Skip to main content

View Diary: Colorado may change EV allocation (108 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Interesting (4.00)
    that the consensus on this thread is that this is a bad idea. It is being pushed by a couple of very high level Dem donors (also MoveOn donors), although truth be told it may just be an effort to make state Repubs spend a ton of money to defeat it. I rather suspect it will go down hard (Coloradans have been saying "no" to ballot initiatives in increasing proportions lately). It doesn't cost much to get in on the ballot, maybe $100k. It might cost millions to defeat it.

    If it passed, two of Colorado's seven districts would be in question, the 3rd and the 7th, both of which are evenly divided. But Colorado is unusual in that a court drew the district boundaries. Most states have essentially no competitive districts. Therefore, presidential elections would become narrowed down to maybe 20-30 CD's, where something like $300 million might be spent. Yikes. And states with no competitive CD's (California) would be completely irrelevant. This would suck, Democracy-wise. On the other hand, it would create a little more incentive for competitive CD's, always a good thing. All in all, I'd say, just say no. It's not worth the extra 2-4 EV's.

    •  Is this good or bad in Colorado? (none)
      There are a couple of things to remember about the Colorado initiative:
      1. It is proportional, not by CD.  DavidNYC has some great info on this at his site, as noted above.
      2. A similar initiative will NOT be on the California ballot, at least this cycle.  The deadline has already passed. (April 16, I believe)
      3. While it is interesting to "game" this out nationally and determine the course of the electoral college, this is a one state initiative.  Some states, like New York, have extremely restrictive ballot procedures, and there is little to no chance the NY House and Speaker Shelly Silver will vote to put this on the ballot.  Therefore, we don't need to worry about that right now.  Similarly, looking ahead for '08, even if Repub's wanted to put this on the CA ballot, a simple poll would almost certainly show that it would fail, and fail miserably.  So, if they want to spend the $1 million to $3 million to get on the ballot in CA, then good luck to them.
      So, the question is: Is this a good thing to have on the Colorado ballot, effective this year?

      I say it is.  Best case scenario: 4 EV's for Kerry.
      Worst case: It loses, but forces Repubs to pay attention to, and spend time and money in, Colorado.  

    •  ambivalence (none)
      You know, it would help us IN COLORADO. And in MO, and in a couple other states that lean R in Presidential elections but have big cities in them. But as DavidNYC's Swing State Project demonstrated conclusively (and he liked the idea intuitively as well) national EV allocation by CD would hose the Dems hard. The question now becomes: if the CO initiative passes, will the GOP strike back by placing EV-CD initatives on ballots in big blue states (since no big blue states have both an R gov and an R legislature)? My guess is that they could get such an initiative on the ballot in only one big blue state: CA. But if it passed, we'd be hosed. But if the CO initiative fails, it'll just suck up R money in attempts to defeat it, R money that might otherwise go to people like Pete Coors and Bob Beauprez... and what's to stop the GOP from placing an EV-CD initiative on the CA ballot next year anyway, regardless of the CO outcome?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (123)
  • Community (60)
  • Media (23)
  • Elections (23)
  • Environment (22)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Law (21)
  • Culture (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Science (19)
  • Labor (18)
  • Economy (17)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • Ireland (16)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Hillary Clinton (15)
  • Health Care (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site