tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post5133404680574707144..comments2023-10-24T09:06:30.200-04:00Comments on No More Mister Nice Blog: Steve M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11963290427258439242noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-8301097575325028052012-10-27T20:42:19.896-04:002012-10-27T20:42:19.896-04:00Presidential elections don't have to be this w...Presidential elections don't have to be this way.<br /><br />The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).<br /><br />Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps. There would no longer be a handful of 'battleground' states where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 80% of the states that now are just 'spectators' and ignored after the conventions.<br /> <br />When the bill is enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes– enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538), all the electoral votes from the enacting states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC.<br /> <br />The presidential election system that we have today was not designed, anticipated, or favored by the Founding Fathers but, instead, is the product of decades of evolutionary change precipitated by the emergence of political parties and enactment by 48 states of winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution.<br /><br />The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for President. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.<br /> <br />In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in recent closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA 75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%. Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.<br /> <br />The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers in 21 states. The bill has been enacted by 9 jurisdictions possessing 132 electoral votes - 49% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.<br /><br />NationalPopularVote <br />Follow National Popular Vote on Facebook via NationalPopularVoteInc<br />totohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12247335901450384827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-72449029649451240402012-10-27T13:29:05.608-04:002012-10-27T13:29:05.608-04:00One way or the other, there will be blood.
Conser...One way or the other, there will be blood.<br /><br />Conservatives have lost whatever self-restraint they once may have had - especially in the past 4 years.<br />And many of them will completely lose their sh*t if Obama wins reelection.<br /><br />They have been uber-armed by the NRA, and primed full of hate for Obama, Democrats, and Liberals, by FOX News, Conservative Op-ed writers, and Right Wing Radio Rushwanda.<br /><br />They will want blood.<br />If I still lived in Fayetteville, NC, and Obama won, I'd take off my Obama-biden bumper-stickers.<br />I took enough grief for them back in '08, when it was clear that even there, people were tired of Republicans, war, and the economy.Victorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06609452382111686086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-18974159669378031032012-10-27T12:31:28.671-04:002012-10-27T12:31:28.671-04:00Again, thus all presupposes that reality will play...Again, thus all presupposes that reality will play a role in how the GOP will spin the election. The mere fact that Obama will have a closer election will be spun the exact same way as if he lost the popular vote. The conclusion is already established (deligitimacy), only the evidence will change. Obama and the debs should just ignore it and treat the GOP like the creepy pedophile uncles that they are,barenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13308760153976339733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-56572095572757238432012-10-27T12:19:22.401-04:002012-10-27T12:19:22.401-04:00Oh yeah, likely voter filters are not reliable and...Oh yeah, likely voter filters are not reliable and registered voter numbers have been better in recent, hotly contested elections than LV numbers. That's because in close elections the voters excluded in LV filters are more likely to turn out.<br /><br />The other day Gallup published a demographic overview of what the electorate looks like under their LV model. It's quite revealing. Gallup doesn't highlight this...just the opposite, in fact...but the overview shows that Gallup is minimizing the Democratic turnout in every possible way. Every single demographic that is more likely to vote Democratic will, according to Gallup's model, turn out in 2012 at a lower rate than in previous elections (including Hispanics and blacks). And all the demographics inclined to vote Republican are treated by Gallup as more likely than ever to vote.<br /><br />That simply does not pass the sniff test. Supporters of Obama are as enthusiastic about him as Romney's supporters are about him. The Hispanic population has grown considerably since 2008, and backs Obama more strongly this time, and has very good reason to vote against Republicans. But Gallup gives Hispanics exactly the same share of the vote as in 2008. It's just nonsense.<br /><br />Gallup's LV screen questions are pretty obtuse, as I've said before. They systematically discriminate against urban voters and voters who move their place of residence.: smintheus ::https://www.blogger.com/profile/06280030649524520605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-16148247356175450132012-10-27T12:05:42.686-04:002012-10-27T12:05:42.686-04:00Republicans tried to raise the same specter in 200...Republicans tried to raise the same specter in 2000...that Gore would win the EV but lose the popular vote. But once it came down to fighting over the electoral vote for weeks on end, the popular vote was nearly forgotten.<br /><br />If this year's EV is close, it may well come down to Ohio. And if OH is close, by OH electoral law it will take weeks before a final tally is known.: smintheus ::https://www.blogger.com/profile/06280030649524520605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-13827494564502738082012-10-27T11:25:15.507-04:002012-10-27T11:25:15.507-04:00I should know better than to underestimate the Rep...I should know better than to underestimate the Repubs, but how could it get worse? I mean what aspect of civility and respect is left for them to trample? I'm with General Grant on this. Fuck worrying about what they are going to do.Raenellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12031586239927965106noreply@blogger.com