GOP: Let's change the rules to win more elections
Posted in the Jonesboro Forum
#1 Jan 25, 2013
I am amazed that the Republican Party is considering changing rules regarding the awarding of electoral votes in a way specifically designed to make up for the shortfall of their presidential candidates. This new strategy emergences just days after GOP officials advocated a realignment of congressional districts targeting areas where GOP candidates have fallen short of of votes needed to win. This is a not even thinly disguised effort to attempt through other means to do what they couldn't do through the voting process; get more Republicans elected.
Republicans already enjoy a decided atvantage in the drawing of legislative districts due to the fact that they controlled the presidency and legislature during the last redistricting and now they're wanting more district changes and a change in state electoral college rules to help pump air into a balloon that's falling. In actual vote tabulating, Democratic House candidates received over a million more votes than Republicans but made less gains in actual seats because of the gerrymandering of the districts. How many points do they expect Dems to spot them so they can compete.
I'm a Democrat, but I accept winning or losing on the number of votes. I can't believe Republican leaders are advancing these notions with a straight face. They are purposely trying to gain seats that they can't win with votes by changing the rules. How low does the Republican party have to sink before they implode. They're already responsible for the Tea Party Republicans that are impeding any progress from compromise between the two parties. If they can't even pull their own candidates into a cohesive group, why would anybody favor changing rules to help them win more elections?
I actually believe in the 2 party system. I don't think my own party should have too much power for too long without the voters being able to decide if they've earned the right to keep it. I hope that citizens from both parties will stand up and say "NO" to attempting to change the outcome of elections through anything other than the decision of the voters. Redistricting should be done by as non-partisan a group as realistically possible so that it's done in voter interest rather than parties. Make your voice heard to our elected leaders about altering the process to benefit any party!
#2 Jan 25, 2013
So far the Democrat Party has had the upper hand at cheating on every election.
Now that supposedly the Republicans want to, it is some how now wrong.
It IS ok for them but, not for the other guys.
#3 Jan 25, 2013
Trying to rig elections is wrong no matter which party is doing it. If we can't have free and fair elections then what's the point of having elections at all. But hey, lets keep up the partisan bickering amongst ourselves so the politicians can continue to get away with anything and everything they want. That's been working out so well for us so far</sarcasm>.
#4 Jan 26, 2013
Every election year, elections procedures, tabulating results, and various complaints are filed with the Elections Commission. Those most serious are taken to courts where they complaintants seek a remedy or nullification of certain ballots, etc.. The courts manage to deal with these and the election process is carried out. Those unhappy with the legal results can appeal the court's decision.
As for your claim that Democrats cheat on every election, well, that's just bullshit and you know it. In the 2012 elections, Republicans had top biling on implementing laws making it hard to impossible or many people to vote, mainly along ethnic lines targeting blacks and hispanics. They pushed these laws under the guise of making sure people didn't vote illegally. The FEC had previously investigated claims on this matter and found the claims to be almost non-existent and not justifiable for new Poll identification laws designed to make it next to impossible to vote and the courts uniformly ruled against these laws with a few rare exceptions.
So, your claims that Dems cheat every election is, like most of your comments, an idiotic one lacking any verification or more appropriately just something you pulled out of your ass. What we're talking about here is one side trying to change the rules to help give their candidates a better shot. That is just wrong on so many levels. Changing rules that have been used by both parties for decades to benefit one party is a slap in the face of every person who took the time to cast their ballot for the people of their choice.
Republicans are toying with this idea to win seats for their party, not for the integrity of the voting system. Just like laws passed to supress the votes of minorities, it goes against the spirit of democratic process and I don't think people are going to lay down for Republican leaders trying to do through underhanded rule changes what they can't do at the ballot box.
#5 Jan 26, 2013
That's not something the Republican party can do even if they wanted to. The awarding of electoral votes is accomplished at the state level by state elected officials, not by any federal office holders or by any political party.
Each state decides for itself how those votes will be awarded. Currently two states award them by congressional district. All of the others award them by state-wide winner take all.
All of the recent hullaballoo about electoral votes is nothing more than Democrat pot stirring trying to create controversy where none exists.
Don't be stupid enough to be taken in by it.
This is more bullshit. Congressional districts are drawn at the state level and they are also determined by state elected officials. The President and members of Congress don't have a thing to do with it.
Come on, surely you're not that ignorant of how it's structured, are you?
No, Republicans won more seats in the House because they won more of the House elections. It's really that simple.
Democrats may have enjoyed wider margins of victories in the races they won, but extra Democrat votes for one district don't mean a damn thing in races held in other districts.
You're just whining because Democrats again got their asses kicked in the House races.
Bullshit. If you accepted winning or losing on the number of votes, you wouldn't be on here whining about the fact that Republicans won more House seats than did Democrats, and they won them by getting more votes in the races they won than did Democrats. That's why they won!
I can't believe you're ignorant enough to believe they are. Look, do some basic research on how our government is structured, then don't be so gullible to believe the lying leftist bullshit you hear disseminated through far left media outlets like MSNBC and Puffington Ho.
No, that would be Harry Reid who has single handedly obstructed the entire legislative process by refusing to bring up dozens of House passed bills in the Senate for discussion and vote.
Why? Because the far left wing of the Democrat party wants no compromise, and they don't want to put their Democrat Senate members on the spot by having to make tough votes for the liberal agenda which would probably cause them to lose their seats come election time. It's better to obstruct and do nothing than to lose their majority in the Senate.
If that were true you wouldn't be on here whining like a little baby because your party doesn't have complete control like they did for the first 2 years of Obama's presidency.
#6 Jan 26, 2013
This is another example of lying leftist bullshit. What laws are you talking about, and how do they target any ethnic groups if they apply to everyone?
Give some specifics and stop regurgitating the lying bullshit you so eagerly swallowed as if it were fact.
Hmm...so we just imagined the video showing armed black panther thugs standing outside of polling places in Philadelphia intimidating voters? And we just imagined Obama's Dept. of Justice doing absolutely nothing about it?
Or maybe your head is buried so far in the sand that you're just ignorant of reality.
What laws specifically are you speaking of, and how are they applied only to minorities? Repeating the same bullshit doesn't lend it any credibility.
Post some supporting evidence for your claim or be man enough to admit you're just parroting something you really know nothing about.
#7 Jan 26, 2013
The Real Gest, go back and loook at some of the reporting it isn't the press making up these stories. There a peole like Rience Pribus among others talking about this. Preibus has gone to Virginia where this is starting out and carring the ideaa to other states. Read it for your self
#8 Jan 26, 2013
I don't give a shit what the lame stream media says. The fact remains that the Republican party has zero power to alter election laws. Those are done at the state level by state elected officials.
Why are you being such a damn coward and running away from my challenge to support the lying leftist bullshit you've been spewing on this thread?
What election laws are you talking about specifically? How are they targeting minorities? What laws are suppressing the vote? Put up or STFU.
And when are you going to put down the koolaid and pick up a tall glass of reality? Stop being such a damn idiot.
#9 Jan 26, 2013
Republicans are losing most of the court fights with Democrats over whether GOP-backed state voter regulations will illegally suppress turnout among the poor and minorities in the Nov. 6 presidential contest.
As the general election begins in earnest following the conclusion of the Democratic national convention, legal battles continue in a half dozen swing-states where court challenges await decisions by state and federal judges.
There are at least 32 challenges to election law procedures pending in federal and state courts. About 21 of 32 election law challenges have been filed over laws in swing states with seven involving Florida and six involving Ohio. Photographer: Scott Eells/Bloomberg
Last month, U.S. courts rejected election-related laws passed by Republican-controlled legislatures in Ohio, Florida and Texas, finding they violated the right to vote. At least 14 cases challenging voter-list purges, provisional-ballot rules, early voting curbs or photo identification mandates are pending in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Iowa, Florida and Ohio.
Court rulings in those states, which both parties claim they can win in November, could tip the presidential election if the race is as close as it was in 2000 between Al Gore and George W. Bush, said Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine.
If the outcome depends on Pennsylvania, and Pennsylvania is extremely close, then these kinds of cases can be determinative, Hasen, the author of The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next Election Meltdown, said in a telephone interview.
#10 Jan 26, 2013
Not many Americans are fans of the Electoral College. But trying to change the way electoral votes are allocated makes lots of people unhappy, too.
That's what Republicans in a number of states are finding just now. There are a half-dozen states that President Obama carried last November where both the legislature and the governor's office are controlled by the GOP Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Virginia.
In most of those states, there are efforts under way to change how electoral votes are distributed.
"I think it's something that a lot of states that have been consistently blue that are fully controlled red ought to be looking at," Reince Priebus, who was just re-elected chairman of the Republican National Committee, told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.
A bill in Virginia might get a vote as early as next week. It would award most electoral votes by congressional district, setting aside two votes to be given to the candidate who carries the most districts in the commonwealth.
Currently, every state but Maine and Nebraska awards all its electoral votes to the statewide popular vote winner.(Those two states have systems that would allocate electors based on congressional district results, but so far neither has split their electoral college votes because a single candidate has swept the state.)
If changes such as the Virginia bill had been in place last year, Obama would have won far fewer electoral votes. In Virginia, he would have taken four electoral votes rather than all 13.
#11 Jan 26, 2013
Nothing wrong with the Electoral College.
Go back to paper ballots.
Since: Aug 10
#13 Jan 26, 2013
It's time to honor the popular vote. It's the way those white wig wear'n forefathers that Righties are always going on about meant for it to be.
Whoever gets the most votes wins, period.
In-state races should be open statewide so all voters are offered the opportunity to vote for all Congressional seats.
#14 Jan 26, 2013
I wouldn't mind going back to paper ballots. With computerized voting you have control of the integrity of the software vested in a minute number of people. What we need is standardized voting procedures that every state can opt into. This would reduce the number of court challenges because standards would be set by a non-partisan commission and instructions for voting would be posted well in advance and availabe at a variety of locations. We truly have one of the most screwed up and inefficient systems of voting compared to most other countries. Even South American countries have more efficient voting systems than the US. But that is another subject altogether.
The Republicans are trying to accomplish through selective rule changes what they couldn't accomplish through the voting process. They don't like the outcome so they want to change the rules. Considering the Republican party already is alienating it's own ranks with obstructionist tactics and neanderthal legislative proposals toward women, do they really think that this newest strategy is going to win back swing voters? They sure seem hellbent on self-destruction.
#15 Jan 26, 2013
Now, that's American.
We are supposed to be a Republic.
NOT a Democracy.
Since: Aug 10
#16 Jan 26, 2013
One person = one vote ..... yep, that's American enough for me.
#17 Jan 26, 2013
#18 Jan 26, 2013
Again, only your doctor can determine if Abilify is right for you! I don't think anybody's real hung up on semantics. We elect our representatives through the ballot box and I don't think anybody is eager to change that. When people say they live in a democracy it's a statement about being a free people who select their leaders, not a civics lesson on definitions.
#19 Jan 26, 2013
Wrong, ignorant Lefty. Why do you suppose that you have a military government.
The authority we now and have operated under since 1861 a.d. is military.
Civil authority stopped on Dec. 5, 1860 a.d. and has never been re-instated.
Republic = Civil
Democracy = Military
#20 Jan 26, 2013
Okay, why don't you educate us all on how exactly this works in the Fox alternative universe?
#21 Jan 27, 2013
Yet again Mouse you display your stupidity and utter ignorance of U.S. History.
The electoral college was crafted by those "wig wear'n forefathers" because they created for us a Republican form of government, not a Democracy.
Idiots like you want to deny that we are a union of free and independent states, and that the federal government exists in part to protect those states and guarantee to each one a Republican form of government.
It's fine if you want to voice opposition against the electoral college system, but it's not okay for you to spew lying leftist bullshit that youv'e so eagerly swallowed without ever considering it's validity, and for being too damn stupid and too damn lazy to fact check it.
Add your comments below
|UCA beats ASU !!!!||23 min||guest||7|
|ASU Dead Wolves||25 min||guest||1|
|Do any other husbands feel unappreciated? (Jul '11)||33 min||FYI||109|
|sobriety checkpoint||53 min||Mang||33|
|hytrol conveyor (Jun '15)||4 hr||guest||16|
|Teacher arrested for having sex with 13-year-ol...||5 hr||Bill||15|
|Howl No!!!! 🐺||8 hr||guest||22|
|Protect Black Sons from Cops||9 hr||Guest||43|
|Trump, "Stop & Frisk", & the Constitution||15 hr||BartyisRuperttheRat||75|
Find what you want!
Search Jonesboro Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC