Florida House Speaker speaks out against GOP plans to steal elections

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by Paratus

Is Florida Minnesota? Do they have the same population density? The same number of rural precincts and city precincts? Why should what works for Minnesota work for Florida?

8 extra days of voting appears to have been find in Republican voting areas. Minnesota has one of the highest turn outs in the nation. It appears that only Democratic areas in Florida have trouble voting even with 9 days to do so.

Maybe the problem is that Democrats take 40 min to fill out a ballot? Note, this is why a spokeswoman for miami-dade county said.

[eskimospy]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

And currently Romney got 47% of the vote and got zero electoral votes care to explain this as the "will of the people"?

Romney won a majority of the vote in 9 congressional districts and yet got no electoral votes care to explain this as the "will of the people"... perhaps you meant "will of Democratic voting districts"?

Perhaps if Democrats stopped chastising people for "clinging to their guns and religion" they would be able to win support outside of a few concentrated urban areas.

Yeah, that party that has won the popular vote in every election but one for the last quarter century should really work on broadening its appeal.

Clearly the right answer to this is to give the guy who got fewer votes about 75% of a state's presidential voting power. If nothing else though this appears to at least be an admission that they no longer have a party platform that can win. That's the first step to recovery.

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

And currently Romney got 47% of the vote and got zero electoral votes care to explain this as the "will of the people"?

Romney won a majority of the vote in 9 congressional districts and yet got no electoral votes care to explain this as the "will of the people"... perhaps you meant "will of Democratic voting districts"?

Perhaps if Democrats stopped chastising people for "clinging to their guns and religion" they would be able to win support outside of a few concentrated urban areas.

Are you really that clueless? Nevermind, yes, yes you are from your other posts here.

Care to answer the question how someone can win the state and only get 30% of the vote?

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by GarfieldtheCat

Are you really that clueless? Nevermind, yes, yes you are from your other posts here.

Care to answer the question how someone can win the state and only get 30% of the vote?

Because electoral votes would not be assigned based on "winning the state".

Most of the electoral votes would be assigned based on "winning districts" and 2 for winning the whole state. Candidates that could appeal to voters across a large portion of the state would be rewarded with more electoral votes.

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by eskimospy

Clearly the right answer to this is to give the guy who got fewer votes about 75% of a state's presidential voting power. If nothing else though this appears to at least be an admission that they no longer have a party platform that can win. That's the first step to recovery.

And by party platform that can win you mean one the believes is transferring wealth from men to single women and pandering to illegal foreign invaders.

[tweaker2]

New Repub Mantra: "If you can't beat'um, cheat'um."

How any Repub can hold their head up without shame with this blatant push for minority rule is beyond me.

Kudos to the media for loudly exposing this shameful conniving stab into the heart of democracy.

This shameless ploy along with those other backfiring scams the Repubs hatched in the last elections exposes how weak and isolated the Repub Party has become that they are compelled to resort to such despicable behavior. If the RNC would only divorce themselves of that freakish Tea Party and have them create a third party of their own, then maybe, just maybe, the Repubs running for office won't have to live in fear of being primaried out of existence for being pragmatic and reasonable.

And if the Dems ever try this same "fix" for the presidency, I'd feel just as indignant about it.

If these Repub sponsored rules changes ever get any traction, I guess in the future we can reminisce about those days where popular majority rule was a fact of life, this while living in a plutocracy where voting is merely a form of protest by the majority without any recourse.

[Paratus]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

Because electoral votes would not be assigned based on "winning the state".

Most of the electoral votes would be assigned based on "winning districts" and 2 for winning the whole state. Candidates that could appeal to voters across a large portion of the state would be rewarded with more electoral votes.

Yes or no, each voters vote regardless of precinct should count the same inside the same state.

[GarfieldtheCat]

Did cubby123 bail now that his idiotic comment has been called out and shown to be farcical and ignorant?

Originally Posted by nehalem256

Because electoral votes would not be assigned based on "winning the state".

Most of the electoral votes would be assigned based on "winning districts" and 2 for winning the whole state. Candidates that could appeal to voters across a large portion of the state would be rewarded with more electoral votes.

So you support discrimination? You support someone that wins the popular vote will get less then a third of the vote? Showing your true colors? Anything to help the GOP win I guess is fine in your mind.

Basically, conservative people in rural areas should have their vote count for more then the (alleged) liberals and minorities in the cities. Bravo! Bigotry and discrimination FTW.

Why not base on the popular vote? Get 51% of the vote, you get 51% of the electoral college? Or ss that not cheating enough for you?

Originally Posted by nehalem256

And by party platform that can win you mean one the believes is transferring wealth from men to single women and pandering to illegal foreign invaders.

Well, showing you are totally insane with comments like that isn't a great way to get people to believe you, just saying.

[Paratus]

Originally Posted by GarfieldtheCat

Did cubby123 bail now that his idiotic comment has been called out and shown to be farcical and ignorant?




So you support discrimination? You support someone that wins the popular vote will get less then a third of the vote? Showing your true colors? Anything to help the GOP win I guess is fine in your mind.

Basically, conservative people in rural areas should have their vote count for more then the (alleged) liberals and minorities in the cities. Bravo! Bigotry and discrimination FTW.

Why not base on the popular vote? Get 51% of the vote, you get 51% of the electoral college? Or ss that not cheating enough for you?



Well, showing you are totally insane with comments like that isn't a great way to get people to believe you, just saying.

Well maybe we could say Nehalem supports affirmative action. Conservatives do appear to be a minority these days.

[shadow9d9]

Originally Posted by Incorruptible

Yet it was the democrats who created the KKK, had Robert Byrd with them and the republicans are racist?

You are a disgrace and a sellout

CONSERVATIVES made the kkk... You see, political parties change.. but conservatives are conservatives no matter what.

[eskimospy]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

And by party platform that can win you mean one the believes is transferring wealth from men to single women and pandering to illegal foreign invaders.

No, I mean one that the majority of the electorate supports. We aren't talking about your hatred of women issues right now.

Also, illegal aliens can't vote.

If you support changing the electoral system so that men and whites get more voting power just come out and say so. I have repeatedly found that your own horrible statements argue against you far better than I can.

[Incorruptible]

Originally Posted by shadow9d9

CONSERVATIVES made the kkk... You see, political parties change.. but conservatives are conservatives no matter what.

Wrong, There are lots of Conservatives who aren't racist and being racist has absolutely nothing to do with Conservatism

[soundforbjt]

Conservatives - not racist, but #1 with racists !


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[sportage]

This idea to change the election laws are soooo republican/Fox News/Karl Rove-ish typical short minded thinking.
About the time they get this thru, the "red" will switch to "blue", and republicans will still keep losing, and keep whining, and keep asking themselves "WHAT THE HELL ???"

Just wait till the first republican candidate for pres wins the popular vote, but loses the election BECAUSE of a screw-up like this latest stunt.
And more crock tears to follow....

[simpletron]

Originally Posted by sportage

This idea to change the election laws are soooo republican/Fox News/Karl Rove-ish typical short minded thinking.
About the time they get this thru, the "red" will switch to "blue", and republicans will still keep losing, and keep whining, and keep asking themselves "WHAT THE HELL ???"

Just wait till the first republican candidate for pres wins the popular vote, but loses the election BECAUSE of a screw-up like this latest stunt.
And more crock tears to follow....

The rules that the republicans are proposing are a double edge sword...win more when you're behind, win less when you're ahead. For example if the proposed rules for Virginia been in place for the 2000 bush versus gore election, it would have resulted in the 269-269 electoral college tie. bush probably would still have won because of the republican controlled house.

In mathematics, the 4-9 obama-rommy split is closer than the current 13-0 to the popular vote. But If the republican goal is to better represent the popular vote, then I find the award of the 2 senator elector to winner of the most congressional district, quite partisan when they could award it based on the popular vote. Also what happens if Virginia gains or loses an elector and there is a tie in the congressional districts? Note: The congressional district split 7-4 for rommy in Virginia.

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by GarfieldtheCat

Why not base on the popular vote? Get 51% of the vote, you get 51% of the electoral college? Or ss that not cheating enough for you?
.

It is based on the popular vote. The popular vote of each Congressional district.

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by eskimospy

No, I mean one that the majority of the electorate supports. We aren't talking about your hatred of women issues right now.

Making men slaves to women is a men's issue.

Originally Posted by eskimospy

Also, illegal aliens can't vote.

Then why do the Democrats(and especially Obama) spend so much time pandering to them?

[Ausm]

Originally Posted by cubby1223

shira, I guarantee you there are Democrats in states that Romney won, who are looking at these happenings with great interest.

I think they are looking at ways to move OUT!

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

It is based on the popular vote. The popular vote of each Congressional district.

So again, why don't you and cubby123 explain how someone can win a state with over 50% and yet receive ~30% of the electoral college? Neither of you to have been able to explain that, for reasons that are perfectly obvious to the rest of us.

It's like losing the super bowl 20 - 14 and still getting the lombardi trophy.