It's amazing that the same debates over the Electoral College 220 years ago are going on today.
Fascinating.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 29.08.2006 @ 11:21
The Electoral College "favors" no one at the moment. Democrats remain more than competitive thanks to their huge lead in the large states as well as majorities in the NE and far west.
Republicans have an edge in the Mountain West, the south (unless the Dems are smart enough to nominate a southerner or border state politician, and the plains states.
The balance of power lies in the Midwest and close races in the border states - MO, TN, KY, WV. Dems dominate in the industrial states of MI, IL, and MN while Republicans do well in farm states like WI, IN, and Ohio.
Do you see where this is going? Either a Dem or Rep must run a national campaign in order to win. They must appeal to a wide cross section of voters in order to prevail.
Under the direct election proposal, the focus of the election would narrow considerably in order to appeal to urban voters. And if it's apathy you want, see what happens when you cut off 1/3 of the voters from having a stake in the outcome of a Presidential election.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 29.08.2006 @ 11:17
I honestly don't think this is a Rep v Dem issue at all. It is a question of making the presidency irreleveant to tens of millions of voters.
At the moment, despite 2004 results, the one man one vote system would overwhelmingly favor Democrats. And the CO and CA proposals would eviscerate the electoral college and destroy an important component of federalism - the idea that we are a nation of many interests.
Apparently you see nothing wrong with making the top 677 counties in the country the sine qua non of all national elections. More specifically, those counties represent the top 31 TV markets - most of which are concentrated on the coasts and especially out east. Even an additional 37 Areas of Dominant Influence (ADI's) taken with those markets represent 70% of the population.
You are proposing the disenfranchisement of the bottom 30% of the country. Eminently practical from the point of view of Democrats but outrageously unfair to the non partisan.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 29.08.2006 @ 10:52
Not at all. During 2004, you had both Kerry and Bush in New Hampshire the weekend before the election. New Hampshire? Why? Because their electoral votes could make the difference between winning and losing.
In the one man one vote scenario, candidates would camp out in CA, NY, TX, FL, and perhaps PA in order to harvest the largest numbers of votes for the buck - advertising buck that is. Why go anywhere else (or spend ad money anywhere else) when the payoff is so small?
In effect, you are disenfranchising about 30 million voters. Plus, as Du Pont raises in his article, what about the Senate? Why not apply one man one vote there and tear the constitution up good and proper?Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 29.08.2006 @ 09:34
If you're going to comment on this blog, I would appreciate it very much if you try to hide your ignorance as much as possible.
Millard Fillmore ring a bell? Buchanan? Grant?
The fact is, your knowledge of American history is pitiful. Any one of them and a dozen others were empty suits. Bush would be far down the list of "worst" Presidents.
Something you would know if you read something besides TV Guide.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 29.08.2006 @ 15:53
It's a shame you can't read - or understand English.
What you quoted was perfectly coherent and was identified as speculation.
And the point I was making about Carroll actually depoliticizes the issue.
I am getting very tired of you. Why not go bother someone else? Any more of your incoherent ramblings and I'll be forced to ban you.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 27.08.2006 @ 08:16
Pay no attention to the foul mouthed lout, although I loved your comeback! The dolt doesn't have a clue how idiotic he sounds nor does he have the faintest clue as to what a conservative is.
I could care less about his ideology because he apparently only has one tiny thought running through his tiny brain - hate.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 26.08.2006 @ 17:28
When "pretend" ends up as a permanent state and prevents reality from intruding, we usually commit the poor soul to a mental institution.
As I said, there were uses for this fig leaf during the cold war - when pretending staved off Armageddon. But that day has passed and now the cold reality is that those who are using the UN to attack our interests and the interests of our civilization are depending on people who pretend their evil doesn't exist to advance their own agenda.
And what's with this "My ball" business? What are you referring to? The reference is so obscure that it makes me wonder if you understand anything I wrote?Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 26.08.2006 @ 17:23
Democrats did a helluva lot more than simply "vote out" Lieberman and you know it. They absolutely savaged him. Huge difference.
And there are going to be relatively few righty bloggers that will care about Chafee. Certainly they won't devote wall to wall coverage of trying to unseat him.
Yes there will be a couple. But Reynolds, Morrissey, Powerline, Malkin, and even RedState will not waste their time.
What is it you want?Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 24.08.2006 @ 03:23
Make up? Make up what?
I criticize a guy whose arrogance drips from every word, a guy whose writing I supply a link to.
Just because you don't have any more decency than he has doesn't mean I'm making anything up.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 23.08.2006 @ 02:50
Pages (132) : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67  69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132