shady republican schemes?

I think that it is pretty shady to say that ALL of any state's electoral votes should go to one candidate or other as a direct result of the election results from a few urban areas..

If you look at the electoral map and still believe that the dems should receive ALL of those votes, then you demonstrate that you are perfectly content with the current corrupt electoral process...

 Winner take all states are NOT indicative of the true beliefs of the population, as a whole.

Ciao, CZ 

by steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 673 comments) on Friday, September 28, 2007 at 12:09:09 PM
 

I agree... sort of

If you want to do that you need to make ALL states the same, so the playing field is kept even.  This was obviously a transparent attempt to steal 30-something electoral votes for the GOP, not some progressive electoral reform as you are trying to frame it.

The problem is each state has the Constitutional right to choose how it elects electors.  There's no way to evenly decide electoral vote contests on a national level without depriving states of their sovereignty.

If the GOP really wanted to help folks as you infer I'd expect a groundswell of support across the state, as opposed to no financing and lost staff.

Go peddle your propaganda elsewhere!

by Mike Kuykendall (36 articles, 60 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 86 comments) on Friday, September 28, 2007 at 12:37:26 PM
 

OH don't get me wrong...

I did not mean to infer that the GOP is doing anything that does not help itself..  Rather, I am suggesting, like you correctly stated, that all states should have the same sort of electoral policy, and winner should most definitely NOT take all....

Now, on a side note, I also suggest that the DEMS and the REPUBS work together to ensure that NOBODY other than the Dems and Repubs get to be on the ballot...  Perhaps their corporate interests drive this??    

"vote this way or we cut you off next election cycle" I am sure that statement was NEVER uttered to a politician in DC or in the state house... 

 Ciao,CZ

by steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 673 comments) on Saturday, September 29, 2007 at 8:15:55 AM
 

For that matter, why should there only be 2 parties? The

Constitution says NOTHING about political parties, let alone specifying that there should only be two of them.

If it's "shady" to have winner-take-all procedures for electoral votes (& I agree that it is), how much more shady is it, to permit 2 giant parties to exist -- and then to let them pass rules which make it nearly impossible for any other parties to compete? That's no more "democratic" than elections were in my highschool homeroom, where, after nominating a good friend for homeroom president, we'd make a motion that nominations be closed!

by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1212 comments) on Friday, September 28, 2007 at 12:57:04 PM
 

I do not advocate for a two party system...

But I do appreciate your thoughts.  This has to do with the apportionment of electoral votes, which regardless of party ARE determined by the Constitution.

 Thanks for playing! 

by Mike Kuykendall (36 articles, 60 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 86 comments) on Friday, September 28, 2007 at 1:00:48 PM
 

What a relief!

I'm glad to hear this news (I lived in CA for many years). Those of you who don't support the Dems or the winner-take-all system should work for Proportional Representation at FairVote.org, or put your money where your mouth is and stop griping. 

by Carol V. Hamilton (15 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 28 comments) on Friday, September 28, 2007 at 4:19:21 PM
 

Exactly!

That's what I was saying above- it's a little suspicious for Republicans to say they just want fair voting practices in the one state that may land the GOP the presidency! 

by Mike Kuykendall (36 articles, 60 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 86 comments) on Saturday, September 29, 2007 at 6:52:54 AM
 

well, I do...

The Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania, along with the Greens have been working to get BACK on the ballot after the Republicans and Democrats decided to work together, to have us TOSSED OFF...

If the situation was reversed, and it was the Republicans who were on the receiving end of the big electoral winfall, CA, then I am POSITIVE your attitude toward the winner take all policy would be 180 degrees off from its current position...

I HATE an electoral policy that DEFENDS the 2 major parties, and keeps out ALL OPINION other than that of big corporate America which OWNS the Republicans and the Democrats..  furthermore, I have been working to change said policy for quite some time...

Regards

CZ 

by steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 673 comments) on Saturday, September 29, 2007 at 11:13:21 AM
 

Well...

While you've been fighting ineffectually on third party causes, the right wing has risen up, clenched America in a corporate grip of steel, and milked it of all the blood, treasure, war, civil liberties violations and tax cuts they could get away with.  My question for you- was your concerns about the two-party system worth one week of Bush's presidency?

How about one day?

I don't think so.  I wouldn't make that trade, even if we end up with a party-heavy parliamentary system at the end of your efforts.  Ever heard of the word "pragmatism"? 

I know I am on the correct side of the issues, and as such I stand with the Democratic party because they do, too .  As has my family since my great-grandmother's time.

 They are the only party with any real chance on ensuring the horrid mismangement and cronyism of the Bush years gets repudiated and righteously beat at the ballot box for once and for all.

 And in retort, I would not condone shady behavior on the Democratic side unless the stakes were dire, say... a religious, uneducated, coporatist movement dedicated to funnelling more cash to the top 1% of our country than in any other time on our history was poised to take over.

That is worth a few bent third party edges and independent ideals, for now.  After the Bushittes and their spawn are dealt with I encourage you to rise up and do the same to the Dems.  For me, I'm impressed by the progressive slant that is coming out boldly in most 2008 platforms.  I'm looking forward to what the party can do to heal our nation and fix things overseas.

Lead, follow, or get out the way.  That's my advice to you. 

by Mike Kuykendall (36 articles, 60 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 86 comments) on Saturday, September 29, 2007 at 11:33:37 AM
 

the right wing has been rising up??

Have you been paying attention?  DEMOCRATS ARE IN CONTROL OF BOTH HOUSES OF CONgress...

Ineffectual?  you tell me how effective it is to vote democrat....

Ciao, CZ 

by steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 673 comments) on Saturday, September 29, 2007 at 11:48:00 AM
 

Read up

An effective 49 seat majority is not enough to stop continual GOP cloture motions that require 60 votes to pass, essentially a filibuster minus the phonebook-reading.

That means Lieberman and a few folks can hold the entire Congress at a standstill.

Didn't you know that?  You're probably one of the folks blindly bitching about Congressional incompetence despite repeated and historic use of the 60 vote threshold by Senate Republicans.

The GOP pulled a PR rope-a-dope and you fell for it. 

by Mike Kuykendall (36 articles, 60 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 86 comments) on Saturday, September 29, 2007 at 11:56:36 AM
 

read up?

have you seen the vote counts??  they are in the neighborhood of 80-15 in the senate...  FOR BUSH....

don't say the Dems can't do anything..  They FLAT OUT REFUSE to do anything other than go along with the corporate interests...

Ciao, CZ 

by steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 673 comments) on Sunday, September 30, 2007 at 9:55:04 AM