Voter ID Not Working, So Republicans Looking To Rig Electoral College
Voter suppression via voter ID laws aren’t providing Republicans with enough votes, especially since many states have seen them overturned. So, the next line of attack appears to be the electoral college. Paul Rosenberg at Salon:
[su_center_ad]
Voter suppression seemed promising at first—and it’s helpful in many downticket races—but it’s not going to be enough to secure the White House. So they’ve been working on another idea as well—make the popular vote totally irrelevant by leaving red states just as they are, with statewide winners getting all the electoral votes, while making electoral votes more or less proportional in as many blue states as possible—many of which the GOP controls at the state level. If they can rewrite the rules fast enough, they could even win in 2016, with no more votes than Mitt Romney received.
Republicans have been fiddling with various Electoral College schemes since at least 2011 (in Michigan and Pennsylvania), with an upsurge of interest in early 2013, following Romney’s disappointing loss. “How Romney Could Have Won: A changed system would mean changed results” was the title of a January 2013 National Review story, capturing the mood at the time. Romney needn’t have won a single additional popular vote, you see. Just divvy up Electoral College votes by congressional district, and voilà! President, President Romney, Mr. 47 Percent! “[F]or those frustrated over 2012’s results,” the story concluded, “it might be worth thinking about whether it’s time to overhaul the system itself.”[su_csky_ad]
MIAtheistGal December 7th, 2014 at 1:20 pm
I am ashamed this us happening in my state of michigan. I feel powerless to do anything about it. I live in a red district and my state rep ignores anyone who doesn’t agree with him. I rarely get more than a form letter response from him.
granpa.usthai December 7th, 2014 at 1:31 pm
lucky you!
about all I ever get is the typical white racist republican BS with the flag/token black child in the ‘family photos’ and a request for more money before they pass another law to TAKE more money from the working taxpayers/or slash SSI ’cause their offshore bank accounts aren’t growing fast enough.
Margie Bateman Osgood December 7th, 2014 at 1:49 pm
You must be in VA, granpa.usthai…………LOL
mea_mark December 7th, 2014 at 1:31 pm
If they succeed it would lead to revolts that would eventually lead to election reform. Openly rigging the system to favor the few would most certainly backfire one way or another. It would certainly be the end of the GOP.
granpa.usthai December 7th, 2014 at 1:32 pm
yep. -kinda like the ending they had in Germany the last time.
Sansui December 7th, 2014 at 2:21 pm
I hope so. The GOP seem to have affected this last mid term election with their new pre election rules and laws.
MIAtheistGal December 7th, 2014 at 3:07 pm
Most people in michigan are pretty upset by the prospect. The legislature doesn’t care, but most people are upset and don’t want this change. I’ve seen a proposition to give all electoral votes to the popular vote winner, statewide. I don’t expect the GOP to even consider that one.
mea_mark December 7th, 2014 at 3:11 pm
Protesting at the Capitol may be necessary. It may not work but it will certainly raise awareness. If people want their votes to count they are going to have to do something.
MIAtheistGal December 7th, 2014 at 3:13 pm
I suspect it may come to that. They are just not listening to us so we will make them.
granpa.usthai December 7th, 2014 at 1:37 pm
no sense in trying to argue the point, seeing as to how the ‘superior minds’ of the ‘master race’ have decided they are Korrect!
Best thing to do in the states that allow party vote is pull the Democrat lever. States like mine take a bit more research, but it’s fun to do.
Red Eye Robot December 7th, 2014 at 1:40 pm
Liberals have been pitching this idea for years. You people have short memories. anyone remember Algore? there was an endless stream of calls by the left to eliminate the electoral college.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/22/1203804/-States-Now-Voting-to-Abolish-Electoral-College-About-to-Pass-Halfway-Point
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-edwards/electoral-college-votes_b_1917826.html
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/07/08/another-stab-at-the-us-constitution/revisiting-the-constitution-do-away-with-the-electoral-college
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2000/11/why_dont_we_abolish_the_electoral_college.html
mea_mark December 7th, 2014 at 1:43 pm
Did you read the article at all? We still want to get rid of the electoral college. It is republicans rigging the electoral college so they can win unfairly that the article is about.
Suzanne McFly December 7th, 2014 at 2:29 pm
You have to understand, he {red nut) has been posting for the last 2 days and has not gotten any replies, but you 2 broke that trend and this implies he is relevant. I have not been to the site for awhile so today I finally had time to read up on the posts I missed and I noticed his posts and the obvious lack of replies till now. I believe, like you, that he did not read the article, he is just provoking, what else does he have working for him?
Bunya December 7th, 2014 at 2:40 pm
I know we shouldn’t encourage Red Eye, but it’s just too tempting to point out his idiocy.
mea_mark December 7th, 2014 at 2:47 pm
Well, he did post nice links. I just don’t think it went over the way he was hoping. He kinda shot himself in the foot, gotta reward him for that.
Suzanne McFly December 7th, 2014 at 2:54 pm
I didn’t click on his post, I don’t even read his posts and I assumed his articles backed up his “arguments” but we all know what assuming something makes me, oh well I don’t mind being an ass, kinda used to it lol.
Red Eye Robot December 9th, 2014 at 2:02 pm
read the daily kos post
Margie Bateman Osgood December 7th, 2014 at 1:47 pm
What mea_mark said. We wanted to eliminate, the right wants to manipulate. Two separate and distinct ideas
arc99 December 7th, 2014 at 2:32 pm
can you possibly be so stupid as to not know the difference between rigging for political advantage and eliminating?
never mind.
your post demonstrates you are indeed that stupid.
KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker December 7th, 2014 at 2:42 pm
“can you possibly be so stupid as to not know the difference between rigging for political advantage and eliminating?”
In a word No…he is incapable.
Obewon December 7th, 2014 at 3:36 pm
Exactly! Red Eye hides the fact that Blue states only agree to an EC vote split IF all states agree to the same state-wide results split. Not a hillbillies gerrymandered Palinbrawl in a landslide fantasy.
Wayout December 7th, 2014 at 6:58 pm
What a bunch of crap! Liberal is from the word liberty, and what you folks want to do with ever more Federal government control of every thing we do is the antithesis of that. You libs have to force people to participate in your schemes by force of law. Hey, if Social Security is as good and popular like you say it is, make it voluntary.
OldLefty December 7th, 2014 at 7:17 pm
That’s funny, because that’s EXACTLY what THEY say about conservatives.
You want control of the bedroom, the womb, who can vote etc.
If lining the pockets of defense contractors is so important and popular, make THAT voluntary.
Obewon December 7th, 2014 at 7:25 pm
On-Topic: you cheapskates can’t win national elections without cheating! Today most like the ACA which reduces HC cost rises and Federal deficits $1.5 T per CBO. SS & Medicare like ACA HC is cheaper when everyone pays into insurance that everyone needs.
That’s also why SS & Medicare surpluses = $5 Trillion+ and the “Debt Held by the Public(Principal)=$12.9 T” borrowed on just 5% of USA’s $240 Trillion asset value in 2010. http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/charts/principal/principal_govpub.htm
Wayout December 7th, 2014 at 7:49 pm
Hey Obe, we just won a national election, with today the Senate getting the 54th REPUBLICAN ! Try not to cry too much tonight.
searambler December 7th, 2014 at 8:34 pm
You “won a national election”? Where? Because the last “national election” in this country was 2012. We hold them every four years, to elect a president. You just “won” a mid term election, with the lowest voter turnout in 70 years. Not a mandate of any kind, not by a long shot…
Obewon December 7th, 2014 at 10:14 pm
Lol! The Romney inverse landslide was really a midterm redux via the lowest voter 36.6% turnout since WW-II when voters were deployed.
At Wayout: @liberaland-92a795b46873063e419773b4f310fc29:disqus which of these is not like the midterms?
A) 2012’s 3:2 (D) 332 to (R) 206-Mitt’nRyan-47% ?
B) 2008’s Dem victory by 53% popular vote via 2:1 (D) 365 to (R) 173-Mc’Palin 47% ?
C) Both A & B ? Ding! Ding! Ding! True Also proves why GOP can’t win without cheating. Not many voters live in red state flyover country having less than 150 EC votes of 270 needed to win. http://disq.us/8l97jm
flopdog December 7th, 2014 at 11:26 pm
The United States does not have national elections.
Aielyn December 8th, 2014 at 12:02 am
I feel I should point out that you didn’t win a national election, you won a series of local and state elections. And considering that Republicans didn’t respect the last two national elections, in which Democrats “won”, I don’t see why you’d expect Obewon and others to respect your so-called “win”. And for the record, *you* didn’t win anything. Candidates won.
Obewon December 8th, 2014 at 1:24 am
Good riddance Landrieu! She’s a big Oil far right wing climate denier who cost the USA the public option lower HC costs via VT’s system of ‘equal payments for all’ beginning in 2016~ http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/mary-landrieu-louisiana-senate-election-2014-113366.html How y’all gonna govern both chambers now? The balls in your court and you missed it already.
arc99 December 7th, 2014 at 7:40 pm
Your hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Fine. Let’s make voter id voluntary
Let’s make restrictions on abortions voluntary.
Let’s make adherence to the tradition of recognizing only heterosexual marriages voluntary.
If those things are as good and popular as right wingers claim, why do we need laws?
You right wingers want the state to control some of the most personal private decisions any person or family can make. So please stop pretending that you are opposed to government mandates.
Aielyn December 7th, 2014 at 11:58 pm
Erm… what? Liberal is not from the word liberty. It’s from the Latin “liberalis”, which means “of or pertaining to freedom”. Liberty comes from the Latin “Libertas”, which has a more restricted meaning. They both share the same root “Liber”, but they have distinctly different meanings. Hence the term “Libertarian”, which is different from “liberal”. It’s Libertarians that believe in absolute freedom, not Liberals.
The word “Liberal”, in American politics, refers to social liberalism. Fun fact: outside of America, it’s more often used to refer to “conservatives”, because conservatives tend to be economic liberals – they believe in free markets. Here in Australia, the Liberal party is a conservative party.
Some Democrats in America, and more generally the “left wing” believes that you give people social freedom, and then you place regulations on the economy in order to best benefit people. The attitude is “take care of the people, and the people will take care of the economy”. And Social Security falls into this category (mind you, private accounts is fine – we have private accounts in Australia, with the public system as a fallback). Standardisation of laws, including electoral laws, is an example of making sure that you’re not screwing people over. A properly designed election law should see every person of voting age (and voting age should be the same as age of consent, in my opinion) given equal opportunity to have their say in electing those who are to represent them.
In America, as it currently stands, if you live in a state that always goes to the republicans (or democrats, but some of those states have already switched to proportional EC votes), then your vote really doesn’t count, because the state’s EC votes go to the state winner completely, rather than proportionally as would be done in a fair system (actually, the EC system itself is outdated, it really should be by direct majority of votes, independent of state).
The greatest absurdity of the EC system, though, is that there’s nothing technically stopping the electors sent to the EC from voting differently from how the voters chose. A state could vote overwhelmingly in favour of the Republicans, and then an EC elector could decide they’re going to change their vote because they felt like it and vote Democrat in the EC (or vice versa).
Dene Bonner December 8th, 2014 at 5:33 pm
And if the Republicans have their way they will Rig it too, they have rigged everything else. and that they couldn’t rig they tried to buy. with the help of SCOTUS
Hirightnow December 7th, 2014 at 2:56 pm
I’ll go with “Yes…yes he can.”
Aielyn December 8th, 2014 at 12:07 am
No need to use such terms. Educate, don’t denigrate and mock. Hold yourself to a higher standard.
Red Eye Robot December 9th, 2014 at 1:58 pm
Read the daily kos post
Aielyn December 8th, 2014 at 12:18 am
Liberals have been pitching the complete abolition of the electoral college, because it’s an outdated mechanism designed for a time when the only way to get information from A to B was by sending a person with the message – and so, to ensure that situations such as death of the winning candidate can be handled, the electoral college was designed.
In modern times, it’s archaic at best. It gives far too much power to the large states, which can see less than half of all voters supporting a particular candidate and yet 100% of their votes go to that candidate. This is the mechanism that Republicans are supporting in so-called red states where majorities tend to vote Republican. Meanwhile, in so-called blue states, where the same mechanism would see all of the votes go to the Democratic candidate, Republicans are supporting changing the laws, only in those states, to make EC voters proportional, thus giving somewhere in the vicinity of 50% of their EC votes to the Republicans.
This is rigging of the Electoral College, abusing the way that the system was designed, exploiting a loophole.
By comparison, the Democrats were pushing for a series of changes, the culmination of which would be that the election of president would be by straight national popular vote, so that every single vote counts. As this would be a constitutional change process, they had to make it happen progressively – begin by putting in place changes to how the EC voters get distributed, in such a way that it would only go into force if the majority of votes were distributed this way. And then, if that was achieved, the next step would be the complete abolition of the Electoral College.
In short, you are asserting that there is equivalence between a desire to fix the system, and a desire to leverage the flaws in the system. It’s the difference between closing loopholes in a piece of legislation and using a loophole in a piece of legislation to make yourself rich. In the case of the electoral college, the Democrats are trying to improve the nation by closing loopholes, while the Republicans are trying to improve their own chances of winning by exploiting loopholes.
Red Eye Robot December 8th, 2014 at 3:23 pm
you didn’t read the daily kos article because they were salivating over the exact same thing
Red Eye Robot December 9th, 2014 at 1:57 pm
you didn’t read the daily kos post
Obewon December 7th, 2014 at 2:22 pm
Even Repubs Ted Cruz, Rand Paul & Jeb Bush know they can’t win without disenfranchising voters by cheating! Today’s remaining GOP are 23.9% of registered voters because repubs have no realistic ideas, no leadership and no successes in the entire 21st century. It’s a dead man’s 89% white party with Koch’s 95% white tea klux klan marionettes pulling their voter disenfranchisement strings.
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" December 7th, 2014 at 2:44 pm
Just for shits and giggles. And way to much work for me to attempt right now. But I would be real curious of what elections would look like, if we did split the electoral vote, instead of basing it on the popular vote.
first map is 2012 election, second is 2004
mea_mark December 7th, 2014 at 2:52 pm
The rural areas are red and the more populated areas are blue. A slight over generalization but basically true.
Larry Schmitt December 7th, 2014 at 4:52 pm
Yes, the majority of that huge red area out west has more cattle than people. And that’s not an exaggeration.
Dwendt44 December 7th, 2014 at 6:50 pm
And some of those cattle are the smart ones.
Hirightnow December 7th, 2014 at 2:55 pm
I can’t help but notice a lot of that red is filled with unoccupied land…
arc99 December 7th, 2014 at 3:29 pm
Any change where it is the rule instead of the exception that the electoral college result produces a different winner than the popular vote is not in the best interests of anyone, except partisan Republicans who see the handwriting on the wall as the nation’s demographics change.
Obewon December 7th, 2014 at 3:29 pm
2008’s Dem victory by 53% popular vote via 2:1 (D) 365 to (R) 173-Mc’Palin 47%, and 2012’s 3:2 (D) 332 to (R) 2016-Mitt’nRyan-47% proves why GOP can’t win without cheating. Nobody lives in red state flyover country having less than 150 EC votes of 270 needed to win.
I’ve always favored the EC’s “Winner take all” in most every state today because it requires the GOP to cheat in most every blue state for any POTUS win. The RNC & GOP’s 90%+ “vote-fraud” guilty plea convictions proves today’s repubs are a corrupt racketeering organization under RICO! Not many want GOP delusions today.
OldLefty December 7th, 2014 at 7:19 pm
And the blue areas are the ones with the most electoral votes.
Andrew Bacon December 7th, 2014 at 9:28 pm
They’re the areas with the most PEOPLE
OldLefty December 7th, 2014 at 9:30 pm
EXACTLY!
wpadon December 7th, 2014 at 9:28 pm
One thing about this map, in Pa, Allegheny County has as many people in as the surrounding seven red counties.
Jones December 7th, 2014 at 3:28 pm
Doing whatever is necessary to win even if it means destroying democracy.
tiredoftea December 7th, 2014 at 4:33 pm
Correction: Especially if it means destroying democracy.
KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker December 7th, 2014 at 7:57 pm
Can I suggest: “Doing whatever is necessary to win even if it means destroying our entire NATION!”
Let’s not forget that corporate oligarchs totally own the republican party as well as a good portion of the corporate media.
crc3 December 8th, 2014 at 11:26 am
Unfortunately there are some elected Dems who also bow to corporate oligarchs….
Larry Schmitt December 7th, 2014 at 4:54 pm
I don’t understand how they can make different rules for different states. These are federal elections, shouldn’t the same set of rules apply to the entire country?
arc99 December 7th, 2014 at 5:22 pm
It is up to the individual states how to choose their electors. Article 2 Section 1 of the Constitution is pretty clear
Article 2 – The Executive Branch
Section 1 – The President
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:
Each State shall appoint, ***in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,*** a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
mea_mark December 7th, 2014 at 5:26 pm
A very antiquated system written for a people who at the time couldn’t travel far quickly or communicate with people at a distance. Time for election reform.
Larry Schmitt December 7th, 2014 at 5:38 pm
And they used to have the inauguration in March because it took that long for news to get around after the election, but they moved it up to January when things sped up. As you said, it’s time for an update. I don’t know why it hasn’t been done long ago. Oh, that’s right, we’re dealing with congress here. They make glaciers look fast.
arc99 December 7th, 2014 at 6:57 pm
It will require amending the Constitution. Congress is only the beginning. Standardizing the selection of electors will require amending the Constitution and ratification by 38 states.
rg9rts December 8th, 2014 at 6:32 am
Should be popular vote but as much of a chance of that as labeling GMO’s
crc3 December 8th, 2014 at 11:24 am
The Constitution must be amended because the electoral college is “past it’s time”…
flopdog December 7th, 2014 at 11:19 pm
The US does not hold national elections but 50+ state elections.
rg9rts December 8th, 2014 at 6:31 am
The death knell of the Gopee is ringing….and they hear it LOUDLY
crc3 December 8th, 2014 at 11:33 am
I have never liked the electoral college to start with so the elimination of it altogether would be fine with me. The popular vote is the only thing I care about and that should be the only determining factor of a presidential election…