Rove handicaps Electoral College
In his column in today’s Journal, Karl Rove says that as of today, McCain leads Obama 241-217, with 80 votes rated a toss-up. Alternatively, Clinton leads McCain 251-203, with 84 votes in the toss-up category. Interesting.
May 8th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Obama beats Clinton.
Clinton finished.
McCain beats Obama because of vote distribution.
Obama finished.
Liberal Democrats have nobody left to carry the torch. They are in disarray.
Electoral Votes redistributed in 2012 according to new census, giving red states more weight due to demographic trends. This makes it impossible for a liberal Democrat to win the election.
Democrats finished.
McCain very old. Paves way for Bobby Jindal to take over.
Soli Deo Gloria.
May 8th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
The Downfall of Hillary Clinton
This is even funnier than the Cowboys Giants version (go look for it on YouTube). Warning, a bit over the top and lots of foul language, so skip if that bothers you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6Lstkiexhc
May 9th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
The real issue is not how well Clinton, Obama, or McCain might do in the closely divided battleground states, but that we shouldn’t have battleground states and spectator states in the first place. Every vote in every state should be politically relevant in a presidential election. And, every vote should be equal. We should have a national popular vote for President in which the White House goes to the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states.
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
The major shortcoming of the current system of electing the President is that presidential candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or worry about the voter concerns in states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. The reason for this is the winner-take-all rule which awards all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state. Because of this rule, candidates concentrate their attention on a handful of closely divided “battleground” states. Two-thirds of the visits and money are focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money goes to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people are merely spectators to the presidential election.
Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.
The National Popular Vote bill has been approved by 17 legislative chambers (one house in Colorado, Arkansas, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and two houses in Maryland, Illinois, Hawaii, California, and Vermont). It has been enacted into law in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These states have 50 (19%) of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring the law into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com