GOP: if we can't win the game, let's change the rules.

[redandguilty]

Could you imagine a recount if there was no electoral college?

 

[redandguilty]

Also...is there any reason states can't collaborate in this? It wouldn't make sense for a big group of southern states to get together because they'd be treated like California. But if Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana passed a measure saying all their votes would go to the popular winner of those 3 states, you'd have a very competitive 45 electoral vote block. Candidates would have to pay specific attention to them. (Not that Ohio can be trusted of course.)

 

[TheVictors]

As is the case when either party over-reaches-although the Republicans seem to be doing it more of late-the GOP might be ignoring an important political calculus that could come around to bite them in the ass.

Let's say I'm a moderate, non-partisan "swing" voter in one of these states. Let's say I may have voted for some of these Republicans in the past who are now talking about trying to implement this change.

My first reaction is going to be "this is going to dilute my state's influence in presidential politics."

Anything that dilutes influence is generally not a good thing, regardless of which party's presidential nominee ends up winning the state.

So this could turn me against the GOP local pols who support it.

If I'm advising the Democrats in those states, this goes right to the top of the talking points and political ads and all that in those states-these changes would make the state's influence in presidential elections weakened, regardless of whichever party somebody supports.

Gerrymandering is certainly a talent of the GOP. Politics is politics but like Tinsel says, it's also about demographics. As populations grow in the West and South, demos are changing. Mitt & Co learned in November this very reality ...young, dark-skinned people who smoke weed and don't mind gay neighbors are the majority.

Gotta adapt!

 

[byco42]

Have to find different differentiating issues. As long as the GOP is merely a more diluted version of the Democrats, the Democrats will continue to simply say they are better at wealth distribution than the GOP is. The GOP needs to champion the ideals that differentiate America from the rest of the world: individualism, liberty, and entrepreneurialism. These ideals can and should be woven into the notion that we are all interdependent.

 

[Michchamp]

Have to find different differentiating issues. As long as the GOP is merely a more diluted version of the Democrats, the Democrats will continue to simply say they are better at wealth distribution than the GOP is. The GOP needs to champion the ideals that differentiate America from the rest of the world: individualism, liberty, and entrepreneurialism. These ideals can and should be woven into the notion that we are all interdependent.

it's true that both parties do it. to me though, this isn't some knock on liberal or progressive ideals; in Chicago, for example, the agenda of Rahm Emanuel and a few like-minded alderman and officials, though nominally "Democratic" is indistinguishable from anything George W. Bush would've done. They're ramming through privitization initiatives, especially in schools (for poor neighborhoods only really though... the richer neighborhoods have kept their unionized teaching staffs. they know you get what you pay for...), they've cut police officer ranks, library and museum staff while theyve handed out millions to wealthy developers, to build things in already developed, wealthy neighborhoods, etc. etc.

on the jerrymandering tip, they recently redistricted many wards to basically screw over any of the alderman who wouldn't play ball on some of this stuff. in one case, the ward boundaries changed so dramatically, it's almost laughable.

there's a power structure, which rams through the redistricting or jerrymandering as it may be, and then there's the opposition, that takes it. The power structure has the same agenda everywhere.

But just because both parties do it, doesn't excuse this latest initiative by legislative GOP, in my opinion. Bad policies should be opposed, period.

 

[redandguilty]

But just because both parties do it, doesn't excuse this latest initiative by legislative GOP, in my opinion. Bad policies should be opposed, period.

It's no excuse, but I only started with the "both sides do it" talk after someone asserted that libs don't do it.

I agree that it's bad either way. Who doesn't?

 

[Michchamp]

It's no excuse, but I only started with the "both sides do it" talk after someone asserted that libs don't do it.

I agree that it's bad either way. Who doesn't?

I guess you probably should've said, "just correcting the record here, but the democrats have done XYZ" but should've added that you are not implying that the two are equivalent, or defending what the GOP is doing now, so that you didn't derail the discussion by riffing on a minor point in Thumb's claim.

But I could be wrong. it's happened on occasion.

 

[redandguilty]

I guess you probably should've said, "just correcting the record here, but the democrats have done XYZ" but should've added that you are not implying that the two are equivalent, or defending what the GOP is doing now, so that you didn't derail the discussion by riffing on a minor point in Thumb's claim.

But I could be wrong. it's happened on occasion.

I think I covered how equivalent I thought things were when I said x>y>z. I guess you saw = signs there. And I didn't defend it. Right off the bat I said it was a bad thing.

 

[Michchamp]

I think I covered how equivalent I thought things were when I said x>y>z. I guess you saw = signs there. And I didn't defend it. Right off the bat I said it was a bad thing.

oh. okay. Well, my other post was a response to byco, so I wasn't directly responding to you anyways.

we both kinda screwed up.