Comments on: Ken Cuccinelli opposes plans to split states’ electoral votes

By: AH_C

AH_C — Sun, 27 Jan 2013 23:13:03 +0000

A hint: that model strongly favors Democrats, who have much larger volunteer corps than Republicans do.Outlander on January 27, 2013 at 3:50 PM

Not true. Having a larger volunteer corps won’t do squat in red districts if the voters aren’t buying the message. even so, the fear of the opposition’s advantage shouldn’t stop us from doing the right thing to be more representational.

By: AH_C

AH_C — Sun, 27 Jan 2013 23:09:10 +0000

He hasn’t thot thru it, the pros and cons. If he’s as conservative as he thinks he is, he needs to examine it more closely. That goes for the classic liberal as well. If the goal is to be as representational as possible then breaking down the ECVs by districts makes total sense

By: Daemonocracy

Daemonocracy — Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:37:57 +0000

Outlander on January 27, 2013 at 3:50 PM

It would make politics more local, and the big cities would no longer deliver entire states to the big liberal. Western Pennsylvania could tap its natural gas reserves, and we all would benefit.

By: Outlander

Outlander — Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:50:23 +0000

The other reason is practical. Right now we fight 90% of our election in 12 states and maybe 20 media markets. Moving states’ electoral college votes from winner-take-all to proportional representation will just expand the map to, call it, 180 congressional districts in 20-25 states and 40 media markets.

That’s going to mean a much larger role for “retail politics” and a boots-on-the-ground, volunteer- and social-media-based campaign model. A hint: that model strongly favors Democrats, who have much larger volunteer corps than Republicans do.

By: Cindy Munford

Cindy Munford — Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:22:56 +0000

Leave the electoral college alone. California and N.Y. already have too much say. I like this man, hope he wins.