Virginia Republicans’ dumb electoral-college idea
But Virginia is not now a safe Democratic state in presidential politics. It is a marginal state, a target state, indeed in the 2008 and 2012 elections it was the closest thing to a bellwether state. In 2008 the United States voted 53%-46% for Barack Obama over John McCain. So did Virginia. In 2012 the United States voted 51%-47% for Barack Obama over Mitt Romney. So did Virginia. In both elections no other state can so close to matching the national percentages of the popular vote.
No state is a bellwether forever. Michigan was in the 1984, 1988 and 1992 presidential elections; starting in 1996 it has been 3% or 4% more Democratic than the nation. But if Virginia continues to be a bellwether, then it’s likely that if the 2016 Republican presidential nominee wins a plurality of the national popular vote, that nominee will also carry Virginia. In which case under the Republicans’ proposal that nominee will likely win only 9, 10 or 11 of Virginia’s electoral votes, while the other 4, 3 or 2 will go to the Democratic nominee.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
It should be Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin that adopt a scheme of dividing electoral votes by congressional district.
DKCZ on January 31, 2013 at 2:55 PM
This is the same guy who predicted a Romney landslide, right?
Punchenko on January 31, 2013 at 3:09 PM
haha, yeah right. only if it includes texas, indiana, south carolina and missouri, too.
not so great idea anymore, huh?
sesquipedalian on January 31, 2013 at 3:16 PM
Barone and Sean Trende are some of the best in the business, but the argument against this because it might help Dem’s at some point in the future doesn’t make any sense at all.
It will help a lot right now.
Literally, anything and everything might change in the future. That can’t be the standard for decisions making.
Also, the idea that this will make the R’s look bad….ridiculous. Remember the backlash when Democrats tried to get rid of the electoral college after Bush won? Me either.
ChrisL on January 31, 2013 at 4:04 PM
Bring it.
I love how liberals are so opposed to the electoral college when Bush won, but are fire breathing originalists now that Obama won.
ChrisL on January 31, 2013 at 4:06 PM
Somehow I don’t think the Republican-controlled legislatures in those states will be interested in changing their electoral scheme — but the Republican-controlled legislatures of states where the state-wide outcome can be tipped by one heavily-Democrat city might have a different perspective.
DKCZ on January 31, 2013 at 4:17 PM
So what is or is not a good idea with regards to the electoral college is solely determined by whether the party we like would win? *sigh* And we wonder why this country is in trouble…
Shump on January 31, 2013 at 4:21 PM
Dividing electoral votes by congressional district would place severe limitations on the possible effects of voter fraud, which is a non-trivial issue in states with entrenched political machines.
DKCZ on January 31, 2013 at 4:29 PM
it’s such a shame that there are so many democrat voters. if only you could somehow take their votes away… just the way the founders intended.
in any case, clowns, once texas turns blue in 4/8 years, you can keep virginia and stick it in any orifice you want.
sesquipedalian on January 31, 2013 at 4:37 PM
It’s called cracking down on voter fraud — although you probably consider this position bigoted against dead people.
Somehow, I don’t think the state of Rick Perry and Ted Cruz is turning “blue” any time soon. For reference, Romney did better in Texas in 2012 than McCain had in 2008, and Republicans control 2/3rds of the House seats.
DKCZ on January 31, 2013 at 5:49 PM