NAACP condemns Virginia GOP plan to split electoral votes

[^_^ 5,021]

Virginia Republicans are plotting to have their state’s electoral votes split proportionately based on Congressional districts.

...

“You want to make sure in any system put in place in any state that the outcome is reflective of the actual votes cast,” Hilary Shelton, senior vice president for advocacy at the NAACP, told Talking Points Memo. “What we have is a system that’s being proposed and actually moving forward in many ways that does not meet that criteria and that raises concerns for us.”

The GOP legislation, which seems poised to pass in a state with Republican governor and majority Republican legislature, would have delivered 9 of the state’s 13 electoral votes to Mitt Romney instead of President Barack Obama on Election Day last November.

The president won the winner take all state by a 50 to 47 margin, largely by dominating the more diverse urban centers of the state.

http://thegrio.com/2013/01/25/naacp-condemns-virginia-gop-plan-to-split-electoral-votes/

[decocker 7,198]

carry me back to ol virginny..

[JohnR! 5,495]

[quote name=' timestamp='1359127860' post='5941383]

"You want to make sure in any system put in place in any state that the outcome is reflective of the actual votes cast,"

The GOP legislation, which seems poised to pass in a state with Republican governor and majority Republican legislature, would have delivered 9 of the state's 13 electoral votes to Mitt Romney instead of President Barack Obama on Election Day last November.

Jury-rigging by any other name....

[^_^ 5,021]

Jury-rigging by any other name....

I don't know. I see this is as possibly a good thing.

The ultimate goal is to remove the electoral college as how we elect our Presidents. The closer we get to proportional representation, the closer we get to that ultimate goal.

Also, this would do wonders for waking up the electorate in non-general election years. Congressional elections matter and this will remind voters.

And besides, there's very little reason to believe Democrats won't push through similar changes in Democratic-run states. Even closer to proportional representation. Good thing.

[catknit 144]

Here's the thing though - the Virginia GOP just pulled a fast one on Monday gerrymandering the districts while there was a GOP majority in the Senate when they knew one of the Dems would be out at the Inauguration. Otherwise, the Senate is split 20-20 party lines [by dumb luck, not by design, of course]. So, my question is this - which congressional district are they speaking of - the ones that existed on Sunday or the ones that may exist if signed off by Governor.

That all said, I don't necessarily think moving to more of a popular vote system is a bad thing - I would prefer it. But, if you can custom tailor the districts to meet the demographics you want - well, it's still a biased system.

[^_^ 5,021]

Here's the thing though - the Virginia GOP just pulled a fast one on Monday gerrymandering the districts while there was a GOP majority in the Senate when they knew one of the Dems would be out at the Inauguration. Otherwise, the Senate is split 20-20 party lines [by dumb luck, not by design, of course]. So, my question is this - which congressional district are they speaking of - the ones that existed on Sunday or the ones that may exist if signed off by Governor.

That all said, I don't necessarily think moving to more of a popular vote system is a bad thing - I would prefer it. But, if you can custom tailor the districts to meet the demographics you want - well, it's still a biased system.

Still biased, but less biased.

Let's take the 2012 results as an example. Obama got 51.2% of the vote in Virginia. Romney got 47.3% and Others got 1.6%.

Virginia has 13 electoral votes.

In the last election, Obama got 100% of the electoral votes, Romney got 0% of the electoral votes and Others got 0% of the electoral votes. Obama gains 49%, Romney loses 47%.

If the plan described in the original article was in place, Obama would have gotten 31% of the electoral vote and Romney would have gotten 69% of the electoral vote. Obama loses 20%, Romney gains 22%.

49, 47 in the current system.

20, 22 in the new proposed system.

Which is less biased?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

[quote name=' timestamp='1359128843' post='5941407]

I don't know. I see this is as possibly a good thing.

The ultimate goal is to remove the electoral college as how we elect our Presidents. The closer we get to proportional representation, the closer we get to that ultimate goal.

Also, this would do wonders for waking up the electorate in non-general election years. Congressional elections matter and this will remind voters.

And besides, there's very little reason to believe Democrats won't push through similar changes in Democratic-run states. Even closer to proportional representation. Good thing.

I don't get the reference. This system has been in place since 1787 and this feels like a thinnly made effort to make sure if we ever get another minority candidate, they won't stand a chance.

[^_^ 5,021]

I don't get the reference. This system has been in place since 1787 and this feels like a thinnly made effort to make sure if we ever get another minority candidate, they won't stand a chance.

Yes, I have no doubt that is their intention.

But it will backfire on them. If Virginia and other large states do it, other large states will follow suit. As each state does it and inches to a system closer to (but not quite arriving at) proportional representation, we get closer and closer to a presidential outcome that mirrors the popular vote.

It won't happen in one election cycle but moves like this set that ball rolling. It's a good thing, in the long term.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

The problem isn't the splitting of electoral college votes. They should be split in all honesty however a state wants them to be.

The problem is the "people" actually having a vote for the Presidency. That should have never come to pass, just as the 'people' shouldn't be electing state senators either.

Popular vote is and always has been dangerous to a society, especially when you have sources that will lead the blind off of a cliff.

[catknit 144]

[quote name=' timestamp='1359127860' post='5941383]

The GOP legislation, which seems poised to pass in a state with Republican governor and majority Republican legislature, would have delivered 9 of the state’s 13 electoral votes to Mitt Romney instead of President Barack Obama on Election Day last November.

http://thegrio.com/2013/01/25/naacp-condemns-virginia-gop-plan-to-split-electoral-votes/

Except here's the rub - the person with the popular vote [Obama] would have won less EV than the second place person [Romney] in this district/math exercise - still weirdly biased and not in sync with the popular vote. It's trickle-down electoral vote madness.

[^_^ 5,021]

Except here's the rub - the person with the popular vote [Obama] would have won less EV than the second place person [Romney] in this district/math exercise - still weirdly biased and not in sync with the popular vote. It's trickle-down electoral vote madness.

That will flip flop every 10 years when they redistrict. Both parties gerrymander. It's just how it is.

Do you think it's more likely that we as a nation move to a popular vote system from the CD system (subject to gerrymandering) or from the current system?

I tend to think the CD system is the next place we need to be. It will create the right mix of problems and opportunities for the next shift to the popular vote system.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

The problem isn't the splitting of electoral college votes. They should be split in all honesty however a state wants them to be.

The problem is the "people" actually having a vote for the Presidency. That should have never come to pass, just as the 'people' shouldn't be electing state senators either.

Popular vote is and always has been dangerous to a society, especially when you have sources that will lead the blind off of a cliff.

Funny, isn't letting people vote part of a democracy?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Funny, isn't letting people vote part of a democracy?

Naw. Mob rule is akin to chaos in the originalist mind.

Edited January 25, 2013 by The Patriot

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Funny, isn't letting people vote part of a democracy?

We are supposed to be a republic, not a democracy.

Edited January 25, 2013 by Obama 2012

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

We are supposed to be a republic, not a democracy.

like the fsu?

or roc?