Republicans Decide Voter Fraud Is the Only Way They Can Win

Since the Virginia GOP moved forward with its bill to allocate the state’s electoral votes by congressional district, there have been several great analyses of what effect this arrangement would have on a national level. At the Crystal Ball, for instance, Emory University political scientist Alan Abramowitz finds that if every state distributed electoral votes by congressional district, Mitt Romney would have won the presidency with 276 electoral votes, despite losing the popular vote by 4 points. If you adopted the exact provisions of the Virginia bill—which gives the state’s remaining electoral votes to the winner of the most districts, and not the winner of the popular vote—you’d have an even larger reversal. This map, from the Huffington Post, gives you a good sense of what the election would have looked like under these new rules:

If the rules had been in effect in the six largest battleground states—Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, and Michigan—Obama would have won, but by the narrowest of margins. And these are the states where this plan is most likely to happen, on account of the fact they’re states controlled by Republicans where Democrats are clustered into just a few districts. Here’s the Center for American Progress with a nifty chart:

For as much as it sounds fair to allocate electoral votes by congressional district, the fact is it reduces representation by making land more important than votes. It takes all the problems of the Electoral College—which itself is malapportioned—and turns them up to 11.

The only way you could make this work without disenfranchising huge numbers of people is to create congressional districts that contain an even number of Democrats and Republicans. But of course, the point of this isn’t to create a new, workable way of distributing electoral votes; it’s to turn the electoral college into the House of Representatives writ large, which—thanks to gerrymandering—is rigged to deliver a Republican majority regardless of the total popular vote (Democrats won more congressional votes in 2012).

It’s worth reiterating a few points. First, a political party that seeks to rig the game is one that has given up on winning in the first place. The GOP shows no interest in reforming its policies or reaching out beyond a shrinking, right-wing base.

Second, another way to describe this plan is as a deliberate effort to reduce the voting strength of African Americans. Blacks vote out of proportion to their numbers in the population, providing Democrats a significant advantage in presidential elections. This scheme would weight rural voters over urban ones, which is another way of saying it would sharply reduce the value of nonwhite votes.

Finally, there is a lot of irony in the fact that—after two years of crowing over “voter fraud”—Republicans are now pushing a plan to rig elections through the mass disenfranchisement of voters who don’t vote for Republicans and don’t live in “real America.” Indeed, if there’s one surefire way of skewing elections, it’s to make some voters count more than others.

Comments

Voter fraud does not mean what you think it means. Voter fraud is when dead people are voting, or ineligible illegal immigrants are voting.

A more honest title would have been "Republicans try and game rules to get more electoral votes" but I don't think you are very interested in honesty, here.

We should be totally and brutally honest -- this is an attempted coup d'état by the right wing.

We should be totally and brutally honest - you are totally clueless. The electoral college and the rules for distribution of its votes have been open for review and amendment throughout our history and have been changed at several points along the way. What Virginia has done is not significantly different than Maine and Nebraska have been doing for a long time. Was it a cheesy way to get it done (with an absent member allowing for a majority vote) - probably. You want to talk about cheesy legislative BS, we can have a long talk about how Obamacare was put into effect.

You are going to lose the Senate in 2014 and the White House in 2016 pretty much no matter what happens between now and then unless the economy gets better and OBama is clueless about that - you have much bigger things to worry about than this.

False Premise: "For as much as it sounds fair to allocate electoral votes by congressional district, the fact is it reduces representation by making land more important than votes."

Actually, congressional districts within a state must be reasonably close in population. The number of voters in every district within a state is about the same, even if the geographic size is vastly different.

This apportionment is has long been lawfully in effect in many states. Unlike gerrymandering , it is certainly not a from of "fraud."

One of the reasons why the Electoral College has remained in effect for all of these years is because it is assumed that all of the swing states benefit so greatly from the attention and advertising dollars, that no politician from these states would advocate eliminating it. However, if the state republicans are willing to sacrifice the attention and money that comes from these contests, then they can not logically oppose shifting to a popular vote, at least not on those grounds. This could be a unique opportunity to push for the elimination of the Electoral College. Sign the petition at:

http://wh.gov/yd76

Spread the word. Let's make this the first petition to hit the new threshold of 100k signatures. Thank You.

First point is the crucial one, and the problem with our politics in general. These guys are allowed to be "too comfortable", and to continue increasing their comfort levels, which in turn diminishes the power of the public they no longer fear or have to try to appeal to. It's the same reason Harry Reid was never really interested in a talking filibuster. He's "comfortable", too "set in his ways". Without a challenge to his leadership, he had no reason to do what his base preferred. No one asked him to reach out to McConnell to get something worse than a real filibuster. When Republicans try these election-rigging schemes, they're just trying to manufacture the same kind of "comfort" Reid did when he decided he could do whatever he wanted to do.

This is a federal elections issue. If Obama doesn't publicly condemn it, and call it out as the fraud that it is until they are shamed into abandoning it for good, they deserve to implement it, and his legacy should be tarnished forever. He is the only one that can take it on all at once.

Of course this is wrong, but it goes back to the horrible problem of "gerrymandering." The very concept that the majority party can redraw Congressional districts in order to consolidate and increase their political power in just wrong. Congressional district should be drawn by non-partisan commission or the judiciary, not by politicians seeking to insure their political power.

In my state (Delaware) most of the districts have been divied up by the political parties to insure that the incumbent always gets reelected. I live in a district that belongs to the Democrats, the district next to mine is owned by the Republicans. They have done away with two-party races in most districts. The result is that the voters of the minority party in each of those districts has been effectively disenfranchised (the "other" party does not even run a candidate.

The Republicans want to continue this on a larger scale in the state's they now control, effectively destroying the votes of millions of Democrats living in Republican dominated districts.

No republicans. No problems!

The Republicans did a great job of gerrymandering Congressional Districts after the 2010 census. That is why they have been able to get a substantial majority in the house even though more people voted for Democratic congressmen then Republican congressmen.

The Virginia proposal is a blatant attempt to parley use ill gotten gains of their congressional gerrymandering into stealing the Presidency as well.

The Republicans have shown a cynical disregard for democracy. They will use any underhanded method to steal elections away from the majority.

This new fits in very nicely with the veto by filibuster in the Senate and the "Haestert rule"in the house that prevents any bill than does not have Republican majority support from ever getting to the floor. j

Democracy can be most clearly defined as two wolves and a sheep deciding who's on the menu for dinner. To simplify for those of you who are metaphor challenged - democracy is a polite term for mob rule and mob rule is what you see in the Middle East today.

Obama just had voter fraud work for him. Care to say anything on that? Or is that too much hypocrisy for you?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/19/ohio-poll-worker-obama-suppor...

I always emailed this webpage post page to all my contacts, as if like to read it after that my contacts will too. video

I don't think fraud is the solution... Politicians have to be honest to be good. www

You made some decent points there. I looked on the internet for the issue and found most individuals will go along with with your website.
Narguilé et chicha pas cher

Fake Promise: "For as much as it sounds fair to allocate electoral votes by congressional district, the fact is it reduces representation by making land more important than votes."

In fact, congressional areas just a condition should be reasonably shut with human population. The quantity of voters divorce lawyers atlanta region just a condition is actually comparable, even if your geographic sizing is actually greatly different.

This kind of apportionment is actually is almost certainly legitimately essentially in many says. Not like gerrymandering, it is not only a coming from regarding "fraud" Corals at Keppelbay

Sorry, But In my opinion all the current voting system should be replaced.
Why do we keep counting ballots by states?
In my (and many other people) opinion the elected president should be the one who got the majority
of the votes nation-wide. That's it - plain and simple.

Democracy can be most clearly defined as two wolves and a sheep deciding who's on the menu for dinner.
Ce site

Pyrameed est une agence de Création site web basée à Genève

I always emailed this webpage post page to all my contacts. Look at : Flavors

You need to be logged in to comment.
(If there's one thing we know about comment trolls, it's that they're lazy)