Why is there oposition in California to splitting up electoral votes by the districts? Wouldn’t this be better representation for the voters?
Why Doesn’t California Want It’s Voters Represented In Presidential Elections.?
Posted in Uncategorized.
Guide and Tutorials
Why is there oposition in California to splitting up electoral votes by the districts? Wouldn’t this be better representation for the voters?
Posted in Uncategorized.
5 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
Because then Southern California’s votes would mean something and, in reality, nobody cares what Southern California thinks.
Not in this case its a Republican ploy to take the next Presidential election… Thats all we need 4 more years of gustopo rule.
No.
The reason? It would dilute California’s power, marginalizing it in national elections. Other states, like Colorado, have rejected splitting up their electoral votes on these grounds.
Now, if you just wanted to chuck the electoral system, a system put in place by our founding fathers who did not believe in a direct democracy, then that would result in a more representative system for everyone, every vote really would count. But in Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court basically shut down any possibility of the electoral abomination (sorry, system) going away any time soon.
Note: In California, the GOP is backing the idea because it would make their task of electing another one of them in 08 a stronger possibility.They would gain electoral votes in California. In Colorado several years ago, the GOP was strongly against it because Colorado is reliably GOP in national election sand doing away with the winner-takes-all approach would have cost the GOP electoral votes there. This is just a highly cynical mind game. If you don’t believe me, go read the archives on the Denver Post.
Why California? Why not Ohio and Florida? Oh, right, because those states would lose even more electoral votes to the dems.
Funny how all this worry about “representation” doesn’t exist if it’s a state that narrowly throws all it’s votes to the Republicans.
Quit pretending that it’s anything other than a political ploy. I’d be all for it if it was universal. Since that’s not how other states do it, there’s no reason to push for it there. If it should apply there, it should apply elsewhere, as well.
They’re afraid the government might become one “of the people, for the people, by the people”.