Can Any Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016?

a reply to: beezzer

Personally I think we need a completely neutral politician with a magic wand that can fix things......

However, I think both, a neutral politician and magic wands don't exist.

But I could get behind someone that isn't afraid to fire people if they're not doing a good job, or not doing their jobs at all.

a reply to: TerminalVelocity

I'd settle for an honest politician, but if Diogenes couldn't find one, I doubt we could.

I can't even Google "honest politician" and get a real person!

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: TerminalVelocity

I'd settle for an honest politician, but if Diogenes couldn't find one, I doubt we could.

I can't even Google "honest politician" and get a real person!

First hit from google

a reply to: Grimpachi

Yeah, that's who I got.

I wonder if you kept the EC but threw out the "winner take all" part and replaced it with a "proportional " system.So, if X wins 57% of California,then they would get 57% of the Delegates.It seems "fairer".i always thought the winner-take-all scenario was strange.What do I know though

a reply to: beezzer

" We need a jerk, a total bastard for president. "

We have one of those Right Now , has that Working Out for you ? No , I must Disagree with you there . We Actually Need another Teddy Roosevelt Right Now to Save Us from the Corporate Monopolies that are Sucking All the Wealth from the People who Actually PRODUCE It , ie, the Middle Class .

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I don't know if any president can lead the country back to prosperity and on a true economic path instead of one propped up by the Fed.

a reply to: beezzer

The " Fed " must be Dead First . All things Come to Pass Sooner or Later in this Finite Life . If and When Our Economy Collapses ,the Fed will be History Most People will Gladly Forget .

originally posted by: neo96

My suggestion would be to dump the entire Electoral College system and elect the president through direct “popular” vote. That, by the way, is the method favored by 63 percent of Americans.

Agreed. Either give every state an equal say in the Electoral College or junk the system.

No the Republicans can not win 2016 acting like Democrat Lite.

This represents why Reagan , Nixon and Ford would be unwelcome in today's GOP. Until this changes the party will simply hand over the White House to the democrats.

a reply to: Flatfish

Furthermore, it's not that the people in CA are more important, it's that the current electoral college system for electing the POTUS is intentionally designed to recognize the fact that there are more "people" living there.

Well now someone basically wants the East Coast, and West Coast determining every single election. Because that is where the 'majority' of the US populace lives.

And if someone lives in the middle. Guess it just sucks being them.

That is a RIGGED system.

My understanding the EC was created specifically to stop that kind of crap.

Didn't matter how many people lived where.

Evidently the Electoral college is not to the liking of Republicans. Mind you though it hasn't been all that /bad/ for Republicans over the years as we've seen more red states gain electoral college points... for Example Texas got something 5 additional Electoral College points over the last 10 or so years... and it's still strongly Republican. I think the Deep South States grew in their share of EC points and liberal states like California lost points

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TonyS

If the country became a one party nation, it would only be a matter of time before that party (the Democratic party in this case) would split in half and create two parties again. Every time we've had a one party system in the past, this has always happened down the line.

Possibly; it would make sense, but......we now have a "Facebook" nation and Facebook acts or can be used to enforce the one party system. The Internet news search systems are operating as a funnel to politically correct expositions. So, you oppose the party, you can't get a job as an example.

Then again, playing my own devils advocate, its possible that once the one party system existed, it would nearly immediately implode because of competing interests that can now communicate freely across the internet.

But.....in a low IQ, dependent society, I'd expect the One Party system to become entrenched much like PRI in Mexico.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Flatfish

Furthermore, it's not that the people in CA are more important, it's that the current electoral college system for electing the POTUS is intentionally designed to recognize the fact that there are more "people" living there.

Well now someone basically wants the East Coast, and West Coast determining every single election. Because that is where the 'majority' of the US populace lives.

So actually it's the "majority of the U.S. populace" that is determining every single election. IMAGINE THAT!

The east coast and/or west coast doesn't determine anything because coastlines don't vote, PEOPLE DO!

originally posted by: neo96

And if someone lives in the middle. Guess it just sucks being them.

That is a RIGGED system.

My understanding the EC was created specifically to stop that kind of crap.

Didn't matter how many people lived where.

Yeah, it must really suck living in the middle of the country and only getting one vote per person like they get out on the coast. PLEASE!

Do you really think it's any different for a democrat living here in Texas where all our electoral votes go the Republican Party in every election?

Maybe you would prefer that we done out votes by the acre?

Or, maybe you think we should return to the preferred method adopted by our infallible founding fathers where only white, land owning males, have the right to vote?

Like I said previously, it doesn't matter whether we utilize the electoral college system or the one person = one vote system, either way I seriously doubt the GOP will recapture the White House in my lifetime and the reason for that isn't because anyone is being cheated out of their representation.

It's because of the fact that the GOP has gone off the deep end with their ludicrous, bigotted policy initiatives and they can longer find enough voting "people" to support their insanity.

I'd be more than happy to do away with the electoral college and going to a popular vote for POTUS elections but I assure you it won't change the outcome with respect to putting a GOP candidate in the White House.

It's not the system that's preventing you from electing a republican POTUS, it's the crazy assed bigotted platform they're running on that's to blame.

originally posted by: buckwhizzle
I wonder if you kept the EC but threw out the "winner take all" part and replaced it with a "proportional " system.So, if X wins 57% of California,then they would get 57% of the Delegates.It seems "fairer".i always thought the winner-take-all scenario was strange.What do I know though

Split Electoral Votes in Maine and Nebraska

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Saturday, September 17, 2016

The very latest is that Trump is gaining ground, and Clinton is losing ground in Electoral College votes..


""A Reuters poll released today shows Hillary Clinton’s once-significant Electoral College lead dropping sharply in recent week -- with much tighter races in Florida, Ohio and other key states that will decide the national contest.

The wire service’s weekly tracking poll of more than 15,000 Americans project that Clinton -- “if the race was held today” -- has a 60 percent chance of winning by 18 electoral votes, compared to having an 83 percent chance last week.

Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee, or her Republican rival, Donald Trump, will need 270 electoral votes -- from a total of 538 across all 50 states, based on the how many members of Congress each state has.

The Reuters’ State of the Nation poll, done by the Ipsos firm, also shows Trump projected to win Florida “if the election were held today.”"

Source: www.foxnews.com...

The "Fat Lady" isn't singing yet, but she's warming up! Great news for Donald.

cwm