newsobserver.com projects - electoral college - Comments

Re: North Carolina is blue, AP says

riverrd — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:53:56 -0500

The Day of Liberation Has Arrived! Sweet Success!

Re: North Carolina is blue, AP says

pjpuryear — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:37:32 -0500

I can't wait to mail Lindsey Graham a pair of goggles.

Re: Meek backs popular vote bill

MattM — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:55:16 -0400

The purpose of the electors was to stop a popular vote from taking place. The general population wasn't smart enough to choose the President then, and in 2008 I don't think anything has changed... Barack Obama was chosen as the Democrat nominee, do we need any further evidence?

Re: Meek backs popular vote bill

mvymvy — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:05:10 -0400

There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that needs to be changed in order to have a national popular vote for President. The winner-take-all rule (awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the candidate who gets the most votes inside the state) is not in the U.S. Constitution. It is strictly a matter of state law. The winner-take-all rule was not the choice of the Founding Fathers, as indicated by the fact that the winner-take-all rule was used by only 3 states in the nation's first presidential election in 1789. The fact that Maine and Nebraska currently award electoral votes by congressional district is another reminder that the Constitution left the matter of awarding electoral votes to the states. All the U.S. Constitution says is "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors." The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the states over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive." A federal constitutional amendment is not needed to change state laws.

Re: Meek backs popular vote bill

MattM — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:50:42 -0400

The raping of our Constitution continues... can we send these guys to Cuba?

Re: Meek backs popular vote bill

mvymvy — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:21:17 -0400

To be involved in the National Popular Vote bill effort . . .

Make Your Vote for President in North Carolina Count as Much as a Vote in Ohio or Florida. Add Your Voice. Sign the Petition at http://NationalPopularVoteNC.com/

Join today's live blog conversation at 3:00 p.m. with Dr. John Koza, the founder of the National Popular Vote organization and Matt Gross, who paved the way for bloggers in politics in the work he did for Howard Dean, Erskine Bowles and John Edwards and their campaigns.
http://bluenc.com/live-blog-on-national-popular-vote-with-matt-gross-and-dr.-john-koza-today

Help get the word out and show your support.

Tell a friend- http://www.NationalPopularVote.com/pages/tellafriend.php

Distribute literature at political, civic, or other meeting, convention, or conference.
Post on discussion groups.
Write letters to editors, OpEds, and/or blog.
Please include a link to the National Popular Vote web site by including something like "See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com"

Up-to-date information and materials are at http://www.NationalPopularVote.com/pages/explanation.php

Re: Meek backs popular vote bill

kimkim — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:02:40 -0400

I was just pointing out the problem with this position within the Dem primary. This is a terrible and deeply flawed way to go...

Re: Meek backs popular vote bill

dahedgehog — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:45:32 -0400

kimkim, you'd also have to ignore the voters in the caucus states for that to hold true.

Re: Meek backs popular vote bill

kimkim — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:31:19 -0400

Terrible idea for many reasons.

I guess Meek wants Hillary to be the Dem nominee for President since she did win the popular vote in the Dem primary. (If you count Michigan and Florida)

Re: Meek backs popular vote bill

FFC1304 — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:15:48 -0400

its the NC 'democrat' PARTY - NOTHING 'democratic' about your peeps, Jerry!

Re: Meek backs popular vote bill

captsfufp — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:05:04 -0400

This bill completely disregards the intent of North Carolina voters in the presidential election. I'm not saying that NC's popular vote could NEVER affect the final vote (2000, 2004), but, usually, the "winner" would remain the same if you took us out of the mix. So, essentially, this bill seems to cast our electoral votes to the rest of the country instead of casting those votes based on NC votes.

I'm a Democrat, and I think this is a terrible, no good, horrible, bad idea. If people are looking for Electoral College reform, I would suggest a bill that would proportionally allot our state's electoral votes...one votes per district and two votes reflecting the state-wide vote. This better reflects the intent of NC voters...

Re: Rand: Stay in college for now

tangoz — Sun, 25 May 2008 17:41:12 -0400

The Demoruption Party is the most corrupt organization I have ever lived under. The State House breaks it's own rules continually by not allowing votes on the open house floor when they get passed by a majority committee vote. One bill was a Marriage Defense Act. Apparently the Speak of the State House is a dictator that can prevent democracy in action. Black is that way and so is Hackney.
Not to mention the numerous democratic law makers in prison or under indictment. Even the DMV has had its heads appointed by political favor like DOT and many other organizations. Apparently it is not how qualified you are but how much money have you or your family raised for democratic candidates.

Paul Terrell
Republican nominee for State House 33rd district

Re: Rand: Stay in college for now

mickiep — Sun, 25 May 2008 09:22:28 -0400

"As a Democrat, Rand said he wishes North Carolina had not been a consistent red state since 1976"

Memories of the miserable and embarassing Jimmy Carter years die hard in NC, Mr Rand.

Re: Rand: Stay in college for now

captsfufp — Sat, 24 May 2008 17:10:40 -0400

I think this bill is wrong. But I do think the state Senate should resurrect the bill that would award our electors based on proportional representation, short of like the Democratic primary. Have each congressional district elector be either the Democratic or Republican elector, based on how the district voted, and then have the final two electors be based on how the total popular vote went. Winner-takes-all system doesn't really represent a true state's vote.

I know the DNC had a conniption fit when we tried to do this the other year, b/c they were afraid CA would do the same thing, which would certainly give the GOP some electors instead of having the solid blue we usually get. But, look, it's a more reflective system of people's vote. As a Democrat, I'd rather reflect the true will of the people than be fixated on the politics of everything (I guess that's why I'm a Clinton supporter...). It may not be a popular position, but it's the most equitable one.

Re: Rand: Stay in college for now

FFC1304 — Sat, 24 May 2008 09:06:57 -0400

No Tony, what WE wish for is that you did not command such overreaching power in ENC. YOU are one of the lowest, most corrupt democrackkks in our midst. We only WISH that NC could get out of the 100+ years of democrackkk OPPRESSION upon our people!