Colorado Electoral Votes

[petrel800]

I am curious about the status of the Colorado constitutional ammendment to split your electoral votes based on the final results of the popular vote. It is my understanding that the results of this will be effective to the Nov. 2nd, 2004 presidential election.

Does anyone know how pre-election polls look? Does this have a lot of support?

Just curious, I have been unable to find any pre-election data on this. I feel like this ammendment could have a very big impact on this election. Especially in a close election, splitting the states Electoral votes could result in an election that will be determined by the congress (no one wins 270).

 

[bigmtnman]

Here in northern CO, I haven't talked to anyone who supports it. I don't think it has a chance of passing. It would negate Colorado's influence in any future Presidential election.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Does this have a lot of support?

Support for this half-baked idea is plummeting, and deservedly so.

 

[Bob Locke]

The vast majority of the state's elected officials (both parties) have come out against it, as have both Pete Coors and Ken Salazar (the two senate candidates).

The Greeley Tribune called a "NO" vote on its editorial page.

I think it's going to go down hard, as well it should. If it passed it would leave Colorado with basically one electoral vote up for grabs in any given election cycle instead of the current nine. We would be the least significant state in the nation at that point.

 

[Langenator]

To the best of my understanding, the initiative was pressed by a group of (IMO) very short-sighted California Democrat big-money types trying to grub up a few more Electoral College votes for for Kedwards.

They're pushing it in Colorado instead of the PRK because CO generally leans to the GOP. A similar law, if passed in the PRK, would push 20 or so EVs to Bush/the GOP, which is why they don't do it there.

 

[TooTaxed]

I've gotta say that the electoral college is a bad idea. It does not represent the popular vote, and I think leads to decreased individual voting. What it means is, winner take all...essentially the minority votes are counted for their opponent...and that really bothered me when I lived in California during the last election and Republicans won every county in the state except for the three or four most urban areas.

The electoral college should be abolished or the votes should be split proportionally to the popular vote.

 

[Reno]

It's not going to pass. A week or two ago I saw a poll, something like 53-39 against.

The tobacco tax is going to pass though

 

[tulsamal]

I've gotta say that the electoral college is a bad idea. It does not represent the popular vote,

It's not _supposed_ to represent the popular vote! If it did, then why would you have it?

The main idea of the Electoral College is the same one that led to a House based on population but a Senate where every state gets two votes. It's an attempt to get every state some real voice but to still allow the most influence to the majority. So a state with very few people (like Wyoming) still gets to have _some_ input.

If the system was totally based on the popular vote, it would change the entire method by which the candidates campaign today. It would only make sense for them to spend time in the places that could give them the most votes. They would want to fill stadiums to hear them rather than little town halls in Iowa. The smaller population states would get very little attention.

And since the more rural and less populous states tend to be Republican, it would play right into the hands of the Democrats. The big numbers are in the big cities and that's where they do best!

I'm a big fan of the Electoral College! It's the only reason CA and NY don't just RUN the political system in this country.

Gregg

 

[Standing Wolf]

The electoral college should be abolished or the votes should be split proportionally to the popular vote.

One of the best reasons I've heard to keep the electoral college is that without it, candidates would cater only to the voters—I started to write "citizens," but of course, lots of illegal aliens vote—in the populous states on both coasts, and ignore those in the less densely populated middle.

Electing presidents solely on the popular vote, it seems to me, merely encourages representatives of the Democratic (sic) party to expand their vote fraud.

The tobacco tax is going to pass though

I suspect you're right. It's a classic example of inflicting taxes on a minority simply because a.) it's a minority, and b.) the majority disapproves of the minority's behavior.

 

[sharpie613]

If you've noticed, they never bring this idea up in California. Wonder why?


(I know the answer already)

 

[Justin]

The tobacco tax is going to pass though

(Paraphrasing Standing Wolf.)

There's no shortage of wannabe goose-steppers.

 

[AgaveHound]

Gotta remember this is a Republic, not a democracy.

I already got my votes in. Too bad about the smoke tax though. Freaking money grabbers...it's for the children of course.

I'm really pissed at the pro tax people for using children in the ads too. Wish I had the money to put my own ads up denouncing these people for the socialist bastids they are.

 

[Standing Wolf]

I heard today the proposed tobacco tax is 6.4%, which doubtless will transfer millions upon millions of dollars every year from the wallets of ordinary people into the coffers of government.

 

[Coltdriver]

Proposition 36 to split the Electoral Vote of Colorado according to the percentage of the popular vote is not going to pass.

It is currently polling 50+% against to 30% for.

If you want a good rule of thumb for Colorado Propositions any proposition in this state that has passed has always polled over 50% for it at least 30 days prior to the vote.

If you understand the difference between a democracy and a republic the electoral college makes sense. Democracy is another word for mob rule.

 

[Sleeping Dog]

the tobacco tax is going to pass though

There oughta be an alternative

or two

Regards.

 

[mountainclmbr]

If the tobacco tax passes, why can't I pass an ammendment to charge rent to government employees that are occupying office space that I paid for and feel that I partially own. My rent is very high too!