tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.comments2017-01-23T02:57:42.065-05:00Swing State Votererinanniehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15033894841051002279noreply@blogger.comBlogger81125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-14000563519046178992016-07-30T14:41:45.834-04:002016-07-30T14:41:45.834-04:00Awarding only 1 electoral vote from the 2 states s...Awarding only 1 electoral vote from the 2 states since 1969 and 1992 does not mean they "divide up the electoral votes to represent the popular votes." The popular vote has not been divided.<br /><br />In 2012, <br />39% of Nebraska did not vote for Romney. <br />No electoral votes from Nebraska were awarded to Obama.<br />42% of Maine voted for Romney.<br />No electoral votes from Maine were awarded to Romney.<br /><br />They have both awarded all of their electoral votes to the winner of their state, except in the single case in 2008.totohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12247335901450384827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-81434663520764360872016-07-29T16:22:54.517-04:002016-07-29T16:22:54.517-04:00Again, here is the source at the National Archives...Again, here is the source at the National Archives on the issue - http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html#selectionerinanniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15033894841051002279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-6804840123296624332016-07-29T16:21:22.822-04:002016-07-29T16:21:22.822-04:00I don't know where you got your information. B...I don't know where you got your information. But my source was the National Archives' page on the Electoral College. It states clearly that Nebraska and Maine are proportional. <br />http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/about.htmlerinanniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15033894841051002279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-67609726818720362962016-07-29T13:05:55.185-04:002016-07-29T13:05:55.185-04:00By changing state winner-take-all laws (not menti...By changing state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes, the National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country. <br /> <br />Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps of pre-determined outcomes. There would no longer be a handful of 'battleground' states (where the two major political parties happen to have similar levels of support among voters) where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 38+ predictable states that have just been 'spectators' and ignored after the conventions.<br /> <br />The bill would take effect when enacted by states with a majority of the electoral votes—270 of 538. <br />All of the presidential electors from the enacting states will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC)—thereby guaranteeing that candidate with an Electoral College majority.<br /> <br />The bill has passed 34 state legislative chambers in 23 rural, small, medium, large, red, blue, and purple states with 261 electoral votes. <br />The bill has been enacted by 11 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes – 61% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.<br /> <br />NationalPopularVotetotohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12247335901450384827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-68692457374219536182016-07-29T13:04:41.397-04:002016-07-29T13:04:41.397-04:00Now 48 states have winner-take-all state laws for ...Now 48 states have winner-take-all state laws for awarding electoral votes, 2 have district winner laws. Neither method is mentioned in the U.S. Constitution.<br /><br />There have been 22,991 electoral votes cast since presidential elections became competitive (in 1796), and only 17 have been cast in a deviant way, for someone other than the candidate nominated by the elector's own political party (one clear faithless elector, 15 grand-standing votes, and one accidental vote). 1796 remains the only instance when the elector might have thought, at the time he voted, that his vote might affect the national outcome. <br /><br />The electors are and will be dedicated party activist supporters of the winning party’s candidate who meet briefly in mid-December to cast their totally predictable rubberstamped votes in accordance with their pre-announced pledges.<br /><br />The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld state laws guaranteeing faithful voting by presidential electors (because the states have plenary power over presidential electors).<br /><br />totohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12247335901450384827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-19032008955810789372016-07-29T13:01:34.863-04:002016-07-29T13:01:34.863-04:00Maine and Nebraska do not divide up the electoral ...Maine and Nebraska do not divide up the electoral votes to represent the popular votes.<br /><br />Maine (since enacting a state law in 1969) and Nebraska (since enacting a state law in 1992) have awarded one electoral vote to the winner of each congressional district, and two electoral votes statewide. <br /><br />Obama won 1 congressional district in Nebraska in 2008, period. That was the only electoral vote for a minority party in a state in the past century. Otherwise, all of the Maine and Nebraska electors have been for the winner of their state.totohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12247335901450384827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-47494108849984468282016-03-08T10:19:31.991-05:002016-03-08T10:19:31.991-05:00You are wrong about Christendom College. It is loc...You are wrong about Christendom College. It is located in Warren County which went for Trump. As the spouse of a professor there I can anecdotally say that I don't think many students voted. Sarahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10112558196901691414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-20299536525313589412016-03-03T08:15:20.927-05:002016-03-03T08:15:20.927-05:00I'm pretty sure it's statements like this ...I'm pretty sure it's statements like this one that are helping to make people vote for Trump. You talking about how dumb they are simply makes them want to vote for him more so they can extend am middle finger to you, and to all of the rest of the 'smart' crowd that have ruined our nation and their lives.<br /> Nigel Longbottom Butterworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06064082103668661041noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-11859301126201605982015-09-08T22:59:45.351-04:002015-09-08T22:59:45.351-04:00What's so bad about Trump going independent sc...What's so bad about Trump going independent screwing over the republican party? Perhaps Clinton can even take the future swing state GA if that happens. It'd be interesting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-5208713538151824112014-11-15T22:46:13.859-05:002014-11-15T22:46:13.859-05:00This comment has been hidden from the blog.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16823035461234883425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-1632958524232912962013-09-20T17:15:52.284-04:002013-09-20T17:15:52.284-04:00Sounds interesting. However, Like many young peop...Sounds interesting. However, Like many young people I grew up a Democrat, but turned Republican as I grew older. What does genetics say about that???<br />andrejuleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12287414374826325849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-34797114638332360142012-11-12T14:19:41.836-05:002012-11-12T14:19:41.836-05:00I was intrigued by the idea that Romney got fewer ...I was intrigued by the idea that Romney got fewer votes than McCain, so I did a little number-crunching:<br /><br /> 2012 2008 <br />O/O 62,151,820 69,456,897 -11.8%<br />R/M 58,799,365 59,934,819 -1.9%<br /> 3,352,455 9,522,078 -184.0%<br /> <br /> 120,951,185 129,391,716 -7.0%<br /><br />It actually explains a lot- overall, the electorate was 7% smaller this year than 2008, likely the historic nature of Obama's first campaign, and the financial crisis brought out more people who normally wouldn't turn out. Given the smaller electorate, the Republicans actually did better this year- their numbers were only down around 2%, compared to 12% for the democrats. So, even though there were fewer voters to get, Romney got a larger share of them than McCain (thus his 47.9% compare to McCain's 45.7%). Chris LaMay-Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13998448439377249844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-6557017686700667762012-11-07T13:10:26.132-05:002012-11-07T13:10:26.132-05:00Beautiful post. I think you probably feel now much...Beautiful post. I think you probably feel now much like I felt in 2004. And yet, many of the most profound and meaningful things that have ever happened in my life happened between 2004-2008. I'm wishing for material and spiritual prosperity for you over the next few years! And us all... Chris LaMay-Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13998448439377249844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-79692310613277888412012-11-05T17:01:07.555-05:002012-11-05T17:01:07.555-05:00you are a biased c u n tyou are a biased c u n tAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02191081740892349252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-80663073026469915762012-11-04T18:34:40.061-05:002012-11-04T18:34:40.061-05:00I think the bias still shows.I think the bias still shows.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13768343708644967048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-3145862294390791262012-11-04T16:29:40.600-05:002012-11-04T16:29:40.600-05:00Although it's not the most likely outcome, the...Although it's not the most likely outcome, the tie is certainly the most fun to consider! As you'll see over at my blog, my prediction is 281-257. I aim intrigued by your thoughts about new york, though! Will you be live-blogging election night? If so. I look forward to tuning in!Chris LaMay-Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13998448439377249844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-12904170381048759902012-10-30T14:40:35.443-04:002012-10-30T14:40:35.443-04:00First, I don't think in today's modern soc...First, I don't think in today's modern society that natural resources have to be taken too much into consideration. New York City has obviously grown and proliferated just fine without an abundance of dependable resources. <br />So if given the blank slate of the boundaries of the existing United States, I would put my capitol in what is now western Kentucky. It is not known for crippling weather events, is slightly central, and has natural defenses for national security purposes. <br />I would put my military in the center of the country, in the St Louis or Kansas City areas. (With all of the necessary bases scattered around the country.) <br />And my financial center I think I would put farther out west, possibly Oregon or Washington State. While they are rainy areas, they don't seem to suffer from work outages too often. <br />And another thought- if our capitol, or seats of power, were on different coasts, would we take other countries or neighbors more seriously? Would we pay less attention to Europe and more to China if our government was on the west coast? how would the war on drugs be effected if more power was closer to Mexico? <br />Just some thoughts.erinanniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15033894841051002279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-55969450035523153012012-10-24T19:33:31.537-04:002012-10-24T19:33:31.537-04:00Really great column!Really great column!Chris LaMay-Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13998448439377249844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-68146759828089520392012-10-23T16:07:15.848-04:002012-10-23T16:07:15.848-04:00Oh BTW what do you think of 1 in 6 not having to c...Oh BTW what do you think of 1 in 6 not having to comply with the federal mandate. In my estimation that is 16%. Since 83% of Americans already have health insurance and 16% are exempt then we get a 1% increase in covered benficiaries at a cost of $1.4 TRILLION<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04426120808688911774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-9585197646055874252012-10-23T16:03:45.509-04:002012-10-23T16:03:45.509-04:00I have the bill in my hand. It tells you what was ...I have the bill in my hand. It tells you what was vetoed and overridden. He vetoed the employer mandate. And Just for Kicks the bill is NOT 70 Pages it is 95 pages. So much for your above math problemAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04426120808688911774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-73851695378453421532012-10-23T15:58:23.843-04:002012-10-23T15:58:23.843-04:00The differences you mentioned above are all cosmet...The differences you mentioned above are all cosmetic.<br /><br /> The most important differences come in the formation ACO's, episodes of care and 40%excise tax on insurance premiums.<br /><br />The ACA mandates and has already modeled what they call ACO"S. Which are large conglomerates of healthcare providers including hospitals, physicians, nursing homes, and home health care. These will recieve a single payment called a "payment bundling". Payment is based on "episodes of care" in which the provider must follow the designated procedures outlined in order to be <br />paid.<br /><br />ASCO's also risk losing floor pay for accepting insurance that uses differing actuary tables from the government. This in combination with the 40% tax on "excess benefits" guarentees that the government insurance is the same as any private insurance. SO SINGLE PAYER!<br /><br />Romney's plan merged employers into groups to give them buying power through the comonwealth Connector. <br /><br />My sources are the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Chapter 58 Common Laws of MassachussetsAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04426120808688911774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-77543707266639118142012-10-03T10:00:28.660-04:002012-10-03T10:00:28.660-04:00Well, I'm sure we've both read the analyse...Well, I'm sure we've both read the analyses indicating that, in terms of lasting effects on polling, they don't. I think that's a bit overstated, in the following way: the debates aren't likely to be a game changer. but I think they can boost and solidify existing trends when they produce moments that (rightly or wrongly) reinforce a narrative already out there: Bush Sr. being disengaged from the concerns of regular folk in '92, or Dukakis being disengaged from human emotion in '88, for example. Incidentally, I'm living in Massachusetts now, which theoretically should immunize me from too much Presidential advertising. But I'm also getting it all the time because Boston media markets have heavy presence in New Hampshire! Chris LaMay-Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13998448439377249844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-16514568280242442422012-09-24T10:38:46.878-04:002012-09-24T10:38:46.878-04:00For Taxmaggedon to happen, the outgoing Congress w...For Taxmaggedon to happen, the outgoing Congress would have to refuse (or be unable) to act before the end of the year, and the new Congress in January would have to refuse (or be unable) to act before taxes are due in April. I would submit that, once the election is concluded, win, lose or draw everyone will be in more of a mood for constructive cooperation, and total gridlock in the face of Armageddon is less likely. Though, goodness knows, I don't put it totally past our elected officials. I'd be interested to hear your take on this. Chris LaMay-Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13998448439377249844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-58968860862630807182012-08-30T20:59:10.105-04:002012-08-30T20:59:10.105-04:00Thank you for this honest, bipartisan assessment o...Thank you for this honest, bipartisan assessment of the situation. The words you used earlier, "a tasteful change of pace," really apply quite well to your own writing here.CChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17326078938058381297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211631313888269614.post-53254774537345980892012-08-29T12:21:39.336-04:002012-08-29T12:21:39.336-04:00Based on your analysis, it appears to be easier to...Based on your analysis, it appears to be easier to pin exactly what Romney supported and didn't support vs what Obama wanted for his plan. As I recall, the Affordable Health Care Plan was changed greatly due to the many compromises for Republicans, who ultimately didn't support it anyway. So, either compare plans without indication of what the leaders may or may not have wanted, OR compare what Romney wanted and what Obama wanted. Assuming neither got exactly what they wanted.JanDanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02211155375232313504noreply@blogger.com