Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on GOP Plot to Steal the White House



Posted by monkey | August 27, 2007 11:18 AM

Yeah, but I think even if it does get on the ballot, Californians will reject it, since there's that overwhelming Democratic majority and all.

Posted by Gitai | August 27, 2007 11:22 AM

Well, there are scenarios in which such a change could help Democrats. Like in Texas.

Posted by Gratuitous GOP-Bashing Alert Service | August 27, 2007 11:24 AM

@GGOPBAS - That's the point. If the change is made in one (large) state and not accross the entire country, it's going to sway the vote one particular way.
The problem for Democrats is that the GOP can do this by just tageting California. There are no comparably large Red states to tinker with. Instead, the Democratic party would have to have do the same across many states in the south and midwest.
I know you're just trying to be "balanced", but let's be realistic, too.

Posted by steve | August 27, 2007 11:34 AM

I hope this brings the National Popular Vote campaign (which is a really good idea) into the public eye, without managing to confuse it with the CA-only scheme (which is a really terrible idea). Not holding my breath though . . .

Posted by Levislade | August 27, 2007 11:51 AM

Well, some of us on Slog have been freaking about the stealing of the 2008 election only to find Josh did not know who G. Palast was. (He exposed the voter fraud in Ohio on the BBC, and was ignored by the American media) And some were freaking out about all the presidential executive orders from this past summer to minimal concern. Soooooo, I thought Slog was just going to keep the iPod's on, go out every weekend and not give a shit about what happens to the republic.

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger | August 27, 2007 11:58 AM

Yes "stealing" is what Republicans do.

They get appointed to the Texas Air Guard to not serve in Vietnam -- "stealing" a slot there someone else would have gotten on merit.

They have crony capitalism another word for stealing.

They steal power by starting illegal unfounded wars based on fear and lies and smearing Democratic candidates. They are not above politicizing the US attorneys who refuse to bring overly political cases timed to win elections.

Now what do Democrats do?

Quiver in fear. And shoot themselves in the foot.

This weekend the Dem. National Committee told every Florida Dem. voter their vote in a primary would not count.
The Democrats just disenfranshied millions of Democratic voters!
The whole Florida presdential primary will be ignored in the Democratic nominating convention. The delegates elected based on the Fla. primary vote will be denied seats at the convention. Why? Because the Florida legislature decided the Fla. primary will be earlier and the Democratic National Committee decided this infringes on the NH and IA "rights" (whatever) to have the early primaries.


Apparently the Dem. National Committee think states like Florida and Michigan -- you know, with big cities, diverse populations, and millions of Democratic voters -- can't move their primaries up. Because the "rules" saying NH and Iowa are the earliest
"are the rules."

Result: vote suppression by Democrats....of Democratic voters! division and discord among a key state, Florida! A huge intra- Democratic fight......less money and energy and focus on beating Republicans....then in the Fall election perhaps some left over bitterness resulting in yet again a narrow Republican win in Florida.

Off topic?

While R's are creating havoc a/k/a ways to fight like hell for their party with shit like this California, the Dems aren't fighting back and worse, are shooting themselves in the foot by creating intra- Democratic fights like this thing in Florida.

If Dems were smarter, they would push Florida and Michigan and Pennsylvania and perhaps Ohio to the earliest position among all primaries.

They would welcome displacement of tiny rural NH and tiny IA.

Don't the Democrats need to pick the candidate who can win Florida, Ohio and similar larger urbanized swing states?As opposed to the candidate who can win the most activists in little tiny rural states?

Once again the Republicans get an A in strategy and tactics and the Democrats get a big fat F.

Posted by unPC | August 27, 2007 12:30 PM

Last I checked Arnold Schwarzenegger has been silent on this initiative. If Schwarzenegger had a clue, he would have repudiated this immediately and unequivocally. The longer it takes him to repudiate it, the more his own credibility could be damaged. But hey, maybe I'm overestimating Californians and Americans.

The sad thing about this Rove era of politics is that -- after Florida's concerted effort in 2000 to deny blacks the right to vote and this insistence on using Diebold voting machines sans paper trail and on and on -- nothing shocks me anymore. This California initiative is the kind of thing you would expect from Vladimir Putin's Russia, but really, it's also the kind of thing you would expect in Karl Rove's America. And I'm sure a whole phalanx of Republican operatives will descend across the media to shamelessly and defiantly defend this initiative's legitimacy.

Posted by cressona | August 27, 2007 12:38 PM

Related to this: We have to stop thinking that the GOP will loose the election next year. STOP thinking this!!! We will not know who will win until January 20 2009 at 12:oopm EST.

Until the Democrats win the White House ASSUME the GOP will win and act accordingly!!

Posted by Another issue | August 27, 2007 12:38 PM

Amen @ #9. I have been getting more annoyed with the widespread assumption that the Dems have a lock on the White House in 2008. It ain't over until the fat lady sings folks. It's going to be a rough election season. Nothing should be taken for granted.

Posted by chris | August 27, 2007 12:49 PM
Posted by Trevor | August 27, 2007 1:06 PM

@8 The Gubernator has actually come out in opposition, saying that unless the entire country makes this change, it's not fair, and compared it to changing the rules in the middle of a game. I don't like the man, but he's on the right side of this one.

Posted by Gitai | August 27, 2007 1:37 PM

If you read that New Yorker article you'll see that the Dems are trying to do it too which should make uh...pretty much no one but unPC happy.
And @ 8, I wouldn't count on Arnie coming out against it as it's his lawyers who got him elected with that bs recall thing who filed it in the first place.
Unless it gets a lot more publicity I bet this "Equal Representation" thing will pass just like all those other Rovian name-a-bill the-opposite-of-what-it-does things.

Posted by chi type | August 27, 2007 1:43 PM

Oops. Just read Gatai's post and feeling shocked/embarassed/impressed.

Posted by chi type | August 27, 2007 1:46 PM

Gitai @12, can you provide a link to a news story about the Gubernator opposing this initiative? I hope you're correct, but I'd like a little confirmation.

Posted by cressona | August 27, 2007 2:01 PM

I hope Californians are smart enough to vote this down. But I'm not too optimistic. The problem is the idea sounds appealing and fair on the surface, and it only becomes obvious that it's a bad idea if you think about it. Californians are all about shallow surface appeal -- it's why they're so easily convinced to vote for celebrities like Ahnold.

Posted by Orv | August 27, 2007 4:02 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).