G.O.P. Electoral Vote Scheme Blows Up – Spreading Egg All Over Faces of Republican Operatives, Shills

I don't normally comment...but Republicans steal the election!

there is no way to spin a change in the law that more accurately identifies voters with their preference for president!

I don't normally comment...but Republicans steal the election!

there is no way to spin a change in the law that more accurately identifies voters with their preference for president! Granted it does favor Republicans but that is BESIDES the point!

I think sometimes the pundits forget that politics and policy are different and at some point the politics need to cede day good policy, regardless of the political outcome.

I don't normally comment...but Republicans steal the election!

there is no way to spin a change in the law that more accurately identifies voters with their preference for president! Granted it does favor Republicans but that is BESIDES the point!

I think sometimes the pundits forget that politics and policy are different and at some point the politics need to cede the day to good policy, regardless of the political outcome because in the long run what is best for the country must prevail and what is best will continually shift from one party to the other.

Bill "one party" Cavala, your axe has two blades:

Jerry Brown "emphasizing" the Term Limits "Initiative" actually "punishes" politicians because they will spend less time in the legislature... yea, right...

Except for our current Speaker Nunez and Senate Pro Tem Perata who instead of being termed out NOW under EXISTING LAW will get to hang around an ADDITIONAL TERM.

This initiative made it through the signature process to place it on the ballot at the last minute by a mere 900 odd signatures. Only a 900ish signature margin in a state with the population of California??? And after some 3 democratic counties "recounted" their earlier submitted signature totals which generated the 900 surplus signatures?

Sure, go ahead and blame the other party in our two party system for Florida 2000 and this electoral college "effort" of late. But your one party just did the EXACT same things with recounting signatures and the way y'all are writing the term limits "initiative"; by NOT emphasizing Nunez, Perata and all the EXISTING crop of politicians get to stick around longer than already voter approved term limit laws allow for.

By your own definitions used with republican antics, does this make you a democrat "shill" for using similar tactics?

Your candidate Hillary is from The "Old Confederacy". So were Presidents Clinton, Carter, Johnson and Truman (Missorri being a border state). I'm intrigued by your latest bashing of the south as some republican "stronghold" when all of your post WWII democrat presidents except for JFK came from there! (I thought you had a degree in political science?)

Bill, you still haven't mentioned which candidates election campaigns you will be working for so we can measure them accordingly. Inquiring minds want to know!

Strom's either an idiot or blind to reality. It does seem the Republicans are shooting off their own foot here, but I believe it is because the mainstream press has been enabling them for the last quarter-century. As a little known fact, the increase in inequaltiy in the distribution of income in this country coincides pretty much with the first cut in the capital gains (from 70% to 50%, in 1978). Further cuts, more inequality (Reagan, Bush). Less governemental services (Bush's attempt to gut social security). Love to see a discussion of this on Fox news (or any news program).

Thanks for the report. I hope that you are correct.
They seem to have violated a number of California laws.

typical lefty response...call me an idiot then don't explain your strong "feelings" with a logical, linear argument to refute what I said!

the FACT is winner take all electors is a bastardization of the system! either we have a direct vote by the people or an electorial system the as closely as possible reflects the will of people. it just so happens political this proposed change helps republicans.

Strom: The response of calling someone an idiot and not giving reasons is not a typical lefty one--I see it all too frequently from those on the right as well on these pages.

Given all that we now know about this ballot proposition and the fact that it was financed and pushed forward by Republicans, many of them hiding their involvement in contributions and the like, I think it is disengenuous to say the least, to argue that it "just so happens" that this one favored the Republicans.

Not a single Republican legislator voted for the National Public Vote bill passed last year by the California legislature, and almost passed this year, but perched to pass next year out of our legislature.

Even if it just so happened that there were changes being made in red states like Texas, I would be reticent to support a Congressional District division of Electoral College votes. It ought to be one person, one vote--and I would hope that you and others would join in that principle.

gotta respond!!! again!! no direct response to my point!

I was not commenting on the Republicans who funded it. It does not matter (to my point) that they were republicans, felons or dog catchers.

Texas or some other policy matter also does not matter to my point.

MY POINT was that democracy is the essence of our country and we should strive toward it at all costs, whatever the political outcome or who funded it or if they filed the right paperwork or made the right disclosures.

The reason political discourse in this country sucks so bad it that each side does what you are doing...we stake our our party lines and defend them, good or bad

Strom: We're talking past one another.

I strongly support democracy and have been on record for some time for a national public vote on the Presidency. One man one vote. Whoever gets the most votes wins. Period. Good or bad for my party or other parties.

This ballot proposition was not an extension of democracy--it was a distortion of it--designed to change the rules right before the election, knowing full well that it would benefit only one party--the Republicans, financed by Republicans, and not making it more likely to reflect the national vote.

I am not dumb enough to be snookered by and to agree to a proposal designed to aid one side and one side only. And that would include a proposal to aid the Democrats only.

But Mr. Russo, You so obviously back the current "Term Limits Initiative" which will reduce legislative politicians to 12 vice 14 years, BUT-BUT will also allow democrats, Speaker Nunez and Senate Pro Tem Perata an ADDITIONAL TERM over existing term limits laws, all passed by California's voters in the 1990's.

Is this ballot measure self serving to those two gentlemen? Politicians who would obviously be termed out next time around? And "right before" they would have to leave office?

Should Californians be "dumb enough" to be "snookered" here too with an initiative that will benefit democrats only? Or at least these two specific democrats in the most powerful positions in the legislature?

Please answer the question and let us not talk past each other either. I request you visit the blogs on Ms. Lyons "Rush to Judgement (I Hope)" article which the point of responsible dialog has become an issue.

Thanks for your time.

Post a comment

Commenters: You must preview your comment before posting. And please only hit "Post" once; it may take a while, but your comment is being processed. Thanks.