Monday, September 01, 2008

Liberal Desperation

In this week's electoral map, John McCain seems to have opened up a slight lead in Virginia:
<p><strong>><a href=''>Electoral College Prediction Map</a></strong> - Predict the winner of the general election. Use the map to experiment with winning combinations of states. Save your prediction and send it to friends.</p>

New Mexico moves back into the toss-up category, but it may very well see-saw back and forth between toss-up and "leans Republican" before it finally closes. There is little doubt that the selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate is motivating the conservative base like nothing else could have done. Conservatives are absolutely thrilled by this choice, and as Adam Graham has pointed out, liberals are engaging in their own crude sexism against Palin. What is most intreaguing about the reaction of the Left is that they are growing increasingly desperate, realising that they can't attack Palin for her inexperience because she has more executive experience than the man at the top of the Democratic ticket.

How desperate are the liberals? Alan Colmes has sunk to a new low, attempting to blame Sarah Palin for her youngest child's Down's Syndrome.

Former Democratic Chairman Don Fowler is happy about Hurricane Gustav hitting New Orleans, since it could disrupt the Republican National Convention. Listen to this conversation between Fowler and South Carolina Democratic Congressman John Spratt:

"God is on our side?"

This would be like me saying that the 1989 San Francisco Bay earthquake happened because God is a Cub Fan...

The more some of these people squeal-and they do squeal like greased pigs at a county fair-it is evident that all of their talk about gender equality doesn't apply when the woman is a conservative. The Left is literally in panic mode that a conservative, pro-life, heat-packing evangelical may become the most powerful woman in the world-and she would have earned every bit of it.

As for John McCain's decision to tone down the convention-I wrestled with it, because we'd all love to have a grand affair to launch this campaign. The more that I thought about McCain's decision, however, the more I realized that the welfare of our fellow citizens should be placed before our own political well-being. This is a disaster for all concerned, and people's minds are not going to be in Minneapolis today.

As for the Lord-something tells me He's liable to have it in for Don Fowler...

Labels: , , ,


At Tuesday, September 02, 2008 12:40:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The real issue is not how well Obama or McCain might do in the closely divided battleground states, but that we shouldn't have battleground states and spectator states in the first place. Every vote in every state should be politically relevant in a presidential election. And, every vote should be equal. We should have a national popular vote for President in which the White House goes to the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states.

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral vote -- that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

Because of state-by-state enacted rules for winner-take-all awarding of their electoral votes, recent candidates with limited funds have concentrated their attention on a handful of closely divided "battleground" states. In 2004 two-thirds of the visits and money were focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money went to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people have been merely spectators to the presidential election.

Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.

The National Popular Vote bill has passed 21 state legislative chambers, including one house in Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and both houses in California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These four states possess 50 electoral votes — 19% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.



At Tuesday, September 02, 2008 4:11:00 PM, Blogger Dave Oatney said...

I am absolutely and utterly opposed to any proposal to elect a President by direct popular vote. It is an evil dilution of States' Rights, and I am of the highly personal opinion that the whole notion itself is a gimmick that has come to us directly from the Pit of Hell, and has processed straight from the mind of Lucifer.


Post a Comment

<< Home

Locations of visitors to this page
Profile Visitor Map - Click to view visits
Create your own visitor map