Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why we don't have to worry about Husted's Ohio idea (splitting up the EV) [View all]dsc
(52,129 posts)20. that is way different that proportional
In NE Obama would have gotten 2 EV and Romney 3EV under a strict proportional vote and he would have needed to get somewhere north of 69% to earn that 4th EV. In ME, Obama would have likely gotten a 3/1 split but could have wound up 2/2 depending on what one meant by proportional.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
40 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Why we don't have to worry about Husted's Ohio idea (splitting up the EV) [View all]
dsc
Nov 2012
OP
I disagree. If they want games like that then get rid of the electorial college, and do just the
still_one
Nov 2012
#1
that's not what Think Progress says and please don't tell me what *not* to worry about
CreekDog
Nov 2012
#28
won't the doj have to approve since ohio is now subject to oversight for irregularities? eom
ellenfl
Nov 2012
#3
i guess not . . . it's not retroactive. bummer. something needs to be done. eom
ellenfl
Nov 2012
#33
Then you may want to notify the Federal Register and tell them that they're wrong
SickOfTheOnePct
Nov 2012
#26
THey don't just want to split the EV, but to gerrymander it so they can get the majority of EV even
Faryn Balyncd
Nov 2012
#36