Repubs realize they have dwindling chances of winning the presidency, so do what they do best, cheat, while at the same time spin it that they're not cheating.
Move the goalposts, trip opponents, swiftboat candidates, impose photo ID laws, gerrymander districts to repub advantage, filibuster to obstruct almost all democrat initiatives. Argue that electoral vote apportionment based on districting creates a fairer electoral process, BUT ONLY IN STATES WHICH VOTE DEMOCRAT.
Under {first} plan Mr. Obama would have split the Pennsylvania haul with Romney 12 to 8. A similar plan .. by 2 GOP House members would award electoral votes by how many of the state's 18 congressional districts a candidate won, with the popular winner getting two extras. Under that plan Romney would have taken 13 electoral votes and Obama 7 {Fair? where one district of 50,000 voters carries same weight as philadelphia with over 500,000?}
If Pennsylvania and other swing states adopted the {state of} Virginia model, Romney would have won with 280 electoral votes to Obama's 258, accdg to FairVote, a Maryland-based election reform group. If the swing states adopted the Pileggi model, Mr. Obama still would have won with a 36-vote electoral vote margin, down from the 106-vote cushion he enjoyed last month.
Should GOP legislators in control of both houses rally around the change -- as they did voter ID -- there is little Democrats can do about it. {Gov} Corbett endorsed the first Pileggi electoral vote plan in the summer of 2011 and the latest effort is "under review
asked why no Republican-voting states are adopting similar plans. "Is Texas going to split its vote in half, or are only blue battleground states rendering themselves irrelevant? Are we willing to sacrifice Pennsylvania's voice for the greater partisan good of the Republican party?" he asked. ........ Oh! there was no answer!
= new reply since forum marked as read
