or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Subterfuge Texas Style
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Subterfuge Texas Style

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
I love it. Split Texas in to 5 states. 8 new senators, same number of Rep's.


Texas needs to move on this and complete it before November.

Austin Powers
post #2 of 14
Thread Starter 
I forgot! Four new stars!
post #3 of 14
i remember a post here or maybe i saw it somewhere else, a similar plan to split up California into many states (over 50) to get many more electoral collage votes, the amazing thing was that none of the small states would be the least populous state
"The only second chance you get in life is the chance to make the same mistake twice"
Reply
"The only second chance you get in life is the chance to make the same mistake twice"
Reply
post #4 of 14
I am surprised by the low brow nature of the article given its author is a purported Yale Law Grad.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #5 of 14
Colorado has something similar for this election, though not quite as drastic or absurd. They have on the ballot an amendment to proportionally give out their electoral votes. So instead of Bush getting all 9 electoral votes, Kerry would get 4 of them, assuming he gets 45% of so. That could be the election if it stays close like last time. The amendment is retroactive, or concurrent rather, so if Colorado passes it, it will apply to that election's electoral votes.

The Colorado polls are close enough now that Kerry could win it, but if he wins Colorado, he'll probably win big in the rest of the country so it won't matter.
post #6 of 14
Thread Starter 
I assume California would have to go through congress. I think in this day would be impossible to pass.
post #7 of 14
When Bush was elected, there was a discussion about the philosophy of US president election. The president is the president of the united states, and not the president of a single giant state.
US is a federation and therefore, difference of size between states tend to be erased.
The constitution allow states to divided them (but in this case it's an obvious joke, no texan will want division) but not allow that the US president is direclty elected by US people.
Direct election will make sense, but will be a big constitutional change that will recquire the positive votes of all states to be effective. Such a vote could lead to a new secession in US
post #8 of 14
Just remove the electoral college. its time has passed.
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS! Its the only way we can clean up Congress.
Reply
post #9 of 14
Quote:
Originally posted by Aurora
Just remove the electoral college. its time has passed.

Or keep it and just base it off counties.
post #10 of 14
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
Or keep it and just base it off counties.

I agree with that, if you mean give out the electoral votes proportionally rather than winner-take-all. That would be easier because it wouldn't require a constitutional amendment. There's a big problem with it though, and that is that you need 270 electoral votes to win, and without the winner-take-all system, whenever there's a close race and a third-party, you run the risk of no one getting to 270. That's what would have happened in 2000.

So I think you need to have proportional electoral votes along with a ranking system or instant run-off system for voting so you end up with only two candidates getting electoral votes. That way you would avoid the problem of not reaching 270. (Although even then there's still the possibility of a 269-269 tie.)
post #11 of 14
USA Today posted a map of how counties went after the last election. Pretty cool map. You can see how strongly the partisan vote correlates to urban/rural and the specifics of regions. I don't know the numbers but I would guess the GOP wins over 80% of the counties in the US.

We could just split up the whole country. New countries would probably be Hawai'i, Alaska, West Coast, Rockies, Plains, Southwest, Texas, SOuth, Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, and New England.
post #12 of 14
Quote:
Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath
USA Today posted a map of how counties went after the last election. Pretty cool map. You can see how strongly the partisan vote correlates to urban/rural and the specifics of regions. I don't know the numbers but I would guess the GOP wins over 80% of the counties in the US.

We could just split up the whole country. New countries would probably be Hawai'i, Alaska, West Coast, Rockies, Plains, Southwest, Texas, SOuth, Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, and New England.

It's not quite 80% but you're basically right. It's actually about 73%. that's pretty amazing given the closness of the last election.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #13 of 14
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
It's not quite 80% but you're basically right. It's actually about 73%. that's pretty amazing given the closness of the last election.

Gives you a real sense of just how empty the vast majority of our nation is, even east of the Mississippi.
post #14 of 14
Quote:
Gives you a real sense of just how empty the vast majority of our nation is, even east of the Mississippi.

When you mention how empty the vast majority of our nation is, are you talking about land use or human craniums?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Subterfuge Texas Style