- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
No thread on winner-takes-all in Nebraska?
Posted on 4/3/24 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 4/3/24 at 1:47 pm
quote:
Republicans now have a filibuster-proof majority in the Unicameral. Read my statement calling for Nebraska to pass winner-take-all and put one more electoral vote in the Republican column for 2024:
https://twitter.com/PeteRicketts/status/1775573185531896164
8
Posted on 4/3/24 at 1:49 pm to loogaroo
I wish more states split their EV’s by congressional district, not less.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 1:50 pm to loogaroo
Nebraska shouldn't be asking us. Just do it. Lead. Don't follow. Don't cuck out like a Bush/Romney Republican. fricking do it. You don't need our permission.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:02 pm to Indefatigable
Winner take-all is more powerful for the state. So winner take all should be the way for a state that cares about its voters. Having said that, if a California or Colorado wanted to split, great. But a solid blue state isn’t going to do that.
With winner take all in Nebraska + Nevada(Ga and Az) Trump is at 269, I think
With winner take all in Nebraska + Nevada(Ga and Az) Trump is at 269, I think
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:03 pm to loogaroo
Harris is saying Maine will flip red
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:12 pm to loogaroo
Winner take all is a corruption of the electoral college.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:13 pm to Padme
It will 
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:15 pm to Padme
quote:
Winner take-all is more powerful for the state. So winner take all should be the way for a state that cares about its voters. Having said that, if a California or Colorado wanted to split, great. But a solid blue state isn’t going to do that.
Right. It only conceptually makes sense from an all or nothing standpoint. I could see maybe being onboard with it if every state were doing it, but it doesn't really make sense to me to have a few do it and most everyone else not.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:18 pm to loogaroo
It will be a wash because if Nebraska does this I'm sure Maine will be petty and do the same. The Dems lose their potential Omaha EC vote while the Repubs lose rural Maine. I wouldn't be surprised if Trump wins Omaha in 2024 anyways with how well he's poised to do
This post was edited on 4/3/24 at 2:19 pm
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:20 pm to SirWinston
quote:
Harris is saying Maine will flip red
quote:
It will
This post was edited on 4/3/24 at 2:26 pm
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:24 pm to loogaroo
I’ve read a couple things that possibly present challenges …let’s hope they can be overcome
NE - supposedly has a supermajority in legislature to get this passed but reading they have one GOP converter from DEMa that will filibuster and not allow to pass…is this accurate ?
ME - why would they simply not pass the same legislation to offset ? I am reading the argument that ME might flip Red…will then if that’s the case the Dems have nothing to lose anyhow
Logically I am trying to play this out
Somebody smarter than me give me hope
Trumps going to Win GA , NV and AZ so this wound be huge if we can get NE on board and overcome what I mentioned above
NE - supposedly has a supermajority in legislature to get this passed but reading they have one GOP converter from DEMa that will filibuster and not allow to pass…is this accurate ?
ME - why would they simply not pass the same legislation to offset ? I am reading the argument that ME might flip Red…will then if that’s the case the Dems have nothing to lose anyhow
Logically I am trying to play this out
Somebody smarter than me give me hope
Trumps going to Win GA , NV and AZ so this wound be huge if we can get NE on board and overcome what I mentioned above
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:26 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
I wish more states split their EV’s by congressional district, not less.
I 100% agree with this. If you want a true representation (which the dems say the electoral college does not do) POTUS should be done like this.
Each congressional district is 1 EC vote, this makes all districts competitive and gives you a true represntation of the US. Then the winner of the state overall gets 2 EC votes. Keeps the # of EC votes at 535 and gives each party opprotunities in states they normally wouldnt have.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:27 pm to masoncj
quote:
NE on board and overcome what I mentioned above
Get the word out.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:28 pm to Padme
quote:
Winner take-all is more powerful for the state.
Horrible way to go, should be per congressional districts, gives Trump a chance to get a few votes in CA,NY
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:31 pm to AubieinNC2009
quote:
I 100% agree with this. If you want a true representation (which the dems say the electoral college does not do) POTUS should be done like this.
Each congressional district is 1 EC vote, this makes all districts competitive and gives you a true represntation of the US. Then the winner of the state overall gets 2 EC votes. Keeps the # of EC votes at 535 and gives each party opprotunities in states they normally wouldnt have.
absolutely. i've been for this since people were bitching about EC in 2000 and i was going through US history at the time.
think about how many people don't vote in CA because they know that their vote doesn't count, or a democrat in Oklahoma the same.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:35 pm to 3nOut
quote:
think about how many people don't vote in CA because they know that their vote doesn't count, or a democrat in Oklahoma the same.
This would be a fairer system for all of the US and give more of America have their vote matter.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:38 pm to loogaroo
This is a big deal if it gets passed. Maine Republicans will be able to block the same thing from happening until after the 2024 election based on the "People Veto" in Maine which allows groups to push legislative issues to a vote prior to laws going into effect.
It's not hard to draw up a 269-269 tie if Trump wins all the Nebraska EVs. Trump would win a tie.
Most likely 269-269 scenario -
Trump turns Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia red but Biden holds Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
It's not hard to draw up a 269-269 tie if Trump wins all the Nebraska EVs. Trump would win a tie.
Most likely 269-269 scenario -
Trump turns Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia red but Biden holds Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:40 pm to Padme
quote:
Winner take-all is more powerful for the state. So winner take all should be the way for a state that cares about its voters. Having said that, if a California or Colorado wanted to split, great. But a solid blue state isn’t going to do that.
It’s not a partisan thing. A state that “cares about its voters” would assign its EV’s in a way that actually reflects the electorate in the state.
This post was edited on 4/3/24 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 4/3/24 at 2:59 pm to loogaroo
What would the map look like if every state divided it up by CD?
Dems would have still won in 2020, but much closer.
Dems would have still won in 2020, but much closer.
Posted on 4/3/24 at 3:01 pm to AubieinNC2009
quote:
I 100% agree with this. If you want a true representation (which the dems say the electoral college does not do) POTUS should be done like this.
You would see a lot less weird votes in urban areas if their fraud didn’t have the ability to swing the entire state’s electoral vote.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News