Author Topic: if Romney doesn't win FL  (Read 6094 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Eupher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24894
  • Reputation: +2828/-1828
  • U.S. Army, Retired
Re: if Romney doesn't win FL
« Reply #50 on: May 09, 2012, 09:18:25 AM »
Most third-party candidates are usually one-shot deals.

Yup, 'cept Nader. He keeps coming back for more rejection.
Adams E2 Euphonium, built in 2017
Boosey & Co. Imperial Euphonium, built in 1941
Edwards B454 bass trombone, built 2012
Bach Stradivarius 42OG tenor trombone, built 1992
Kanstul 33-T BBb tuba, built 2011
Fender Precision Bass Guitar, built ?
Mouthpiece data provided on request.

Offline NHSparky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24431
  • Reputation: +1278/-617
  • Where are you going? I was gonna make espresso!
Re: if Romney doesn't win FL
« Reply #51 on: May 09, 2012, 09:21:52 AM »
Yup, 'cept Nader. He keeps coming back for more rejection.

True, but I meant in the sense that they draw a significant portion of the vote (> 5%) and/or have any significant influence on the overall election.

Take pretty much anyone who has ever run from the Green or Libertarian Party.
“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.”  -Henry Ford

Offline Danglars

  • Banned
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
  • Reputation: +280/-62
Re: if Romney doesn't win FL
« Reply #52 on: May 09, 2012, 01:00:39 PM »
Incorrect according to my research.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/laws.html

No, I am not incorrect. I wasn't citing statute, but how it is done in fact. I know the electors aren't actually bound, but, in practice, that's how it goes. Have you heard, in your entire life, of any electors in the 48 winner-take-all states casting their votes for anyone but the winner of that state's popular vote? Even one? That's because it doesn't happen.

In 2000 there was a lot of loose talk of the Dems lobbying and trying to flip electors, but even then, it didn't happen. At all. All electors won in the 48 winner-take-all states went to GW Bush.



http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/faq.html#takeall


"What is the difference between the winner-takes-all rule and proportional voting, and which States follow which rule?

There are 48 States that have a winner-takes-all rule for the Electoral College. In these States, whichever candidate receives a majority of the vote, or a plurality of the popular vote (less than 50 percent but more than any other candidate) takes all of the State's electoral votes.

Only two States, Nebraska and Maine, do not follow the winner-takes-all rule. In those States, there could be a split of electoral votes among candidates through the State's system for proportional allocation of votes.For example, Maine has four electoral votes and two Congressional districts. It awards one electoral vote per Congressional district and two by the state-wide, "at-large" vote. It is possible for Candidate A to win the first district and receive one electoral vote, Candidate B to win the second district and receive one electoral vote, and Candidate C, who finished a close second in both the first and second districts, to win the two at-large electoral votes. Although this is a possible scenario, it has not actually occurred in recent elections."



Nebraska and Maine are the two odd states out--not sure if that's what you were disagreeing with or my first assertion, but in either case, I am entirely correct.

http://archive.fairvote.org/e_college/me_ne.htm

« Last Edit: May 09, 2012, 01:02:41 PM by Danglars »