levitra in holland kaufen zenegra 100 mg tablets xalatan discount coupon retin a micro reviews acne mobicity store parramatta review mobicity

FiveThirtyEight.com on Minnesota

FiveThirtyEight.com is a national poll reporting site that aggregates and run stats on those polls to predict the outcome of this fall’s national elections. They also include reports on how things are playing in key states including Minnesota. Here is a snippet on the senate race:

Road to 270: Minnesota

Minnesota will likely be a single-digit race at the presidential level when all is said and done, but pay close attention to the Coleman-Franken race. Not only is it a brutal fight already, with each candidate wounded by tough criticism and a torrent of attack ads from each side on the air, but also note that if Franken cannot pull off a victory then Democrats have very little chance of getting to the magical, filibuster-proof 60 seats they hope for.

In think the poll scenario of Obama winning the election (electoral vote) yet losing the national popular vote is fascinating. They are giving that a 9.7% chance of happening. I wonder how the country would react to that?

2 thoughts on “FiveThirtyEight.com on Minnesota”

  1. The current system does not reliably reflect the nationwide popular vote. The statewide winner-take-all rules makes it possible for a candidate to win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide. This has occurred in one of every 14 presidential elections.

    In the past six decades, there have been six presidential elections in which a shift of a relatively small number of votes in one or two states would have elected (and, of course, in 2000, did elect) a presidential candidate who lost the popular vote nationwide.

    Nationwide popular election of the President is the only system that makes all states competitive, guarantees that the candidate with the most popular votes nationwide wins the Presidency, and makes every vote equal.

    The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

    Every vote would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections.

    The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

    The National Popular Vote bill has passed 21 state legislative chambers, including one house in Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and both houses in California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These four states possess 50 electoral votes — 19% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.

    See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com

  2. It seems like this would take away the need for politicians to ever visit the heartland of America outside of a few major cities. They could reach many more people more efficiently by campaigning only on the coasts and appealing only to the values of people living on the coasts. As John Koza, from your organization, explains here, it would simply flip which states candidates choose to ignore and end up creating battleground states out of the most densly populated states.

    I suppose that’s good if you live on the coasts or would rather see candidates appealing to the values and issues that are relevant to people living in the most industrious areas of the country rather than relying on the wedge issues driving the current elections such as abortion, guns, and offshoring of jobs. None of those three issues would be in the top-3 if elections were decided by the coasts rather than the heartland.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.