Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: 12th Amendment Update: Tie Probability Continues t...

nike women shoes nike running shoes ed hardy w...

2010-03-11T20:05:05.555-05:00

nike women shoes
nike running shoes
ed hardy womens shoes
ed hardy t shirts for men
ed hardy mens jeans
wholesale nike shoes
nike shoes
nike tn dollar
nike air max 90
nike air max 2009
nike air max 2010
nike air max tn
puma cat
ed hardy mens shoes
ed hardy womens hoodies
ed hardy mens tees
puma shoes
ed hardy clothing us
ed hardy clothing
ed hardy outerwear
ed hardy t shirts
ed hardy boots
ed hardy hoodies
cheap ed hardy
ed hardy clothes
cheap ed hardy clothing
ed hardy wholesale
ed hardy men’s
ed hardy women’s
ed hardy kid’s

Truly a nice blog! Thanks for your great work! Wis...

2010-03-11T20:02:34.160-05:00

Truly a nice blog! Thanks for your great work! Wish you a nice day!
cheap puma shoes
cheap sport shoes
ed hardy ugg boots
ed hardy love kills slowly boots
ed hardy love kills slowly
discount puma shoes
nike shox torch
nike tn dollar
cheap nike shox
ed hardy polo shirts
ed hardy love kills slowly shoes
ed hardy wear
cheap nike shox shoes
nike shox r4
ed hardy love kills slowly shirts
ed hardy trousers
ed hardy jackets
puma mens shoes
cheap nike max
discount nike shox
ed hardy t shirts sale
ed hardy womens t shirts
ed hardy boots
cheap puma ferrari shoes
nike mens shoes
nike shox nz
ed hardy womens clothes
ed hardy womens shirts
ed hardy clothes
discount nike running shoes
discount nike shoes
nike shox shoes
ed hardy outerwear
ed hardy womens
ed hardy womens jeans
cheap nike shoes
nike sports shoes
puma running shoes
puma sneakers
ed hardy bags
ed hardy winter boots
ed hardy t shirts
nike shoes kids

ISO 9001 CE GOST QUALITY TSE ELD ECA AYDINISI EC...

2009-04-06T16:39:19.945-04:00

ISO 9001 CE GOST QUALITY TSE ELD ECA AYDINISI
ECAyedekparca ECAyetkiliservis

http://www.eld.com.trhttp://www.aydinisi.com.trhtt...

2009-04-06T16:35:42.355-04:00

http://www.eld.com.tr
http://www.aydinisi.com.tr
http://www.ecayetkiliservis.com
http://www.ecayedekparca.com
http://www.iso.gen.tr
http://www.eldemir.gen.tr

Daily Kos +7 for Obama

2009-04-06T16:32:25.975-04:00

Daily Kos +7 for Obama

SEO課程課程教你怎麼做我們提供SEO教學SEO是一門值得學習的,我們也提供網站登錄我們提供婚紗攝影...

2009-03-01T22:06:32.694-05:00

SEO課程課程教你怎麼做我們提供
SEO教學
SEO是一門值得學習的
,我們也提供網站登錄

我們提供婚紗攝影
結婚錄音
台北婚紗攝影
高雄婚紗攝影
台中婚紗攝影

SEO課程課程教你怎麼做我們提供SEO教學SEO是一門值得學習的,我們也提供網站登錄我們提供婚紗攝影...

2009-03-01T22:04:39.703-05:00

What is the SMALLEST number of total votes that ne...

2008-10-08T08:52:43.850-04:00

What is the SMALLEST number of total votes that need to be switched from one candidate to another, and from which states, for the outcome to be a TIED ELECTION?

https://www.msu.edu/~sheppa28/elections-tied.html

Hey, just in case you want to know what happens if...

2008-10-07T00:34:44.832-04:00

Hey, just in case you want to know what happens if a tie would occur. go to:

http://www.electoralcollegetie.com/

It's looking increasingly as though the House dele...

2008-09-24T10:57:00.970-04:00

It's looking increasingly as though the House delegations are going to swing heavily Democrat. No delegation that is currently Democrat is in serious danger of losing that character, whereas Arizona (currently even) and Alaska, Nevada, New Mexico (all currently Republican) all have a very serious possibility of changing. If all four did so, and that is not in the least unlikely, the delegation division for the new USHOR would be 31/18/1. I think the likelihood of one neutral and seven Democrat delegations switching sides is vanishingly remote.

And even if this did happen, the same internal political pressures brought to bear on the Democratic delegations would presumably be brought to bear on some of the Republican ones. I am thinking particularly of the one-person Republican delegation in Delaware, in the person of Congressman Castle.

The odds of all this happening are so close to zero that they can be said not to exist. Obama will have to get 269 votes to win this election, whereas McCain will have to get 270.

The suit described above seem to me to be nothing ...

2008-09-22T11:30:06.374-04:00

The suit described above seem to me to be nothing short of bizarre.

One can't challenge a constitutional provision simply because one thinks it was a "fundamental error" or constitutes some "breach of contract." (Well, one can challenge it, but one won't win in court.) The Constitution is the highest law of the land and trumps all other provisions, including contract law. If enough people think that some part of the Constitution is bad policy, then the only way to change it is through an amendment. It cannot be struck down by a simple lawsuit--otherwise, our most fundamental freedoms would be at risk if a series of judges thought that, well, they're just a bad idea. And that's not how our system works.

Novel Federal Challenge to Twelfth Amendment Seeks...

2008-09-21T12:37:25.010-04:00

Novel Federal Challenge to Twelfth Amendment Seeks "Automatic" Result of McCain and Obama as President and Vice-President, Together

Author of unusual constitutional challenge claims fundamental error against Preamble of United States Constitution by passage of Twelfth Amendment, arguing change flip-flopped original design, basic purpose and underlying premise for election of America's top two offices of President and Vice-President.

Indianapolis, IN (FreedomNewsWire™) September 15, 2008 -- Although written in a rather difficult 'patriotic' style, the peculiar pleadings in a federal challenge drafted by a local constitutional practioner appear to suggest a fairly clear argument. The author states that the primary purpose of contractual language contained within the Declaration of Independence and subsequent Federal Constitution expressly require that the 12th Amendment be promptly struck down, for any variety of legal doctrines also provided. If successful and allowed to stand, the ruling would restore the Electoral College back to the original structure as per our Founding Fathers, and Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Barack Obama (D-IL), both of whom are now firmly established as - by far - the top two leading candidates, would then, in fact, jointly ascend to the offices of President and Vice-President, together, as a legally-foregone conclusion.

Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution originally specified that Electors voted only amongst the different Presidential candidates, and then the top two winners, regardless of party affiliation, would become President and Vice-President, in order of the total number of votes cast. The Twelfth Amendment, ratified during 1804, altered the total selection process by adding the notion of a running mate to be also voted for, and future elections became primarily based upon entire political parties, instead of focusing on the unique qualifications and skills of individual candidates, themselves.

The author of the constitutional challenge appears to claim that alteration was fundamental error, by removing a built-in design for continual blending or "rehealing" of our Country's wandering political parties every four years, and, instead, changing into a system of voting that ensures continual division and redivision of our Nation, further and further apart.

The lawsuit apparently is filed in an undisclosed United States District Court, names a principal plaintiff as "next friend" of all other American citizens, and is suing, among some number of other government units and individuals, the entire Federal Government of the United States. It is not difficult to speculate at reasons why the identifying information has been omitted, although there is a hint of that being only temporary. Any reasonable federal judge surely would have preferred keeping the case quiet until some significant further development, considering the current political climate.

The filings available to the public glaringly do not include an actual complaint, but the 12th Amendment challenge is obviously framed as a breach of contract. While also not mentioned, another possible legal result could be to 'moot' - or, to make 'legally irrelevant' – the recent federal suit filed by Attorney Phillip J. Berg against Senator Obama in Philadelphia's Eastern District, over alleged U.S. citizenship issues of the Senator, since Obama might then no longer be technically within a current, legal state of "running" for the Presidency, maybe also depriving Berg of what is known as 'standing' to continue challenging the Senator about that particular qualification for the Nation's highest office.

Another important item seems to be missing from the new arguments. After learning of the bold suit, a quick look-see at the 12th Amendment clearly revealed another issue that this federal judge should consider. It seems that an election for the Vice-President is also supposed to have its own “distinct” voting and counts, or, in other words, separate from that cast for the President, in what would appear also along the same lines of the legal author's basis for making a constitutional challenge. However, an online search did not reveal any images of actual election ballots, where the selections for President and Vice-President were actually separate, which questions the validity of many elections.

Related writings entered into the novel federal suit further claim divine inspiration, the "inevitability" of several political leaders rising soon to various top offices, name a dozen Governors, Senators and Representatives into a bipartisan task force for families, also forecast various cultural healings across race, gender, political parties and social classes, as well as foretell the skyrocketing of our stock markets, the end of the current national homeowners and mortgage crises, and that the judge in the same federal case will easily ascend to the U.S. Supreme Court, to name a few.

The author claims that the political office advancements, cultural healings, spiritual revival, and booming revitalization of our Nation's economy are merely the only logical conclusions remaining after such a monumental ruling would come to pass, because of sudden renewal in the overall confidence and security in our system of government, and therefore of our entire Country, itself. He claims that should also quickly translate into generally strong, positive growth factors for America, with economic increase and stability for all people, and seems to suggest that our Nation's families are now broken and suffering, and in general need of repairs, precisely because of the government's continual redivision.

He argues that restoring the first system of electing our President and Vice-President is a contractual obligation to all American citizens (a.k.a., 'We The People', 'The Public Trust', or 'The Social Compact'), because it is necessary "in order to form a more perfect Union," or, as he also puts it, "in order to [always be] form[ing] a more perfect Union." The constitutional protagonist further argues that the process for all future Presidential elections, maintained in the original design manner, should continually re-strengthen and increase our Nation like clockwork, every four years, and goes so far as to describe a celebration for the official changes, even naming lists of religious faith personalities, dozens of leaders of government, and others, to all attend a special concert to coincide with the patriotic holidays.

Some of legal filings seem a bit unorthodox, but it should be nice to see such dramatic, progressive and widespread change, and so we decided to support this unusual effort, setup the repeater point, and forward the basic information out. We will try to stay abreast of developments, and post any new filings and events as they become available. All of the currently-known filings and communications were made accessible to the general public at the following link:
http://unitedcivilrights.org/members/heavenonearth

For more information, as provided by Cornell Law School:

Article 2, Section 1 of the United States Constitution
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html#section1

The Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxii.html

###

abovemypaygrade: A good compromise would be by con...

2008-09-19T22:11:57.355-04:00

abovemypaygrade: A good compromise would be by congressional district I think. Each Congressional district gets 1 EV. Each state as a whole gets say 1 EV based on State outcome (instead of the current 2 which I think overweights the importance of statehood versus individuals within that state. But instead of winner take all do the Maine/Nebraska thing each EV at congressional districts is up for grabs. It puts almost all 50 states in play every election, except several very red or very blue single district states.

I think that's a bad idea for three reasons.

First, it replicates the problems of the present winner-take-all state-by-state system except it does it 435 times. One could win a a bare majority of districts by one vote each and get zero votes in all the others and win the national election with barely more than 25% of the vote.

Second, entire regions would still be ignored by candidates because they're reliably for one party or the other.

Third, as a prior post points out, if you thing gerrymandering is bad now with House seats, it will be even worse with the presidency on the line. If the districts are not drawn fairly, then the contest won't be fair either.

pacific moderate: What motivation would there be f...

2008-09-19T22:01:47.909-04:00

pacific moderate: What motivation would there be for the overwhelmingly Democratic electorate of California to dilute its electoral votes by proportional allotment unless Republican Texas simultaneously does the same?

None. But you missed the text of the legislation: first, it allocates ALL the state's popular votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Second, it goes into effect only when enough other states do the same to constitute and electoral college majority.

So it doesn't matter which states do it, whether they're "red" or "blue." They could all be blue states, but they retain their present status--sending all their electoral votes to whomever wins the state--until enough states pass similar legislation. When enough other states do so, we will have a national popular vote system without having had to amend the constitution.

It's really a very clever idea.

You forgot the really exciting scenario. If the Ho...

2008-09-19T17:00:18.699-04:00

You forgot the really exciting scenario. If the House fails to break the tie by March 2009, (the kind of snafu house dems are capable of orchestrating), then Cheney becomes President. Of course, if Cheney dies by then, Pelosi become President.

Scenarios where Pelosi becomes President (including Kucinich's double impeachment) amuse me.

Then again, if Cheney became the next President, I think the sheer number of exploding heads might cause permanent damage to the progressive movement.

If it's a tie and if the vote is by the current la...

2008-09-19T15:35:56.463-04:00

If it's a tie and if the vote is by the current lame duck Congress (I'm not sure about that), then, wouldn't Leiberman in the Senate support McCain/Palin and wouldn't that give us President Obama and Vice President Palin?

I'm just saying - if that happens, Obama better step up personnel in the Secret Service.

@ Jirque, et al-The National popular vote compact ...

2008-09-19T15:22:31.107-04:00

@ Jirque, et al-

The National popular vote compact is a great, workable idea. Definitely worth reading more at

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com

I do agree with other commentators that if Obama wins w/out the popular vote, or wins on an electoral tie, then there may be the political will to finally create NPV thru amendment. But the compact is actually a better, more constitutionally moderate approach in alot of ways. It keeps the basic paradigm of elections as being controlled by and the purview of the states intact, and avoids the various problems associated with national registration, a majority popular vote requirement, etc. Of course, in MY ideal world, there would be a National Vote by Instant Runoff Voting, AND there would be a nation mandate for voter registration (a constitutional right to vote). But I think the compact is a way to get it done, and finally end the ridiculousness of a system that makes 70% of the country irrelevant to the result of the election. What about One Person One Vote?

Of course, NPV would also mean Nate would have to create a new model. ;)

One other thing- If Obama wins without the popular vote, there would also be a bit more impetus for "red" states, eg safe states who always go republican, to sign on to the compact.

Thankfully, the model here (and common sense) seem to find very few scenarios in which McCain pulls a Bush. If he loses the popular vote, he'll almost certainly lose the election.

(Full disclosure: I worked on pushing the National Popular Vote Compact in Rhode Island this year)

Here's another breakdown of the State-by-State Hou...

2008-09-19T14:23:01.827-04:00

Here's another breakdown of the State-by-State House vote, taking into consideration the top 30 races the National Journal has identified as vulnerable. Not that that's gospel, but it gives you an idea where things might go.

Solid Republican 7
Likely Republican (tie) 3
Likely Republican (switch) 6
Vulnerable Republican (tie) 1
Vulnerable Republican (switch) 5
Tie not vulnerable to switch 1
Tie vulnerable to go D 1
Vulnerable Democratic (switch) 0
Vulnerable Democratic (tie) 2
Likely Democratic (switch) 10
Likely Democratic (tie) 5
Solid Democratic 9

In other words, the Democrats have 24 states they can more or less count on, and four more likely to at least tie, perhaps go/stay D. Sounds like they would have the upper hand.

Here are the individual state analysis, with the current party split plus National Journal top 30 states identified.

States likely to have a Republican vote for President in the House:

Republican control by a margin of at least 2, with <2 vulnerable (7 states)

Alabama 5-2 1 Republican vulnerable
Florida 16-9 1 each vulnerable
Michigan 9-6 1 Republican vulnerable
Nebraska 3
Oklahoma 4-1
Texas 19-13 1 Democrat vulnerable
Virginia 8-3 1 Republican vulnerable

Republican control but could tie with one R loss, not vulnerable (3 states)

Idaho 2-0
Kentucky 4-2
South Carolina 4-2

Republican control, but could flip with one R loss, not vulnerable (6 states)

Delaware 1
Georgia 7-6
Missouri 5-4
Montana 1
Utah 2-1
Wyoming 1

Republican control, but vulnerable to tie (1 state)

Minnesota 5-3

Republican control, but vulnerable to switch (5 states)

Alaska 1 1 Republican vulnerable
Louisiana 4-3 1 each vulnerable
Nevada 2-1 One R vulnerable
New Mexico 2-1 One R vulnerable
Ohio 10-7-1 1 D seat vacant, 3 possible D pickups

Tied currently (2 states)

Arizona 4-4 One R vulnerable
Kansas 2-2

Democratic control, but vulnerable to switch

-none-

Democratic control, but vulnerable to tie (2 states)

Mississippi 3-1 one D vulnerable
New Hampshire 2 one D vulnerable

Democratic control, but could flip with one D loss, not vulnerable (10 states)

Colorado 4-3 one R vulnerable
Iowa 3-2
Indiana 5-4
New Jersey 7-6 two R vulnerable
North Carolina 7-6 one R vulnerable
North Dakota 1
South Dakota 1
Tennessee 5-4
Vermont 1
West Virginia 2-1

Democratic control, but could tie with one D loss, not vulnerable (5 states)

Arkansas 3-1
Hawaii 2
Maine 2
Rhode Island 2
Wisconsin 5-3

Democratic control by a margin of at least 2 with <2 vulnerable (9 states)

California 34-19
Connecticut 4-1 one R vulnerable
Illinois 11-8 two R vulnerable
Maryland 6-2
Massachusetts 10
New York 23-6 three R vulnerable
Oregon 4-1
Pennsylvania 11-8, one D vulnerable
Washington 6-3 one R vulnerable

There are other scenarios involving a tie if Obama...

2008-09-19T14:11:04.889-04:00

There are other scenarios involving a tie if Obama wins an EV from Nebraska. But, given recent polling of NE as a whole, it seems very unlikely that Obama will win one there.

May have been mentioned, but what if Obama wins on...

2008-09-19T14:04:53.587-04:00

May have been mentioned, but what if Obama wins one split electoral vote from NE? They split their votes now.

abovemypaygrade,I hate your idea! Seriously, it j...

2008-09-19T13:59:14.540-04:00

abovemypaygrade,

I hate your idea! Seriously, it just encourages gerrymandering of congressional districts. We've already gone way too far in that direction, but to make it determine presidential elections would be much worse.

Eric: I'm not arguing for or against the EC. I am ...

2008-09-19T13:54:18.073-04:00

Eric: I'm not arguing for or against the EC. I am making the point that adding up 51 individual state contests and trying to conclude that they represent what would be the result of a nationwide popular vote contest is wrong.

But that's also true on a state level. Different precincts manage elections differently. The ballots are often very different, the machines used are different, the number of polling places per voter are different, etc.

In this tie scenario, McCain wins 29 states. For O...

2008-09-19T13:53:47.198-04:00

In this tie scenario, McCain wins 29 states. For Obama to win, 5 states have to vote against the will of their constituents.

Not really on point. The ones voting will be Representatives and their constituents are the voters of their Congressional Districts. So, a Democrat from a CD that voted for Obama should have no pressure to vote for McCain; just the opposite. It's the Democratic Representatives from CDs that vote for McCain who will feel the pressure--Herseth in SD and Taylor in MS, for example, will feel enormous pressure to vote McCain.

but if McCain wins the popular vote, there will be...

2008-09-19T13:44:39.557-04:00

but if McCain wins the popular vote, there will be far more pressure on Democratic Representatives to vote against their party.

Not after the last 2 elections it won't. Republicans have proven they're willing to win by any means possible and I doubt any Democratic Representative would survive being the vote that gave us 4 more years of this nonsense.

For those espousing a National Vote instead of Ele...

2008-09-19T13:37:29.634-04:00

For those espousing a National Vote instead of Electoral College, think Florida 2000, only now with the vote within say 1% either way we must recount all 50 states multiple times. A good compromise would be by congressional district I think. Each Congressional district gets 1 EV. Each state as a whole gets say 1 EV based on State outcome (instead of the current 2 which I think overweights the importance of statehood versus individuals within that state. But instead of winner take all do the Maine/Nebraska thing each EV at congressional districts is up for grabs. It puts almost all 50 states in play every election, except several very red or very blue single district states. States like New York, California, Texas, Illinois, even Georgia really matter because they clearly have congressional districts that go the other way from the states voting majority. Puts more power to the people without needless messy recounts. Even simpler than Florida 2000, Since each district in Florida would have had its own EV only certain districts would get counted.