ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   D.C. (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   Elections What If There Were No Swing States? (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=265030)

HolyHandgernade 10-12-2012 02:05 PM

What If There Were No Swing States?
 
Hypothetically, what if, barring greatsocial/political upheaval, there were no swing states, or at the very least, one party had enough states he or she could count on each year that it guaranteed that party at least 271 electoral votes?

Do you think they would move to get rid of the electoral college?

If one party held complete sway like that, would it rip the nation apart?

cosmo20002 10-12-2012 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade (Post 9005598)
Hypothetically, what if, barring greatsocial/political upheaval, there were no swing states, or at the very least, one party had enough states he or she could count on each year that it guaranteed that party at least 271 electoral votes?

Do you think they would move to get rid of the electoral college?

If one party held complete sway like that, would it rip the nation apart?

We'll know soon enough, when the last of the old racist cranks propping up the R party finally keel over in a couple decades.

jiveturkey 10-12-2012 02:16 PM

It's been talked about a bit on here that if Latinos stay with the Dems Texas might be in play as early as 2016 (more likely 2020).

If the Dems can count on TX, CA and NY then I don't think you'll see a Repub president for a long time.

This seems a little far fetched to me but I guess it plays well with your hypothetical.

Rain Man 10-12-2012 02:22 PM

I think this has been the case in a lot of elections. When Nixon beat McGovern or when Reagan beat Mondale, I don't think we had a lot of swing states. So all it means is that one candidate is much stronger. Americans don't like that, so it would swing back eventually, or in a more extreme case the more powerful party would eventually splinter.

jiveturkey 10-12-2012 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 9005631)
I think this has been the case in a lot of elections. When Nixon beat McGovern or when Reagan beat Mondale, I don't think we had a lot of swing states. So all it means is that one candidate is much stronger. Americans don't like that, so it would swing back eventually, or in a more extreme case the more powerful party would eventually splinter.

I also think it's likely that they would be rolling out some terrible candidates, which would put some weird places in play that might not have been in the past.

Absolutely power would definitely lead to complacency.

Deberg_1990 10-12-2012 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmo20002 (Post 9005609)
We'll know soon enough, when the last of the old racist cranks propping up the R party finally keel over in a couple decades.

Yes, because the Dems never have any old racist cranks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_thurmond

KCTitus 10-12-2012 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade (Post 9005598)
Hypothetically, what if, barring greatsocial/political upheaval, there were no swing states, or at the very least, one party had enough states he or she could count on each year that it guaranteed that party at least 271 electoral votes?

Do you think they would move to get rid of the electoral college?

If one party held complete sway like that, would it rip the nation apart?

Absolute power corrupts, absolutely...the electoral college balances states/population. It should not be abolished, otherwise we no longer have a representative democracy but pure democracy which would lead to socialism, then communism.

stonedstooge 10-12-2012 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCTitus (Post 9006142)
Absolute power corrupts, absolutely...the electoral college balances states/population. It should not be abolished, otherwise we no longer have a representative democracy but pure democracy which would lead to socialism, then communism.

I Barrack O'Bama approve this message

Saul Good 10-12-2012 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiveturkey (Post 9005619)
It's been talked about a bit on here that if Latinos stay with the Dems Texas might be in play as early as 2016 (more likely 2020).

If the Dems can count on TX, CA and NY then I don't think you'll see a Repub president for a long time.

This seems a little far fetched to me but I guess it plays well with your hypothetical.

What is the fastest growing area of the country?

jiveturkey 10-12-2012 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Too (Post 9006542)
What is the fastest growing area of the country?

I did a quick search and it looks like the south has experienced the most growth over the last 10 years or so.

qabbaan 10-12-2012 07:54 PM

What if the red states and blue states became two separate countries?

Saul Good 10-12-2012 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiveturkey (Post 9006559)
I did a quick search and it looks like the south has experienced the most growth over the last 10 years or so.

Yep. The southeast in particular.

alnorth 10-12-2012 07:56 PM

If Romney were to hypothetically win the popular vote but lose the electoral college, that would be the election result that finally forced major change.

We probably wouldn't amend the constitution, but a whole lot of red states would sign onto the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Deberg_1990 10-12-2012 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 9006576)
If Romney were to hypothetically win the popular vote but lose the electoral college, that would be the election result that finally forced major change.

Isnt this what happened to Gore in 2000? No change...

Aries Walker 10-12-2012 10:18 PM

Yup.

Also, political parties evolve. The ostracized party would change its platform and people would shuffle parties, like the Dixiecrats did in the 60's.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.