If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell turns out to be both not a total douche bag and smart enough to know being one would hurt his Presidential ambitions   (firstread.nbcnews.com) divider line 43
    More: Obvious, Governor of Virginia, electoral colleges  
•       •       •

4208 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Jan 2013 at 6:49 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



43 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-26 04:49:16 PM
nope, he may be smart, but he is a total douchebag.
 
2013-01-26 04:53:01 PM
He's smart enough to pretend to be against it----but will sign it anyways.
Just like he did with the forced ultrasound law.
"Oh I can't believe they'd do that...." Then signs it anyway.
 
2013-01-26 05:48:42 PM
Well, if you're just going to throw that panda burger away...
 
2013-01-26 06:11:17 PM
He waited to see how much of a fuss it was going to make.  If it went away he would sign it, but since we're still talking about it he has to kill it.  He still hasn't said if he's going to stop that redistricting bill they forced through.
 
2013-01-26 06:29:11 PM

optikeye: He's smart enough to pretend to be against it----but will sign it anyways.


Assuming they can herd the two RINOs back in line to pass it, which is deeply unlikely.

GAT_00: He still hasn't said if he's going to stop that redistricting bill they forced through.


Yeah, this is just not "total moron".
 
2013-01-26 06:49:59 PM
Shut up, gov ultrasound
 
2013-01-26 06:52:34 PM

Cewley: nope, he may be smart, but he is a total douchebag.


Yeah. Met the guy. Not a fan.
 
2013-01-26 06:55:02 PM
Can Bob McDonnell empty my dog's anal glands?
 
2013-01-26 07:00:00 PM
What is the logic driving this movement? If this had been in place in 2012, Romney would have won the election, but lost the popular vote. How is that better or more fair?
 
2013-01-26 07:06:01 PM

foo monkey: What is the logic driving this movement? If this had been in place in 2012, Romney would have won the election, but lost the popular vote. How is that better or more fair?


Because the Republicans would've won. And that's really all that matters to them.
 
2013-01-26 07:07:27 PM

foo monkey: What is the logic driving this movement? If this had been in place in 2012, Romney would have won the election, but lost the popular vote. How is that better or more fair?


When Colorado put out an initiative to divide their electoral votes by district in 2004, Republicans rallied against it and defeated it 2-to-1.
 
2013-01-26 07:07:41 PM
I would totally cool with getting rid of the Electoral College all together, but if you insist on using it has to be kept the same so who ever get's the most votes in the State wins that states Electoral Votes.

These purpose changes the GOP want to make would lead to even more instances where Presidents would be elected w/o winning the popular vote.
 
2013-01-26 07:10:09 PM

foo monkey: What is the logic driving this movement? If this had been in place in 2012, Romney would have won the election, but lost the popular vote. How is that better or more fair?


It would help Republicans win. Therefore it is good. If it helped Democrats win, it would be the worst thing since Hitlerbama.
 
2013-01-26 07:17:59 PM

alienated: Shut up, gov ultrasound

 
2013-01-26 07:25:53 PM

foo monkey: What is the logic driving this movement? If this had been in place in 2012, Romney would have won the election, but lost the popular vote. How is that better or more fair?


Voters are stupid and electing candidates from the wrong party.
 
2013-01-26 07:27:38 PM

Mentat: foo monkey: What is the logic driving this movement? If this had been in place in 2012, Romney would have won the election, but lost the popular vote. How is that better or more fair?

When Colorado put out an initiative to divide their electoral votes by district in 2004, Republicans rallied against it and defeated it 2-to-1.


Whaaaat? You mean the Republicans are hypocrites AS WELL as cheating filth? I NEVER WOULD HAVE GUESSED.
 
2013-01-26 07:27:41 PM
As someone who comes from a state that DOES apportion...well, first of all, that doesn't always work out the way Republicans hope. This state has NEVER apportioned its vote.

You can always tell how badly Republicans are doing based on whether or not they make that special trip to capture that one vote. Not to capture ALL the votes in the state, but to split the vote. They never show even the slightest interest in the heavily-populated First District. Both Romney and Ryan made separate trips to grovel for it, and so did McCain in 2008.

I always wondered what it would look like if ALL the states apportioned the way mine does. It was an intriguing idea until I realized that apportionment would make it possible to gerrymander a Presidential election. Yes, it does give an outsized vote to rural areas. Suddenly living in only one of two states that apportions its vote didn't seem all that cool anymore.
 
2013-01-26 07:46:30 PM
So, does that mean he's going to veto the last minute gerrymandering that occurred on Monday? Ah, I see. He's only going to veto a bill which isn't going to reach his desk in the first place.
 
2013-01-26 07:47:45 PM

Mrtraveler01: foo monkey: What is the logic driving this movement? If this had been in place in 2012, Romney would have won the election, but lost the popular vote. How is that better or more fair?

Because the Republicans would've won. And that's really all that matters to them.


sad bears sad bears sad bears .jpg
 
2013-01-26 07:48:51 PM
Ya'll Demorats are just butthurt that only a few states reflecting the will of hte people will result in Permanent Repulibcican Majority.

static.fjcdn.com
 
2013-01-26 08:00:22 PM

peasandcarrots: As someone who comes from a state that DOES apportion...well, first of all, that doesn't always work out the way Republicans hope. This state has NEVER apportioned its vote.

You can always tell how badly Republicans are doing based on whether or not they make that special trip to capture that one vote. Not to capture ALL the votes in the state, but to split the vote. They never show even the slightest interest in the heavily-populated First District. Both Romney and Ryan made separate trips to grovel for it, and so did McCain in 2008.

I always wondered what it would look like if ALL the states apportioned the way mine does. It was an intriguing idea until I realized that apportionment would make it possible to gerrymander a Presidential election. Yes, it does give an outsized vote to rural areas. Suddenly living in only one of two states that apportions its vote didn't seem all that cool anymore.


The problem is that parties generally only try to split votes when there is a mismatch between the party that carries the state in a Presidential election and the party that controls the State government. Even ignoring gerrymandering this would much more readily produce a mismatch between the electoral college and the popular vote, which are highly controversial in the best of times. I shudder to think what would happen if we had a mismatch during a deep recession with a highly polarized electorate. Maybe not a full-scale civil war, but there would be dead bodies nonetheless.

All in all, I say we ditch the Electoral College and go with a popular vote with preferential voting. That will have the combined effect of removing mismatches as well as the spoiler effect (allowing 3rd party candidates to run and people to vote for them without fear of inadvertently helping their least favorite candidate get elected).
 
2013-01-26 08:05:50 PM
A Republican state senator has come out against the plan. The state senate is tied at 20-20 so this should be doomed. The Lt. Gov would likely vote against this too if he has to break a tie.
 
2013-01-26 08:22:27 PM

peasandcarrots: As someone who comes from a state that DOES apportion...well, first of all, that doesn't always work out the way Republicans hope. This state has NEVER apportioned its vote.

You can always tell how badly Republicans are doing based on whether or not they make that special trip to capture that one vote. Not to capture ALL the votes in the state, but to split the vote. They never show even the slightest interest in the heavily-populated First District. Both Romney and Ryan made separate trips to grovel for it, and so did McCain in 2008.

I always wondered what it would look like if ALL the states apportioned the way mine does. It was an intriguing idea until I realized that apportionment would make it possible to gerrymander a Presidential election. Yes, it does give an outsized vote to rural areas. Suddenly living in only one of two states that apportions its vote didn't seem all that cool anymore.


Someone (Chris Matthews?) was saying something along the lines of doing it the way we do now where the popular winner gets all the votes means the states elect the winner who is then the president of the United States. Doing it proportionally would make the winner the president of the Congressional Districts.
 
2013-01-26 08:31:41 PM

Non-evil Monkey: The problem is that parties generally only try to split votes when there is a mismatch between the party that carries the state in a Presidential election and the party that controls the State government. Even ignoring gerrymandering this would much more readily produce a mismatch between the electoral college and the popular vote, which are highly controversial in the best of times. I shudder to think what would happen if we had a mismatch during a deep recession with a highly polarized electorate. Maybe not a full-scale civil war, but there would be dead bodies nonetheless.

All in all, I say we ditch the Electoral College and go with a popular vote with preferential voting. That will have the combined effect of removing mismatches as well as the spoiler effect (allowing 3rd party candidates to run and people to vote for them without fear of inadvertently helping their least favorite candidate get elected).


I hereby dub thee Non-Evil Alarmist.
 
2013-01-26 08:51:29 PM

SomeoneDumb: peasandcarrots: As someone who comes from a state that DOES apportion...well, first of all, that doesn't always work out the way Republicans hope. This state has NEVER apportioned its vote.

You can always tell how badly Republicans are doing based on whether or not they make that special trip to capture that one vote. Not to capture ALL the votes in the state, but to split the vote. They never show even the slightest interest in the heavily-populated First District. Both Romney and Ryan made separate trips to grovel for it, and so did McCain in 2008.

I always wondered what it would look like if ALL the states apportioned the way mine does. It was an intriguing idea until I realized that apportionment would make it possible to gerrymander a Presidential election. Yes, it does give an outsized vote to rural areas. Suddenly living in only one of two states that apportions its vote didn't seem all that cool anymore.

Someone (Chris Matthews?) was saying something along the lines of doing it the way we do now where the popular winner gets all the votes means the states elect the winner who is then the president of the United States. Doing it proportionally would make the winner the president of the Congressional Districts.


I've never been crazy about the whole "states' rights" thing anyway. And over the years, I've become more and more a believer in deep-sixing the EC and going with a straight-up popular vote. Then the winner would be President of the American People. Sounds good to me.
 
2013-01-26 08:59:39 PM

Meireles16: A Republican state senator has come out against the plan. The state senate is tied at 20-20 so this should be doomed. The Lt. Gov would likely vote against this too if he has to break a tie.


Keep an eye on PA. They have our state all wrapped up at the moment. We can sway to blue for a presidential election, but we have no control over our state government at the moment.

Corbett isn't dumb enough to let his state (R)s open their mouths on something this important. They let it slip on voter ID laws and they knew they farked that up

side note: (it's still a law though, as it is most other states... which I never see anyone discuss. When 2014 and 2016 roll around, there is no battle over voter ID laws, they are on the books, just not used for the very last election)

Corbett is smart and that makes him dangerous. He also plays his cards close to his chest. If PA changes how our electoral votes will happen, they'll do it late summer of 2014 or 2016 (depending on if they think there is a chance of losing majority in 2014)... and you'll hear about it shortly after it's quickly written, passed and the day before he signs it.
 
2013-01-26 09:04:03 PM
Holy fark, there's a Republican that actually listens to their PR expert.
 
2013-01-26 09:05:06 PM
The biggest asshole governor Virginia has elected within my 44 year memory. The VA attorney general is a real piece of shiat too.
 
2013-01-26 09:16:30 PM
Has he actually said he will veto it? If not, I expect this is just a bunch of theatrical pearl-clutching.
 
2013-01-26 09:18:33 PM
www.zeitgeistyreport.com
A vote for me, is like voting for every month to be celebrated as confederate history month.
 
2013-01-26 10:34:39 PM
The GOP already showed it would abuse this set up. Look what happened to the NE district that voted for Obama in '08.
 
2013-01-26 10:43:12 PM

the opposite of charity is justice: The biggest asshole governor Virginia has elected within my 44 year memory. The VA attorney general is a real piece of shiat too.


That's saying something, considering 1994-1998.
 
2013-01-26 11:09:14 PM
this was such a toxic bit of trash that not even a GOP Governor could support it.
 
2013-01-27 02:27:40 AM

foo monkey: What is the logic driving this movement? If this had been in place in 2012, Romney would have won the election, but lost the popular vote. How is that better or more fair?


They tried passing proportional awarding of EVs here in PA before the 2012 election (our gov wants to make it happen), but the Republicans in the state legislature shot it down. Even they recognized it's a bad idea,
 
2013-01-27 03:22:49 AM
The guy deemed most responsible for the first state to actually do it would essentially be sacrificing his political career and face potentially going down in history as The Man Who Stole The Presidency. There is no amount of super-PAC money in the world that would make a person risk that being their legacy, especially not some random governor or state legislator.

And you're seeing some Republicans realize it. They may want it, but they don't want to be the guy thrown under the bus for it. Nobody wants to be the guy that gets thrown under the bus for the sake of the party. The ones still on board likely don't think they'll be the guy that goes under.
 
2013-01-27 08:32:59 AM
I wouldn't be all that against this plan if the district's weren't horridly gerrymandered. If every state adopted the method of drawing their districts the way Iowa does it (math algorithm against the population distribution), I'd be okay with this plan. I realize that Nebraska and Maine already give their EVs out by congressional district, but it's pretty hard to gerrymander states that have nobody living there.
 
2013-01-27 08:34:34 AM

optikeye: He's smart enough to pretend to be against it----but will sign it anyways.
Just like he did with the forced ultrasound law.
"Oh I can't believe they'd do that...." Then signs it anyway.


Yes, with much gnashing of teeth and wailing, he will loudly condemn the bill and then sign it when no one is looking. Luckily, there's a few Republican senators who don't seem all that enchanted with the concept.
 
2013-01-27 08:58:40 AM
If some states adopt this and people don't like it, it will backfire on state legislators in those states.
I don't think its anything to worry about, in any system except direct popular vote, its possible to win the college and lose the popular vote. However, I think a change like this should be put up for a referendum.
 
2013-01-27 08:59:31 AM
Ha, I hope he runs for president in 2016. I'm sure the phrase "trans-vaginal ultrasound" will play about as well nationwide as it did in Virginia.
 
2013-01-27 09:04:26 AM

sadbad: Ha, I hope he runs for president in 2016. I'm sure the phrase "trans-vaginal ultrasound" will play about as well nationwide as it did in Virginia.


Yeah, that whole 'using government to rape women with plastic cocks' thing doesn't look good.
 
2013-01-27 10:48:45 AM

sadbad: Ha, I hope he runs for president in 2016. I'm sure the phrase "trans-vaginal ultrasound" will play about as well nationwide as it did in Virginia.


I don't understand why the governor of Virginia is automatically considered a Presidential candidate. Them and the mayor of New York. We never get through one single Presidential cycle without chucking whatever warm bodies hold those two positions into the mix, no matter how horribly unsuited they are for the job.
 
2013-01-27 01:02:03 PM

Alphax: sadbad: Ha, I hope he runs for president in 2016. I'm sure the phrase "trans-vaginal ultrasound" will play about as well nationwide as it did in Virginia.

Yeah, that whole 'using government to rape women with plastic cocks' thing doesn't look good.


"Women with Plastic Cocks" was a best-seller on DVD.
 
2013-01-27 04:29:55 PM

Dog Welder: I wouldn't be all that against this plan if the district's weren't horridly gerrymandered. If every state adopted the method of drawing their districts the way Iowa does it (math algorithm against the population distribution), I'd be okay with this plan. I realize that Nebraska and Maine already give their EVs out by congressional district, but it's pretty hard to gerrymander states that have nobody living there.


Ain't that hard. One of the more intriguing redistricting plans submitted by the Republican legislature to the governor lumped all the wealthy communities south of us together with the vast farmlands to the north in the hopes of getting rural churchgoers and big money all in the same place. The district looked like a shot-up stop-sign with all the chunks taken out where the lines were drawn around cities and liberal small towns. The trick is making this apply to a Presidential election.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report