ADVERTISEMENT

Nebraska's Electoral College

Nebraska Republicans have tried changing the policy every year since Obama won an electoral vote in 2008. And every time they try, one state senator - Ernie Chambers - filibusters it.

But you probably think that one guy thwarting the will of the majority is a shining example of democracy in action.
Did you read the OP?
 
I have a question for the Rs here... wouldn't you want your party to actually have to show they have the best ideas and are the party that is best to lead all Americans? Instead we get them not having to adapt and shove their shit ideas down our throats. If we got rid of the electoral college they would actually have to adapt to what's best for us...I fail to see how that's a bad thing. So I'd like to hear from Rs and get an answer besides it's the only way we can win.
If that happens they wouldn't be able to say "No!" to everything. That would drive them crazy. In a similar vein, I would like to see the Democrats get total control of everything AND ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT what they want to do...and prove me right or prove me wrong. If their policies start sending the country downhill, we can vote them out. The thing is, with filibusters and the 60 vote rule in the Senate, we never actually get to see. I mean, Biden has done a phenomenal job with the economy and infrastructure, now matter what Fox News and MAGA try to tell us. Just once I want to see them be able to actually do what they want to do. I KNOW the Republicans in Washington are afraid because they know the democrats' policies are good for the majority. I'm convinced of that otherwise they wouldn't be lying about it nonstop.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: abby97
Oh no! Everyone’s vote counts! The horror!
Lol. Riiight. Because that’s your primary concern here. That’s why if New Mexico were to announce tomorrow they’re going to start apportioning electoral votes by congressional district, you would be on here praising it as a win for democracy. Right?

Right?
 
Lol. Riiight. Because that’s your primary concern here. That’s why if New Mexico were to announce tomorrow they’re going to start apportioning electoral votes by congressional district, you would be on here praising it as a win for democracy. Right?

Right?
I thought elections were up to the individual states?
 
Have I posted something that contradicts that notion?
TJ, you’re smarter than this.

Nebraska republicans are considering this at this point in time because they’re seeing how close the election could be, with Omaha potentially giving the election the Harris. When this has been floated earlier, Maine instantly said they would drop their election model to make Nebraska changing theirs a wash. But now it would be much harder for Maine to call their legislature back to match Nebraska in time for November.

If they try this, it’s very obviously election shenanigans.
 
TJ, you’re smarter than this.

Nebraska republicans are considering this at this point in time because they’re seeing how close the election could be, with Omaha potentially giving the election the Harris. When this has been floated earlier, Maine instantly said they would drop their election model to make Nebraska changing theirs a wash. But now it would be much harder for Maine to call their legislature back to match Nebraska in time for November.

If they try this, it’s very obviously election shenanigans.
It's fun to watch TJ do his thing though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gimmered
Even if they do this, i think the only thing it could do, taking into account actual plausible electoral pathways, is avoid kicking the election to the house, and a lot of things would have to happen for that pathway to occur. and if it did get kicked to the house, she probably loses anyway.

Side note - I kinda like the assignment of electors by district victor as a structural matter
 
TJ, you’re smarter than this.

Nebraska republicans are considering this at this point in time because they’re seeing how close the election could be, with Omaha potentially giving the election the Harris. When this has been floated earlier, Maine instantly said they would drop their election model to make Nebraska changing theirs a wash. But now it would be much harder for Maine to call their legislature back to match Nebraska in time for November.

If they try this, it’s very obviously election shenanigans.
The upcoming election obviously gives the effort a renewed sense of urgency. But, again, this is not some new tactic the Republicans came up with. They have tried at least 16 times in the past 16 years to make this happen. And the minority Democrats filibuster it year after year after year.
 
Nebraska Republicans have tried changing the policy every year since Obama won an electoral vote in 2008. And every time they try, one state senator - Ernie Chambers - filibusters it.

But you probably think that one guy thwarting the will of the majority is a shining example of democracy in action.
If you had any idea of what has been going on in Lincoln for last couple of years you'd realize how stupid this statement is.
 
The upcoming election obviously gives the effort a renewed sense of urgency.
But doing it with a special session 45 days before the election is definitely rubbing people the wrong way and getting people in Omaha upset.

This time it's being upheld by a republican that is going to run for mayor. He knows he needs some D votes in Omaha, which is why he's likely staying no. Unless someone matches his price, of course.
 
If you had any idea of what has been going on in Lincoln for last couple of years you'd realize how stupid this statement is.
This last minute attempt to change how their electoral votes will be cast along with trying every possible way to block the abortion and school initiatives from the ballot shows just how much Nebraska wants "the people" to have the power in their state.
 
Do you not think some districts in California would vote Red? Some in Texas Blue? This puts the whole nation in play and maybe force us into some decent candidates.
Agreed. From a public governance perspective, it's a great way to provide incentives for candidates to focus on districts everywhere, retains some of our core federalist structure, and is orders of magnitude better than direct popular voting.
 
The upcoming election obviously gives the effort a renewed sense of urgency. But, again, this is not some new tactic the Republicans came up with. They have tried at least 16 times in the past 16 years to make this happen. And the minority Democrats filibuster it year after year after year.
How many times in the past have they tried to do it less than 2 months before the election?

It’s also far from clear they have sufficient support to pass this on their own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlickShagwell
How many times in the past have they tried to do it less than 2 months before the election?
No idea. I just know they’ve tried it year after year. And year after year the minority Democrats have blocked it by filibuster.

“Tyranny of the minority,” as you guys would call it if the tables were turned.

This isn’t just some knee-jerk tactic to try to swing the election. And this isn’t like when John Kerry ran for President and the Massachusetts legislature realized “Oh, shit! If he wins then Governor Romney might appoint a Republican to replace him in the Senate,” so they changed the law to take away the governor’s right to temporarily fill Senate vacancies. This is a policy that would have already been changed years ago if not for the filibuster.

It’s also far from clear they have sufficient support to pass this on their own.
They probably don’t have enough.
 
Enlighten me.
The Republicans have done everything in their power to block every issue from reaching the ballots that the people have had successful ballot petitions for. The last thing they want is democracy. After a successful ballot initiative on School scholarship for religious schools, they repealed the law and replaced it with a different one forcing a second ballot initiative.
It's been a joke and there will be hell to pay with the voters in Omaha. Even Lincoln had a blue wave in their last local election after the shit show over the abortion and trans bill.
 
Last edited:
TJ, you’re smarter than this.

Nebraska republicans are considering this at this point in time because they’re seeing how close the election could be, with Omaha potentially giving the election the Harris. When this has been floated earlier, Maine instantly said they would drop their election model to make Nebraska changing theirs a wash. But now it would be much harder for Maine to call their legislature back to match Nebraska in time for November.

If they try this, it’s very obviously election shenanigans.
Maine cannot change their law in time for this election, they have no provision for emergency legislation, Nebraska does. It would be funny if Nebraska's got tied up in the courts and it cost Trump the election because they couldn't allot any.
 
No idea. I just know they’ve tried it year after year. And year after year the minority Democrats have blocked it by filibuster.

“Tyranny of the minority,” as you guys would call it if the tables were turned.

This isn’t just some knee-jerk tactic to try to swing the election. And this isn’t like when John Kerry ran for President and the Massachusetts legislature realized “Oh, shit! If he wins then Governor Romney might appoint a Republican to replace him in the Senate,” so they changed the law to take away the governor’s right to temporarily fill Senate vacancies. This is a policy that would have already been changed years ago if not for the filibuster.

They probably don’t have enough.
If you think it’s just coincidence they’re bringing this up again this late in the election, then you’re only fooling yourself.
 
If you think it’s just coincidence they’re bringing this up again this late in the election, then you’re only fooling yourself.
Once again I’m forced to ponder whether you guys even bother to read posts before responding to them.
 
She’s looking good in North Carolina, is she not? That would make this a non issue.
Yeah, in the end the tie only happens if Trump wins NC, NV, AZ, and Harris holds VA, WI, MI, and PA. I’ve played enough parlays to know chances are one of those states goes the other direction.
 
Then stop insinuating that it’s pure coincidence they’re trying to do this now.
Holy shit. I refer you once again to post #51. I know you saw that post because you took the time to reply to it.

The upcoming election obviously gives the effort a renewed sense of urgency. But, again, this is not some new tactic the Republicans came up with. They have tried at least 16 times in the past 16 years to make this happen. And the minority Democrats filibuster it year after year after year.
 
Holy shit. I refer you once again to post #51. I know you saw that post because you took the time to reply to it.

The upcoming election obviously gives the effort a renewed sense of urgency. But, again, this is not some new tactic the Republicans came up with. They have tried at least 16 times in the past 16 years to make this happen. And the minority Democrats filibuster it year after year after year.
Yes. I read that. You still haven’t even attempted to explain why they’d try, once again, when it’s so close to the election.
 
If that happens they wouldn't be able to say "No!" to everything. That would drive them crazy. In a similar vein, I would like to see the Democrats get total control of everything AND ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT what they want to do...and prove me right or prove me wrong. If their policies start sending the country downhill, we can vote them out. The thing is, with filibusters and the 60 vote rule in the Senate, we never actually get to see. I mean, Biden has done a phenomenal job with the economy and infrastructure, now matter what Fox News and MAGA try to tell us. Just once I want to see them be able to actually do what they want to do. I KNOW the Republicans in Washington are afraid because they know the democrats' policies are good for the majority. I'm convinced of that otherwise they wouldn't be lying about it nonstop.
Yah, record high inflation and terrorists marching into our country through a nonexistent border is good for the majority.:rolleyes:o_O:mad:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tom Paris
Yah, record high inflation and terrorists marching into our country through a nonexistent border is good for the majority.:rolleyes:o_O:mad:
rockos modern life nicksplat GIF
 
I have a question for the Rs here... wouldn't you want your party to actually have to show they have the best ideas and are the party that is best to lead all Americans? Instead we get them not having to adapt and shove their shit ideas down our throats. If we got rid of the electoral college they would actually have to adapt to what's best for us...I fail to see how that's a bad thing. So I'd like to hear from Rs and get an answer besides it's the only way we can win.

They are not interested in what is best for us or the country. They are only interested in a very specific vision of the country. And anyone who doesn't fit into that specific vision they want to be rid of.

This is their country and the rest of us are nationless squatters.

That is why the EC needs to stay because their votes in their minds are inherently more important. And even when they lose the EC that specifically favors their votes they are willing to attempt a coup to put their person in power anyways.

The general moral view that the person with the most votes should win they don't believe in that anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nelly02
Do you not think some districts in California would vote Red? Some in Texas Blue? This puts the whole nation in play and maybe force us into some decent candidates.
If Congressional districts were drawn fairly with absolutely no political bias, then I would be all for that system. But, they’re not and never will be. The R’s are much better at shameless gerrymandering than the D’s, so that system would give them even more of an advantage than the current Electoral College does. A Dem presidential candidate would probably need to win by at least 8 points to overcome that advantage; it’s bad enough they have to win by at least 3-4 points as it is…
 
My point is valid with or without Graham’s involvement. Filibuster is the only reason this policy wasn’t already changed years ago.

Dems on this board are constantly raging against filibusters as being undemocratic, except in cases like this where it helps your team.
Not really, Graham's involvement shows it's a desperate attempt to protect Orange Jesus. As a Republican do you remember the exact point in time Graham stopped being a serious person, and became an errand boy?
 
Not really, Graham's involvement shows it's a desperate attempt to protect Orange Jesus.
Donald Trump was still a Democrat when Nebraska Republicans started trying to change the policy. Yes, the election gives them a heightened sense of urgency. I have already acknowledged that fact. But that doesn’t change the fact that this is at least the 16th time they’ve tried to do it and the 16th time Democrats have used the filibuster to stop them.

I guess if one good thing comes out of this thread it’s that I never again have to take serious any of you guys complaining about filibusters.
As a Republican do you remember the exact point in time Graham stopped being a serious person, and became an errand boy?
So long ago, I don’t remember when
That’s when they say I lost my only friend
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT