• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Will Nebraska be splitting its electoral votes this time?

shuamort

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,002
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Typically Republican Nebraska can split up its electoral votes

In most presidential election years, Democrats need hardly work at all here. Nebraska hasn't voted Democratic since Lyndon Johnson's landslide in 1964.

But a law that allows the state's five Electoral College votes to be split up has encouraged Democrats to try for one of them. Republicans predict the election will hinge on battleground states like Virginia, but Obama's campaign isn't taking any chances.

Nebraska and Maine are the only two states that don't have winner-take-all rules for electoral votes. In those states, the candidate who wins a majority statewide gets two votes. The other votes are awarded to the winner in each congressional district.

Neither state has ever split votes, but Democrats say Nebraska's 2nd District, which includes most of Omaha and part of Sarpy County, may be within reach.


Randall Atkins, a political scientist at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, says Obama has generated more enthusiasm among Democrats than Al Gore and John Kerry combined. "The fact you put feet on the ground in Omaha is a big deal," he says.

McCain's campaign website directs Nebraska supporters to an office in suburban Denver.
Click to expand...

This could be interesting to see a possible purple state.
 
Won't happen anymore than McCain will get an electoral vote from Maine, which also splits its electoral votes.
 
danarhea said:
Won't happen anymore than McCain will get an electoral vote from Maine, which also splits its electoral votes.
Click to expand...

What are the criteria for the split? If it's proportional Nebraska should go 3-2 for McCain. Electoral-vote has Nebraska at 56%-37%, which should translate into at least one vote
 
Kernel Sanders said:
What are the criteria for the split? If it's proportional Nebraska should go 3-2 for McCain. Electoral-vote has Nebraska at 56%-37%, which should translate into at least one vote
Click to expand...

Doesn't work that way. Nebraska has 3 Congressional districts, which have one electoral vote. Nebraska's other 2 electoral votes are statewide. Obama would have to win one of Nebraska's Congressional districts to get an electoral vote. Won't happen.
 
danarhea said:
Doesn't work that way. Nebraska has 3 Congressional districts, which have one electoral vote. Nebraska's other 2 electoral votes are statewide. Obama would have to win one of Nebraska's Congressional districts to get an electoral vote. Won't happen.
Click to expand...

Obviously, the McCain camp is a bit more worried. They've sent Palin to stump in NE-2
 
danarhea said:
Doesn't work that way. Nebraska has 3 Congressional districts, which have one electoral vote. Nebraska's other 2 electoral votes are statewide. Obama would have to win one of Nebraska's Congressional districts to get an electoral vote. Won't happen.
Click to expand...

There is a possibility that he could win the Omaha district. He's competitive in North Dakota and Indiana, so why not?

Unfortunately InTrade does not track Nebraska's district-wide EVs (just the at-large EVs). But I would imagine that McCain is only a slight favorite to win NE-2.
 
To make every vote in every state politically relevant and equal in presidential elections, support the National Popular Vote bill.

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes (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 been approved by 21 legislative chambers (one house in CO, AR, ME, NC, and WA, and two houses in MD, IL, HI, CA, MA, NJ, RI, and VT). It has been enacted into law in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These states have 50 (19%) of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring this legislation into effect.

see National Popular Vote -- Electoral college reform by direct election of the President
 
mvymvy said:
To make every vote in every state politically relevant and equal in presidential elections, support the National Popular Vote bill.

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes (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 been approved by 21 legislative chambers (one house in CO, AR, ME, NC, and WA, and two houses in MD, IL, HI, CA, MA, NJ, RI, and VT). It has been enacted into law in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These states have 50 (19%) of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring this legislation into effect.

see National Popular Vote -- Electoral college reform by direct election of the President
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that law, if passed, won't stand up in court, since the Constitution specifies electors. The only legal way to change it is through a Constitutional amendment.
 
danarhea said:
Sorry, but that law, if passed, won't stand up in court, since the Constitution specifies electors. The only legal way to change it is through a Constitutional amendment.
Click to expand...

It doesn't specify how they chose who to vote for, however, that is left up to the states. If states with a majority of the electoral votes choose to award their votes to the candidate who wins the electoral vote, that's their business. It would be a legal states-based way to effectively change the EC while leaving the statues intact. I like the idea
 
danarhea said:
Sorry, but that law, if passed, won't stand up in court, since the Constitution specifies electors. The only legal way to change it is through a Constitutional amendment.
Click to expand...

This doesn't eliminate electors. It just changes the method in which individual states choose their electors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom