Tim Kowal is a husband, father, and attorney in Orange County, California, Vice President of the Orange County Federalist Society, commissioner on the OC Human Relations Commission, and Treasurer of Huntington Beach Tomorrow. The views expressed on this blog are his own. You can follow this blog via RSS, Facebook, or Twitter. Email is welcome at timkowal at gmail.com.
Rather weak, why can’t any argument over NPV ever address the significant shortcomings of our present system? You know, the extreme skewing of advertising in favor of battleground states, the ignoring of issues for reliably red/blue states, voter apathy/disenfranchisement, out-of-state interference (I spent all election day calling Ohio voters in 2008, since my vote didn’t matter in my state). There two definitely sides to this issue, and only addressing one side does a disservice to the debate.
“A diffused election that requires the president to gain support from different regions of the country.”
Prof. Eastman is apparently unfamiliar with the election of 1860, in which 40% of the popular vote, concentrated almost entirely in the north, became 60% of the electoral vote.
Rather weak, why can’t any argument over NPV ever address the significant shortcomings of our present system? You know, the extreme skewing of advertising in favor of battleground states, the ignoring of issues for reliably red/blue states, voter apathy/disenfranchisement, out-of-state interference (I spent all election day calling Ohio voters in 2008, since my vote didn’t matter in my state). There two definitely sides to this issue, and only addressing one side does a disservice to the debate.
“A diffused election that requires the president to gain support from different regions of the country.”
Prof. Eastman is apparently unfamiliar with the election of 1860, in which 40% of the popular vote, concentrated almost entirely in the north, became 60% of the electoral vote.