<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for ELECTAPRES.COM</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.electapres.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.electapres.com</link>
	<description>The long and winding road to the White House</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:46:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on No Joke, No Hyperbole: 2012 May Be America&#8217;s Final Election by oldgulph</title>
		<link>http://www.electapres.com/2011/10/no-joke-no-hyperbole-2012-may-be-americas-final-election/comment-page-1/#comment-3925</link>
		<dc:creator>oldgulph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:46:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electapres.com/?p=3051#comment-3925</guid>
		<description>The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections.  There would no longer be &#039;battleground&#039; states where voters and policies are more important than those of other states.

When the bill is enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes-- enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538), all the electoral votes from the enacting states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC. 
		
The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.

In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state&#039;s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).  Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in closely divided Battleground states: CO - 68%, FL - 78%, IA 75%, MI - 73%, MO - 70%, NH - 69%, NV - 72%, NM-- 76%, NC - 74%, OH - 70%, PA - 78%, VA - 74%, and WI - 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK - 70%, DC - 76%, DE - 75%, ID - 77%, ME - 77%, MT - 72%, NE 74%, NH - 69%, NV - 72%, NM - 76%, OK - 81%, RI - 74%, SD - 71%, UT - 70%, VT - 75%, WV - 81%, and WY - 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR - 80%,, KY- 80%, MS - 77%, MO - 70%, NC - 74%, OK - 81%, SC - 71%, TN - 83%, VA - 74%, and WV - 81%; and in other states polled: CA - 70%, CT - 74%, MA - 73%, MN - 75%, NY - 79%, OR - 76%, and WA - 77%.  Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win. 

The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA ,RI, VT, and WA. The bill has been enacted by DC, HI, IL, CA, NJ, MD, MA, VT, and WA. These 9 jurisdictions possess 132 electoral votes-- 49% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.

http://www.NationalPopularVote.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).</p>
<p>Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections.  There would no longer be &#8216;battleground&#8217; states where voters and policies are more important than those of other states.</p>
<p>When the bill is enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes&#8211; enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538), all the electoral votes from the enacting states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC. </p>
<p>The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.</p>
<p>In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state&#8217;s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).  Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in closely divided Battleground states: CO &#8211; 68%, FL &#8211; 78%, IA 75%, MI &#8211; 73%, MO &#8211; 70%, NH &#8211; 69%, NV &#8211; 72%, NM&#8211; 76%, NC &#8211; 74%, OH &#8211; 70%, PA &#8211; 78%, VA &#8211; 74%, and WI &#8211; 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK &#8211; 70%, DC &#8211; 76%, DE &#8211; 75%, ID &#8211; 77%, ME &#8211; 77%, MT &#8211; 72%, NE 74%, NH &#8211; 69%, NV &#8211; 72%, NM &#8211; 76%, OK &#8211; 81%, RI &#8211; 74%, SD &#8211; 71%, UT &#8211; 70%, VT &#8211; 75%, WV &#8211; 81%, and WY &#8211; 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR &#8211; 80%,, KY- 80%, MS &#8211; 77%, MO &#8211; 70%, NC &#8211; 74%, OK &#8211; 81%, SC &#8211; 71%, TN &#8211; 83%, VA &#8211; 74%, and WV &#8211; 81%; and in other states polled: CA &#8211; 70%, CT &#8211; 74%, MA &#8211; 73%, MN &#8211; 75%, NY &#8211; 79%, OR &#8211; 76%, and WA &#8211; 77%.  Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win. </p>
<p>The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA ,RI, VT, and WA. The bill has been enacted by DC, HI, IL, CA, NJ, MD, MA, VT, and WA. These 9 jurisdictions possess 132 electoral votes&#8211; 49% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.NationalPopularVote.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.NationalPopularVote.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Old Electoral College Switcheroo: The Devastating Consequences of Pennsylvania&#8217;s Proposal to Game the Electoral College by oldgulph</title>
		<link>http://www.electapres.com/2011/10/the-old-electoral-college-switcheroo-the-devastating-consequences-of-pennsylvanias-proposal-to-game-the-electoral-college/comment-page-1/#comment-3924</link>
		<dc:creator>oldgulph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:37:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electapres.com/?p=3049#comment-3924</guid>
		<description>Given the choice, most Pennsylvania and U.S. voters want a national popular vote for President.

A survey of 800 Pennsylvania voters conducted on December 16-17, 2008 showed 78% overall support for a national popular vote for President.
Support was 87% among Democrats, 68% among Republicans, and 76% among independents.
By age, support was 77% among 18-29 year olds, 73% among 30-45 year olds, 81% among 46-65 year olds, and 78% for those older than 65.
By gender, support was 85% among women and 71% among men.

Under National Popular Vote, every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the national count. The candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC would get the 270+ Electoral College votes from the enacting states. That majority of Electoral College votes guarantees the candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC wins the presidency.

National Popular Vote would give a voice to the minority party voters in each state and district (in ME and NE). Now their votes are counted only for the candidate they did not vote for. Now they don’t matter to their candidate.

Every vote, everywhere would be counted equally for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation. The political reality would be that when every vote is equal, the campaign must be run in every part of the country.

In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA 75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%,, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and in other states polled: CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%. Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.

The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, RI, VT, and WA. The bill has been enacted by DC (3), HI (4), IL (19), NJ (14), MD (11), MA (10), CA (55), VT (3), and WA (13). These 9 jurisdictions possess 132 electoral votes -- 49% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.

In Pennsylvania, the National Popular Vote bill has been introduced in both the House (HB 1270) and Senate (SB 1116)

NationalPopularVote</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Given the choice, most Pennsylvania and U.S. voters want a national popular vote for President.</p>
<p>A survey of 800 Pennsylvania voters conducted on December 16-17, 2008 showed 78% overall support for a national popular vote for President.<br />
Support was 87% among Democrats, 68% among Republicans, and 76% among independents.<br />
By age, support was 77% among 18-29 year olds, 73% among 30-45 year olds, 81% among 46-65 year olds, and 78% for those older than 65.<br />
By gender, support was 85% among women and 71% among men.</p>
<p>Under National Popular Vote, every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the national count. The candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC would get the 270+ Electoral College votes from the enacting states. That majority of Electoral College votes guarantees the candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC wins the presidency.</p>
<p>National Popular Vote would give a voice to the minority party voters in each state and district (in ME and NE). Now their votes are counted only for the candidate they did not vote for. Now they don’t matter to their candidate.</p>
<p>Every vote, everywhere would be counted equally for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation. The political reality would be that when every vote is equal, the campaign must be run in every part of the country.</p>
<p>In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA 75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%,, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and in other states polled: CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%. Americans believe that the candidate who receives the most votes should win.</p>
<p>The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, RI, VT, and WA. The bill has been enacted by DC (3), HI (4), IL (19), NJ (14), MD (11), MA (10), CA (55), VT (3), and WA (13). These 9 jurisdictions possess 132 electoral votes &#8212; 49% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.</p>
<p>In Pennsylvania, the National Popular Vote bill has been introduced in both the House (HB 1270) and Senate (SB 1116)</p>
<p>NationalPopularVote</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on GOP candidates slow to reach Hispanic voters by George Washington</title>
		<link>http://www.electapres.com/2011/06/gop-candidates-slow-to-reach-hispanic-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-3329</link>
		<dc:creator>George Washington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jun 2011 21:35:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electapres.com/?p=2697#comment-3329</guid>
		<description>Constitutionally, legislatively, and morally, Ron Paul has no equal. His 22 year voting record speaks for itself.
Mr. Paul has not survived in politics for 22 years and maintain the ethics and morality he has by being anything other than stellar. 
If You refute the above comment, then I please invite You to listen to him speak about key issues. It is amazing how well he comes across because he doesn’t have to remember lies like other politicians.  He understands what is happening in the world and knows how to apply the basic principles of liberty to achieve the real change that America so desperately deserves. 
American to American we are all on the same team. So I present Mr. Ron Paul as my Candidate for 2011 and invite anybody to meaningfully and respectfully debate why he is not the best for American and its people in 2012.
Ron Paul = A real change, not for special interest, but for America’s Interests!
Thank You for Your time
Ron Paul 2012</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Constitutionally, legislatively, and morally, Ron Paul has no equal. His 22 year voting record speaks for itself.<br />
Mr. Paul has not survived in politics for 22 years and maintain the ethics and morality he has by being anything other than stellar.<br />
If You refute the above comment, then I please invite You to listen to him speak about key issues. It is amazing how well he comes across because he doesn’t have to remember lies like other politicians.  He understands what is happening in the world and knows how to apply the basic principles of liberty to achieve the real change that America so desperately deserves.<br />
American to American we are all on the same team. So I present Mr. Ron Paul as my Candidate for 2011 and invite anybody to meaningfully and respectfully debate why he is not the best for American and its people in 2012.<br />
Ron Paul = A real change, not for special interest, but for America’s Interests!<br />
Thank You for Your time<br />
Ron Paul 2012</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Don’t Underestimate Republicans in 2012 by George Washington</title>
		<link>http://www.electapres.com/2011/05/don%e2%80%99t-underestimate-republicans-in-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-3197</link>
		<dc:creator>George Washington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 14:24:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electapres.com/?p=2364#comment-3197</guid>
		<description>Please, if I may;
Constitutionally, legislatively, and morally, Ron Paul has no equal. His 22 year voting record speaks for itself.
Mr. Paul has not survived in politics for 22 years and maintain the ethics and morality he has by being anything other than stellar. 
If You refute the above comment, then I please invite You to listen to him speak about key issues. It is amazing how well he comes across because he doesn’t have to remember lies like other politicians.  He understands what is happening in the world and knows how to apply the basic principles of liberty to achieve the real change that America so desperately deserves. 
American to American we are all on the same team. So I present Mr. Ron Paul as my Candidate for 2011 and invite anybody to meaningfully and respectfully debate why he is not the best for American and its people in 2012.
Ron Paul = A real change, not for special interest, but for America’s Interests!
Thank You for Your time
Ron Paul 2012</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please, if I may;<br />
Constitutionally, legislatively, and morally, Ron Paul has no equal. His 22 year voting record speaks for itself.<br />
Mr. Paul has not survived in politics for 22 years and maintain the ethics and morality he has by being anything other than stellar.<br />
If You refute the above comment, then I please invite You to listen to him speak about key issues. It is amazing how well he comes across because he doesn’t have to remember lies like other politicians.  He understands what is happening in the world and knows how to apply the basic principles of liberty to achieve the real change that America so desperately deserves.<br />
American to American we are all on the same team. So I present Mr. Ron Paul as my Candidate for 2011 and invite anybody to meaningfully and respectfully debate why he is not the best for American and its people in 2012.<br />
Ron Paul = A real change, not for special interest, but for America’s Interests!<br />
Thank You for Your time<br />
Ron Paul 2012</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Obama: Republicans push vision of &#8220;shrunken America&#8221; by George Washington</title>
		<link>http://www.electapres.com/2011/05/obama-republicans-push-vision-of-shrunken-america/comment-page-1/#comment-3179</link>
		<dc:creator>George Washington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 17:53:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electapres.com/?p=2281#comment-3179</guid>
		<description>Mr. Ron Paul for 2012 Republican Nom and President.
-Strengthen our USD
-No Inflation
-Balance the Budget
-No Mandated Healthcare
-Creates MANY JOBS
-New Crop Industries
-Free Market
-Very Pro Life
-No Bailout
-No Patriot Act
-Stays out of foreign DOMESTIC AFFAIRS, but contract/trade with all
-No Unjustified War with no objectives
-Brings our Troops Home after over 10 YEARS OF FIGHTING!!!!
The USA could have fought WWII twice  in 10 years!
Please, let’s bring America&#039;s Troops home. They deserve it.  We could have fought 2 WWII in this time.
Leave the Middle East, and all other Nations that are agreed to be sovereign, ALONE with regard to DOMESTIC AFFAIRS.

American Lives are NOT toys.

Bring our Troops Home   
I am a Ron Paul Republican
Mr. Ron Paul 2012 for Republican Nom and President</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. Ron Paul for 2012 Republican Nom and President.<br />
-Strengthen our USD<br />
-No Inflation<br />
-Balance the Budget<br />
-No Mandated Healthcare<br />
-Creates MANY JOBS<br />
-New Crop Industries<br />
-Free Market<br />
-Very Pro Life<br />
-No Bailout<br />
-No Patriot Act<br />
-Stays out of foreign DOMESTIC AFFAIRS, but contract/trade with all<br />
-No Unjustified War with no objectives<br />
-Brings our Troops Home after over 10 YEARS OF FIGHTING!!!!<br />
The USA could have fought WWII twice  in 10 years!<br />
Please, let’s bring America&#8217;s Troops home. They deserve it.  We could have fought 2 WWII in this time.<br />
Leave the Middle East, and all other Nations that are agreed to be sovereign, ALONE with regard to DOMESTIC AFFAIRS.</p>
<p>American Lives are NOT toys.</p>
<p>Bring our Troops Home<br />
I am a Ron Paul Republican<br />
Mr. Ron Paul 2012 for Republican Nom and President</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Electoral College Calculator by oldgulph</title>
		<link>http://www.electapres.com/electoral-college-calculator/comment-page-1/#comment-3138</link>
		<dc:creator>oldgulph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2011 16:44:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electapres.com/?page_id=118#comment-3138</guid>
		<description>By 2012, The National Popular Vote bill could guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). 

Every vote, everywhere would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Elections wouldn&#039;t be about winning states. Every vote, everywhere would be counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states. 

In the 2012 election, pundits and campaign operatives already agree that, at most, only 14 states and their voters will matter under the current winner-take-all laws (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in each state) used by 48 of the 50 states. Candidates will not care about at least 72% of the voters- voters-in 19 of the 22 lowest population and medium-small states, and big states like CA, GA, NY, and TX. 2012 campaigning would be even more obscenely exclusive than 2008 and 2004. Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. Policies important to the citizens of ‘flyover’ states are not as highly prioritized as policies important to ‘battleground’ states when it comes to governing.

Since World War II, a shift of a handful of votes in one or two states would have elected the second-place candidate in 4 of the 13 presidential elections.  Near misses are now frequently common.  There have been 6 consecutive non-landslide presidential elections. 537 popular votes won Florida and the White House for Bush in 2000 despite Gore&#039;s lead of 537,179 popular votes nationwide. A shift of 60,000 votes in Ohio in 2004 would have defeated President Bush despite his nationwide lead of over 3 Million votes.

The bill would take effect only when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes--enough electoral votes to elect a President (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 bill would thus guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. 

In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state&#039;s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).  Support is strong among Republican voters, Democratic voters, and independent voters, as well as every demographic group surveyed in virtually every state, partisan, and demographic group surveyed in recent polls in closely divided battleground states: CO - 68%, FL - 78%, IA 75%,, MI - 73%, MO - 70%, NH - 69%, NV - 72%, NM-- 76%, NC - 74%, OH - 70%, PA - 78%, VA - 74%, and WI - 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK - 70%, DC - 76%, DE - 75%, ID - 77%, ME - 77%, MT - 72%, NE 74%, NH - 69%, NV - 72%, NM - 76%, OK - 81%, RI - 74%, SD - 71%, UT - 70%, VT - 75%, WV - 81%, and WY - 69%; in Southern and border states: AR - 80%,, KY- 80%, MS - 77%, MO - 70%, NC - 74%, OK - 81%, SC - 71%, VA - 74%, and WV - 81%; and in other states polled: CA - 70%, CT - 74%, MA - 73%, MN - 75%, NY - 79%, OR - 76%, and WA - 77%.

The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, RI, VT, and WA. The bill has been enacted by DC, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA,VT, and WA. These 8 jurisdictions possess 77 electoral votes -- 29% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.

http://www.NationalPopularVote.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By 2012, The National Popular Vote bill could guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). </p>
<p>Every vote, everywhere would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Elections wouldn&#8217;t be about winning states. Every vote, everywhere would be counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states. </p>
<p>In the 2012 election, pundits and campaign operatives already agree that, at most, only 14 states and their voters will matter under the current winner-take-all laws (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in each state) used by 48 of the 50 states. Candidates will not care about at least 72% of the voters- voters-in 19 of the 22 lowest population and medium-small states, and big states like CA, GA, NY, and TX. 2012 campaigning would be even more obscenely exclusive than 2008 and 2004. Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. Policies important to the citizens of ‘flyover’ states are not as highly prioritized as policies important to ‘battleground’ states when it comes to governing.</p>
<p>Since World War II, a shift of a handful of votes in one or two states would have elected the second-place candidate in 4 of the 13 presidential elections.  Near misses are now frequently common.  There have been 6 consecutive non-landslide presidential elections. 537 popular votes won Florida and the White House for Bush in 2000 despite Gore&#8217;s lead of 537,179 popular votes nationwide. A shift of 60,000 votes in Ohio in 2004 would have defeated President Bush despite his nationwide lead of over 3 Million votes.</p>
<p>The bill would take effect only when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes&#8211;enough electoral votes to elect a President (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 bill would thus guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.</p>
<p>The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. </p>
<p>In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state&#8217;s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).  Support is strong among Republican voters, Democratic voters, and independent voters, as well as every demographic group surveyed in virtually every state, partisan, and demographic group surveyed in recent polls in closely divided battleground states: CO &#8211; 68%, FL &#8211; 78%, IA 75%,, MI &#8211; 73%, MO &#8211; 70%, NH &#8211; 69%, NV &#8211; 72%, NM&#8211; 76%, NC &#8211; 74%, OH &#8211; 70%, PA &#8211; 78%, VA &#8211; 74%, and WI &#8211; 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK &#8211; 70%, DC &#8211; 76%, DE &#8211; 75%, ID &#8211; 77%, ME &#8211; 77%, MT &#8211; 72%, NE 74%, NH &#8211; 69%, NV &#8211; 72%, NM &#8211; 76%, OK &#8211; 81%, RI &#8211; 74%, SD &#8211; 71%, UT &#8211; 70%, VT &#8211; 75%, WV &#8211; 81%, and WY &#8211; 69%; in Southern and border states: AR &#8211; 80%,, KY- 80%, MS &#8211; 77%, MO &#8211; 70%, NC &#8211; 74%, OK &#8211; 81%, SC &#8211; 71%, VA &#8211; 74%, and WV &#8211; 81%; and in other states polled: CA &#8211; 70%, CT &#8211; 74%, MA &#8211; 73%, MN &#8211; 75%, NY &#8211; 79%, OR &#8211; 76%, and WA &#8211; 77%.</p>
<p>The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, RI, VT, and WA. The bill has been enacted by DC, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA,VT, and WA. These 8 jurisdictions possess 77 electoral votes &#8212; 29% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.NationalPopularVote.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.NationalPopularVote.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

