According to this interesting analysis by Fairvote, President Obama has visited all nine swing states since he has been president, but has visited only seven other states. In this context, “swing state” means a state carried by President Bush in 2004, but by Obama in 2008.
I’ve snipped a few paragraphs from the Fairvote piece. I invite defenders of the present Electoral College system to read them and in light of the conclusions the survey draws, reiterate their support for a system which theoretically represents the interests of small states in particular, and “states rights” in general.
—————-
Insiders make no bones about the narrowness of the electoral map. In reviewing the 2008 campaign, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe made clear to Conde Nast Portfolio after the election, “We viewed the campaign as essentially 16 different campaigns,” and also confessed to the Post in January, “We view this through the prism of the battleground states, that’s all we focused on.” Post-election, this outlook may seep into the administration’s day-to-day decisions. Press secretary Robert Gibbs admitted to the Post, “It’s hard [to look] at a map and not see red, purple and blue states.”
Fleischer’s flip comments about unhappy spectator states picking up their bags to move to swing states show that it’s not just Team Obama; The problem is endemic to the system. Former Bush strategist Matthew Dowd told reporters during the Republican convention in 2004 that the campaign had not once polled outside of 18 potential battleground states in the previous two years. Think about that. The richest campaign in history to that point never wasted a dime finding out what a single person thought in states representing well over half the country. Why care about their ideas and interests when that knowledge would never affect your campaign strategy?
REAL Democracy NOW.
Abolish the time bomb Electoral College.
Uniform definition of Elector.
NONPARTISAN nominations and elections of all elected executive officers and all judges using Approval Voting — vote for 1 or more *approved* candidates. Highest win.
P.R. for all legislative body elections.
NO party hack caucuses, primaries and conventions are needed.
Comrade Obama bragged that he had campaigned in 57 states in 2008!
3 –
You can stop looking for the other 7 states now.
All –
Check out this map –
http://www.mapthecandidates.com/
to see how the present electoral college advances the interests and “rights” of states with 4 or fewer EC votes by encouraging candidates to visit and listen to their respective voter’s views…oh…unless of course the state happens to be HI, AK, ID, MT, WY, UT, ND, SD, NB, KS, OK, LA, AK, AL, SC, ME, RI…
2: What’s next? Move to a unicameral legislator? Direct election of Supreme Court Justices? National initiatives?
#4: Did you locate the other seven states?
They must have been listed on Obama’s teleprompter.
KS, OK, LA, AL, and SC all have MORE than four electoral votes.
6 –
You’re right – they’re all huge. Enormous.
…And Texas and California and NY are three of the four biggest prizes in the EC sweepstakes.
How many visits did THEY get from the nominees?
You can stop counting when you get to seven, which evidently is a number which causes you great troubles. Not exactly a “big picture” guy, are you?