Why dont we just have winner takes all delegates? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 27, 2024, 11:19:05 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  Why dont we just have winner takes all delegates? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why dont we just have winner takes all delegates?  (Read 664 times)
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,066
United States


« on: March 07, 2008, 01:14:54 PM »

The whole idea that you can infer which states a candidate is going to win in the GE based on where they win primaries is ridiculous.  McCain only won, what, 7 primaries in 2000?  Does that mean that he necessarily would have been a worse GE candidate than Bush?  No, of course not.  Because Bush got a disproportionately high share of votes from people who were going to vote for the Republican in the GE no matter what (while McCain got lots of indies), you can't make that argument.

So the question isn't whether Clinton or Obama are getting more votes from the "more important states".  It's **which voters they're getting in those states**.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.017 seconds with 13 queries.