What this really shows is why the California ballot initiative process needs to be scrapped.  Year after year, it's a disaster, and everyone knows it.  Pure democracy is great for small towns, not so great for states with 35 million people.

I am a loyal democrat but this strikes me as very hypocritical.When the same thing happened in N.Carolina it was celebrated.

I am honestly puzzled at the thinking behind this initiative. I mean, not the general thrust of it, I get that it's a right wing power grab. But why propose EVs be allocated by electoral district rather than a straight proportional allocation based on percentage of the state's popular vote? They are so obviously setting themselves up for the very criticism that Boxer just made. And it's not like an allocation by percentage would ever give the GOP candidate any (or much) less than 20 EVs. I'm not saying we should waste a lot of brain power dissecting these people's thinking, but isn't it odd?

By trying to do this in EVERY state in the South.

Because, if we get this in just half the states in the South, then we  will would cut them off at the knees.

I wish I could be enthusiastic, but I can't be.

First; Swartzenegger won the governorship because then-governor Gray Davis simply didn't campaign. Two years later, Phil Angelides did Davis one better; running the very worst State Gubenatorial  non-campaign I have ever seen. Anybody looks good when his opponent doesn't campaign.

Democratic voters still have a serious problem with our state Democratic party organization and its sleeping gaggle of elected officeholders -- just look at our Senator Diane Feinstein, who makes Joe Leiberman look like a Trotskyite.

Second; the State GOP knows what it's doing. Their argument is tailored to appeal to registered Independents:  Not to us. I am dismayed to see that you didn't realize that and point out that problem with Boxer's response.

This measure will pass -- unless people with a loud blog voice (like you) are able to goose sleeping California Democrats (like Feinstein and the gaggle of Democrats in Sacramento) into a more alert political state. We will lose unless THEY come up with an assertive, strong, winning public message (better than Boxer's); and then campaign for California independent votes; and campaign HARD.  

Good luck with that.

b73

I signed the petition.  Keep up the good work.  I am glad people are being pro-active with this ballot measure.  Honestly, can we get rid of these ballot measures once and for all? Every election, there is a right wing one that we all have to fight to undo.  Its a waste of time and energy.  

What I meant to say was that I signed the PETITION to "commit to not signing the Ballot Measure"....Looking at my own post above, it could have been taken another way.

The GOP evidently will stop at nothing to steal elections.

As pointed out above, this is the way to go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Po pular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
This passed the state assembly and senate in 2006 and was vetoed by Arnold, it has passed the State senate again in 2007.  Short of a constitutional amendment, this gets as close to one person one vote as we could hope (and by using the national vote total (even if differers from the state total) it keeps smaller states in play.)

The Boxer criticism against the Republican Initiative is valid, our Congressional districts are gerrymandered and fixed, so apportion votes based on CDs will not give independents a greater voice (nor will repub in dem district nor dems in repub districts have a greater voice.)  Thus, no increase in presidential attention.  If the republican plan apportioned the electoral votes based on the popular vote in the whole state, that might make each vote count more (and garner more campaigning in the state)....but clearly the republicans don't really want that either, since the toning down of the central republican values of hate and bigotry will likely lose them their core wing-nut votes in other states..

This initiative is on the June ballot, the one we are likely to see the lowest turnout for for...which tends to favor republican proposals.  Any independents who support it because they think it will make their voice be heard is a fool.

Also, if this proposal is meant to apply to the 2008 election, no one couldn't see it as a ploy to simply steal the presidency from the Democrats.