Obama/Dems won the battle but Repubs are winning the war....

[graham4anything]

27. I disagree with all of this. Hillary45 already has it clinched.Constant don't remain Constant

these are the same downer type things as the theft memes which just look to depress the vote.

In actuality, the electoral vote change is totally wrong.
Because it is looked at straight on 2012 and would not be applicable to a different race

for instance

let's say Jeb picks Christie as VP in 2016 to run against Hillary45.
Let's say that leads to Jeb winning PA.
Well, instead of Jeb winning 100% of PA, he will lose 1/3 of the electoral votes or more

and again, this constant, is just not applicable

because there are movements when the constants change in each statistical direction,
and constant don't remain constant

long as there is no 3rd party idiot with lies like Traitor Nader used to toss an election to republicans like Nader so willingly and laugingly did in 2000(it was nader in Nov.2000, not the scotus 2nd part of their ruling in Dec.2000 that caused Gore to lose
(see stats of total # of voters, 2000,2004,2008,2012. Nader surpressed the vote far more than any other factor. 10 million LESS votes than in any modern election.
Had Gore used Bill Clinton, he would have won 4 other states besides Florida.

and there was NO theft in 2004, just a horrible run campaign that allowed unanswered for 6 weeks a major slur, and not enough voters.
(especially the VP pick of Edwards, what a joke).

When ALL of the parties base comes out to vote, there are landslides.

I believe this change of electoral is just a red herring.
AT NO TIME should Democratic people want to now change the electoral vote,which is what this red herring is wanted.

Again, constant in raw statistical number analysis, DOES NOT HAPPEN.
because for every change, there is a second change somewhere else overruling the first change. It is not static.

and 2016 will not be 2012.
Unless a shitty candidate is picked who is not vetted and cannot win of course.

Which is what jeb would love.

Had Nader not told 10 million voters to stay home in 2000, had Gore not told Bill Clinton to stay home in 2000, the democratic party would have won a landslide

3rdpartyites would love Jeb to win, just like Nader loved W winning.(and just like republicans financed Nader to repress the vote, whether the BigEgotist knew it or not). Just like Perot endorsed W in 2000 and 2004, making his run in 1992 just personal against 41, but not political.
He truly wanted to even a personal score with 41 and did.Where it political, he would not have endorsed his son(and I am sure in 2016 he will endorse Jeb).

all the other is scare tactics.

BTW, with Hillary45 as nominee, the Dems will win red states like Texas, like Arkansas, like Tenn. like Kentucky. Like Georgia. Like South Carolina.

for every constant that is moved, another one moves with it
it is not just one constant, and everything else stagment.

life and politics don't work like this

and the loud republican noise for this, is a red herring to get dems to change to a different system because they can't win this.

It really irritates me to think the single greatest player in the political game, President Obama and his single greatest team, would have people thinking they would have lost 2012 to this.
NO THEY WOULD NOT HAVE. They would have played a different set of cards and won the same amount.

don't fall for it, because Jeb would surely love it if the Dems fell into this trap.

(and in the past, everytime the repubs tried to game the system, it failed.
Look at the only 2 term law after FDR. Who lost there? The repubs, as Ike and Reagan easily would have own a 3rd term.)