The Kind-Hearted Smart Aleck

I'm really loving this post-gerrymandering-winner-by-congressional-district election idea.  If applied to the entire country, one Willard Mittens Romney would have won the election with 276 electoral votes, while losing the popular vote by 4,967,5 98. In the state of Ohio, he would have won 12 of the 18 electoral votes (66.67%), even though he lost the state. In other news, it's being rumored that starting in the 2013-2014 NFL season, home teams will be rewarded 12 points for a touchdown, 6 for a field goal, 4 for a safety, and 2 for an extra point. As announcer Al Michaels would put it: "Even while the visiting Cleveland Browns scored 21 points on three touchdowns and extra points, they were no match for the home team Cincinnati Bengals, who came away with 28 points on two touchdowns and extra points. Now, to hear his reaction on the game, we have Browns tailback Trent Richardson with Erin Andrews. Erin?" Andrews: "Thanks, Al. So, what is your first reaction to ...

So it appears as if some Republicans are trying to alter the winner-take-all-electoral-vote model to the win-by-congressional-district model in some Democratic-leaning or battleground states that President Obama won in the 2012 presidential election. These states include: Ohio (18), Virginia (13), Michigan (16), Wisconsin (10), Pennsylvania (20), and Florida (29) - worth a combined 106 electoral votes. Due to Republican gerrymandering, this would have propelled Mitt Romney to the presidency this past election, even though he lost the overall vote by close to five million. With this new model, even though Obama defeated Romney by close to four percentage points in the state of Virginia in November, he would have netted just four of the state's thirteen electoral votes. That's right. In a state where Obama won by roughly 150,000 votes, Romney would have won 9 electoral votes to the president's 4. Make sense? I didn't think so. If the Republican Party is able to get away...