Sentences with phrase «electoral votes equal»

Each state has a number of electoral votes equal to the combined total of its congressional delegation, and each state legislature is free to determine the method it will use to select its own electors.

Not exact matches

And it is chutzpah for a pro-FPTP party to talk about votes having an «equal value» if you equalise constituency size in an electoral system where they do not.

The parties will bring forward a Referendum Bill on electoral reform, which includes provision for the introduction of the Alternative Vote in the event of a positive result in the referendum, as well as for the creation of fewer and more equal sized constituencies.

«We will bring forward a Referendum Bill on electoral reform, which includes provision for the introduction of the Alternative Vote in the event of a positive result in the referendum, as well as for the creation of fewer and more equal sized constituencies.

The Deputy Leader wants to scrap the «one member one vote» system used for electing Labour leaders, and restore the old «electoral college» which gave an equal say to party members, trade unions and Labour MPs.

He argues for an electoral system in which every vote carries equal weight.

Labour leadership elections have previously been decided by a complex electoral college system, with equal weight given to the votes of three groups - one third to MPs and MEPs, one third to ordinary party members and one third to trade unionists.

At the moment, Labour leadership elections are decided by a complex «electoral college» system, with equal weight given to the votes of three groups - one third to MPs and MEPs, one third to ordinary party members and one third to trade unionists.

Because in a «winner takes all» electoral system like that in the US and the UK, not all votes are created equal.

I understand the constitution does not explicitly guarantee that all votes must be equal, nor does it ban geographic voter discrimination and that it does call for an electoral college so I see the counter argument would be strong, but I wonder if you guys think there is any case to be made for my argument.

The electoral college altering your vote to match the majority seems to be the most egregious crime because, although the constitution doesn't explicitly require your vote to be equal in strength, surely the founders intended with the word «vote» that you at least get to choose who you vote for.

This includes enhanced access to government information, restoring relevance to Question Period, electoral reform, and an end to the «first past the post» voting system, the unmuzzling of government scientists, return of the long form census, an equal number of men and women in Cabinet, and the formation of a Youth Advisory Counsel so that young people can provide advice to the PM on issues that concern them.