AP: Supreme Court rules states can require presidential electors to back popular vote winner.

[Synthaholic]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

 

[martybegan]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

Popular vote winner IN THE STATE.

This has nothing to do with the likely unconstitutional interstate vote compact, in fact this decision if you read it shows that the current SC might find issues with it if it were ever brought before it.

 

[Shelzin]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

Well... Your avatar makes sense now. That ruling was actually against what it was she was going for.

 

[Synthaholic]

 

[Synthaholic]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

Well... Your avatar makes sense now. That ruling was actually against what it was she was going for.

Speak English moron. What was AOC “going for”?

 

[Shelzin]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

Well... Your avatar makes sense now. That ruling was actually against what it was she was going for.

Speak English moron. What was AOC “going for”?

*blink*blink*

If you don't know, why in the hell do you have her as a picture on your avatar?

Frankly I prefer you just a clueless as she is if you are going to call me names for your ignorance. Figure it out yourself.

 

[Synthaholic]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

Well... Your avatar makes sense now. That ruling was actually against what it was she was going for.

Speak English moron. What was AOC “going for”?

*blink*blink*

If you don't know, why in the hell do you have her as a picture on your avatar?

Frankly I prefer you just a clueless as she is if you are going to call me names for your ignorance. Figure it out yourself.

Did AOC bring this case to SCOTUS? Your obsession with her is sick.

 

[Persistence Of Memory]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

I bet if the Electoral College favored you. You'd say the popular vote doesn't matter right????
The Constitution tells you to go pound sand.

Worry about NYC and all the new crime there AOC.

 

[esalla]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

So what if the states require a particular candidate and not the popular vote winner.

This ruling is pure BS

 

[JLW]

The decision appears to be unanimous with two concurring opinions. I have not read the entire opinion so I may revise my opinion later. SCOTUS does call into question the whole rationale for the electoral college. The framers wanted the electors to use independent judgment in selecting a president. If the electors can not do that then what is their purpose? The case makes a compelling argument to dissolve the electoral college once and for all and elect a president just on popular vote.

 

[Rambunctious]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

I think you have this wrong you had better check again......this is a good thing for Trump....he can't have his states stolen from him....dummy....read before you post....LMAO

 

[Rambunctious]

This ruling prevents never Trumper electors from taking the state away from Trump like they wanted to be able to do.....

 

[JLW]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

I think you have this wrong you had better check again......this is a good thing for Trump....he can't have his states stolen from him....dummy....read before you post....LMAO

LOL...you are so blinded by Trump love that you can't see the faithless electors in this case failed to vote for Hillary Clinton.

 

[esalla]

The decision appears to be unanimous with two concurring opinions. I have not read the entire opinion so I may revise my opinion later. SCOTUS does call into question the whole rationale for the electoral college. The framers wanted the electors to use independent judgment in selecting a president. If the electors can not do that then what is their purpose? The case makes a compelling argument to dissolve the electoral college once and for all and elect a president just go on popular vote.

If the college has the right to overrule the people, what is the purpose of people voting in the first place

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

If you think that this ruling was about states being able to shirk the will of their own voters and send their electors to vote in favor of whoever won the national popular vote, then I'd have to guess you didn't actually read any of the articles about what you're posting.

The decision simply says that the electors can't take it upon themselves to shirk the will of the state that sent them.

I swear, every day it looks more and more like the average lefty sees the first four or five words in a headline and then fills in the narrative themselves based on whatever emotion pops up first.

 

[Jets]

No objection to the ruling. That said, it makes the EC almost superfluous.

 

[JLW]

The decision appears to be unanimous with two concurring opinions. I have not read the entire opinion so I may revise my opinion later. SCOTUS does call into question the whole rationale for the electoral college. The framers wanted the electors to use independent judgment in selecting a president. If the electors can not do that then what is their purpose? The case makes a compelling argument to dissolve the electoral college once and for all and elect a president just go on popular vote.

If the college has the right to overrule the people, what is the purpose of people voting in the first place

Which is why the Electoral College needs to be abandoned.

 

[Rambunctious]

No objection to the ruling. That said, it makes the EC almost superfluous.

No you don't get it either....it makes the EC be the EC that was intended when enacted....it strengthens it.....

 

[Rambunctious]

The decision appears to be unanimous with two concurring opinions. I have not read the entire opinion so I may revise my opinion later. SCOTUS does call into question the whole rationale for the electoral college. The framers wanted the electors to use independent judgment in selecting a president. If the electors can not do that then what is their purpose? The case makes a compelling argument to dissolve the electoral college once and for all and elect a president just go on popular vote.

If the college has the right to overrule the people, what is the purpose of people voting in the first place

Which is why the Electoral College needs to be abandoned.

That will never ever happen....

 

[Synthaholic]

Oh, the times, they are a-changing.

If you think that this ruling was about states being able to shirk the will of their own voters and send their electors to vote in favor of whoever won the national popular vote, then I'd have to guess you didn't actually read any of the articles about what you're posting.

The decision simply says that the electors can't take it upon themselves to shirk the will of the state that sent them.

I swear, every day it looks more and more like the average lefty sees the first four or five words in a headline and then fills in the narrative themselves based on whatever emotion pops up first.

Exactly. Two states that voted for Hillary had electors who voted for Trump. No more of that shit.