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

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.


Our State Legislation pass the National Interstate EC law. No one has contested it yet. Right now, the EC has to go with the State's popular vote. Chances are, when it is contested the new law will be bounced big time. It's a knee jerk reaction to Rump.
 
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.....

Isn't it the popular vote of each state determines the winner?
We are a representative republic....look it up....its a genius move by our founders and the EC is in place to keep more populated states from ruling over less populated states....this way every city and state chooses our president not just NY and LA....really....read up on it and I'm sure you will at least understand if not appreciate the EC....
 
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.....

Isn't it the popular vote of each state determines the winner?
We are a representative republic....look it up....its a genius move by our founders and the EC is in place to keep more populated states from ruling over less populated states....this way every city and state chooses our president not just NY and LA....really....read up on it and I'm sure you will at least understand if not appreciate the EC....

That’s didn’t answer my question. Does the popular vote of each state determine the winner?

Edit: in determining who the electors will choose.
 
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.....

Isn't it the popular vote of each state determines the winner?
We are a representative republic....look it up....its a genius move by our founders and the EC is in place to keep more populated states from ruling over less populated states....this way every city and state chooses our president not just NY and LA....really....read up on it and I'm sure you will at least understand if not appreciate the EC....

That’s didn’t answer my question. Does the popular vote of each state determine the winner?

Edit: in determining who the electors will choose.
In effect yes.... We go to the polls and people cast their vote, when they vote they are actually voting for a group of people called electors...The number of electors each state gets is equal to its total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress...... A total of 538 electors form the Electoral College....The candidate who gets 270 votes or more wins......this way more populated states have an edge but can't roll over the nation like with a popular vote....
 
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.....

Isn't it the popular vote of each state determines the winner?
We are a representative republic....look it up....its a genius move by our founders and the EC is in place to keep more populated states from ruling over less populated states....this way every city and state chooses our president not just NY and LA....really....read up on it and I'm sure you will at least understand if not appreciate the EC....

That’s didn’t answer my question. Does the popular vote of each state determine the winner?

Edit: in determining who the electors will choose.
In effect yes.... We go to the polls and people cast their vote, when they vote they are actually voting for a group of people called electors...The number of electors each state gets is equal to its total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress...... A total of 538 electors form the Electoral College....The candidate who gets 270 votes or more wins......

Ok, we’re on the same page.
 
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.....

Isn't it the popular vote of each state determines the winner?
We are a representative republic....look it up....its a genius move by our founders and the EC is in place to keep more populated states from ruling over less populated states....this way every city and state chooses our president not just NY and LA....really....read up on it and I'm sure you will at least understand if not appreciate the EC....

That’s didn’t answer my question. Does the popular vote of each state determine the winner?

Edit: in determining who the electors will choose.
In effect yes.... We go to the polls and people cast their vote, when they vote they are actually voting for a group of people called electors...The number of electors each state gets is equal to its total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress...... A total of 538 electors form the Electoral College....The candidate who gets 270 votes or more wins......

Ok, we’re on the same page.
See this why more populated states have an edge but can't roll over the rest of the nation....like with a popular vote...
 
Last edited:
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.


Our State Legislation pass the National Interstate EC law. No one has contested it yet. Right now, the EC has to go with the State's popular vote. Chances are, when it is contested the new law will be bounced big time. It's a knee jerk reaction to Rump.


It hasn't been contested yet because no one has standing to contest it.

It would have to be enacted, meet the required # of signatories, then a person may even have to vote, be part of a State majority that is overruled by the compact, and then sue.
 
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.....

Isn't it the popular vote of each state determines the winner?
We are a representative republic....look it up....its a genius move by our founders and the EC is in place to keep more populated states from ruling over less populated states....this way every city and state chooses our president not just NY and LA....really....read up on it and I'm sure you will at least understand if not appreciate the EC....

That’s didn’t answer my question. Does the popular vote of each state determine the winner?

Edit: in determining who the electors will choose.
In effect yes.... We go to the polls and people cast their vote, when they vote they are actually voting for a group of people called electors...The number of electors each state gets is equal to its total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress...... A total of 538 electors form the Electoral College....The candidate who gets 270 votes or more wins......

Ok, we’re on the same page.
See this way more populated states have an edge but can't roll over the rest of the nation....like with a popular vote...

I understand that, but my point was that the EC was mostly superfluous because the popular vote of each state was and is being used to determine the winner.

What this ruling does is punish those who do not honor the winner of that states popular vote.

That said, it was a matter of semantics on my part.
 
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.....

Isn't it the popular vote of each state determines the winner?
We are a representative republic....look it up....its a genius move by our founders and the EC is in place to keep more populated states from ruling over less populated states....this way every city and state chooses our president not just NY and LA....really....read up on it and I'm sure you will at least understand if not appreciate the EC....

That’s didn’t answer my question. Does the popular vote of each state determine the winner?

Edit: in determining who the electors will choose.
In effect yes.... We go to the polls and people cast their vote, when they vote they are actually voting for a group of people called electors...The number of electors each state gets is equal to its total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress...... A total of 538 electors form the Electoral College....The candidate who gets 270 votes or more wins......

Ok, we’re on the same page.
See this way more populated states have an edge but can't roll over the rest of the nation....like with a popular vote...

I understand that, but my point was that the EC was mostly superfluous because the popular vote of each state was and is being used to determine the winner.

What this ruling does is punish those who do not honor the winner of that states popular vote.

That said, it was a matter of semantics on my part.
Its the only really fair way to elect a national leader of a multi state nation...this is why the senate matters....
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top