Colorado Rigging Next Election

[OKTexas]

OMG, you're not only boring and ignorant, you're redundant in the process, that's a sure sign of a low IQ. Mtich was just following the Biden rule. LMAO

.

The Biden rule that never existed except in some tiny corner of Repugs' minds? Got it, goober.

In his own words.


.

Did the Senate ever take a vote on the so-called "Biden Rule"? Was it ever used from 1992 - 2015? Nope.

There wasn't even a Supreme Court vacancy at the time Biden gave this speech.

Your shit is weak and disingenuous. I expect nothing less from a Repug.

Of course there wasn't a vacancy at the time, Biden and his comrades were trying to preemptive and it worked, just not the way they imagined it. LMAO And the republicans stole nothing, there is no rule or law that says when the senate is to take up a nomination, or at all for that matter. The commies have slow walked nominations for decades when a republican was in office.

.

.

Turnabout is fair play, Repug. Don't whine when Dems pull the same trick on you assholes in the future. But you will, of course.

At the rate you commies are going the dems will be lucky to be a party in a few years. When do you figure you'll be taking on the moniker of CPUSA?

.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Really? Explain how a state can make changes to how that state's Electoral College votes are determined and not violate the Constitution. I'm all ears!

Because there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that stipulates that a state must award its EC votes based on who wins the state's popular vote. There may be state laws that direct how EC votes are allocated, but there is nothing in the Constitution about this. And state laws can be changed, as Colorado just illustrated.

It's all about them states' rights, ain't it Repubs?

Except the US Federal Government promises to ensure a REPUBLICAN democracy to each State. Changing the peoples vote is NOT Democracy and is not a Republican form of Government.

Your definition of "Republican" government is not the definition in the Constitution. The Constitution states absolutely nothing about how electoral votes should be allocated in regards to the popular vote in each state vs the entire country.

Electors belong to the States and their citizens, not the country. No State can bind the future votes of their citizens, just like no legislature can bind votes of future legislatures.

.

OK, so why haven't previous EC laws passed by the states been deemed unconstitutional?

You can't challenge a law till someone tries to use it, till then it's inoperative. You're not very smart, are ya?

.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Really? Explain how a state can make changes to how that state's Electoral College votes are determined and not violate the Constitution. I'm all ears!

Because there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that stipulates that a state must award its EC votes based on who wins the state's popular vote. There may be state laws that direct how EC votes are allocated, but there is nothing in the Constitution about this. And state laws can be changed, as Colorado just illustrated.

It's all about them states' rights, ain't it Repubs?

Except the US Federal Government promises to ensure a REPUBLICAN democracy to each State. Changing the peoples vote is NOT Democracy and is not a Republican form of Government.

Your definition of "Republican" government is not the definition in the Constitution. The Constitution states absolutely nothing about how electoral votes should be allocated in regards to the popular vote in each state vs the entire country.

Electors belong to the States and their citizens, not the country. No State can bind the future votes of their citizens, just like no legislature can bind votes of future legislatures.

.

OK, so why haven't previous EC laws passed by the states been deemed unconstitutional?

Probably because they weren't like this one is.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You might want to read Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3. While you're at it, you might want to read the rest of the document as well, you appear to be really ignorant about it.

.

Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3:

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

So what am I missing?

enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State,

That.

.

What Agreement do you think they are entering into? Their decision is just for their state, and is not binding on any other state, just as no other state has any binding agreements on them.

It is EVEN called an interstate Compact, it is IN FACT an agreement between the several States to conspire and violate the rule of law and the sanctity of the votes cast by the residents of that and the several States involved in this ILLEGAL agreement.

Call it what you want, each state can independently pass their own law and achieve the same thing. The "compact" is not necessary.

It is needed and in fact they have STATED for the record that it will ONLY go in to effect when enough States pass it, proving it is a compact and illegal. No State Government has the right to change the vote of its people that is against the law and it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL t boot.

 

[Picaro]

So how, exactly, was 'The African American Vote' suppressed? What a load of rubbish.

Do some research on the Google machine, genius. I'm sure that you can easily find at least 2 dozen articles on the topic.

So you're too embarrassed to repeat that bullshit on a board that proved it to be bullshit. Okay.

 

[keepitreal]

All you have to do now is prove all those fake votes you expect actually happen. You haven't had any luck proving that in the past, but who knows, You might find something this time.

You mean the same fake votes that dems believe elected trump?

We don't believe there were fake votes for Trump. We just know that thousands of African Americans were prevented from voting in certain states like Wisconsin and North Carolina, that's all. It's called voter suppression. Look it up.

I wonder how many voters didn’t bother voting
because of the fabricated poll numbers
and landslide predictions for Clinton

 

[keepitreal]

Democrats are a bunch of criminals.
They fully intend on stealing the next presidential election by passing laws that assure that regardless how their state votes, they will award their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote.
This goes directly against the constitution and is an assault on the election process.

All Democrats have to do is generate enough fake votes in Blue States using illegal voters...and then Colorado would award their electoral votes to the fake winner.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Colorado Open Records Act lawsuit on behalf of reporter Todd Shepherd against Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold for records of communications related to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would award Colorado’s presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of whether Colorado’s voters chose that candidate (Todd Shepherd v Jena Griswold in her official capacity as Colorado Secretary of State (No. 2019-cv-032310)).

The suit was filed after Griswold refused to turn over certain documents in response to a February 4, 2019, open records request for records about the Electoral College debate.

On February 21, 2019, the Colorado House passed the National Popular Vote bill and sent it to Governor Jared Polis. Colorado Secretary of State Griswold is a critic of the Electoral College and applauded Gov. Polis’s signing of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Currently, most states award all their Electoral College votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state. But, as described here by the National Conference of State Legislatures, when a state, such as Colorado, “passes legislation to join the National Popular Vote Compact, it pledges that all of that state’s electoral votes will be given to whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote nationwide, rather than the candidate who won the vote in just that state. These bills will take effect only when states with a majority of the electoral votes have passed similar legislation and joined the compact.”

Five times a presidential candidate has won the “popular vote” but lost the election, most recently Hillary Clinton. Many opponents of President Trump have proposed undoing the Electoral College. Supporters of the Electoral College point out that it balances the interests of citizens in both large and small states by requiring candidates to seek votes in less populous states whose interests might otherwise be ignored. In addition, under the reform, a state could award its Electoral College votes to a presidential candidate who lost the state’s popular vote.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Judicial Watch​

This doesn't go against the Constitution at all. That is wishful thinking on your part. You will have a very difficult time proving that it does go against the Constitution. Bravo, Colorado.

Let's face it - The only hope that Repubs have of winning another Presidential election is the Electoral College. Repubs will NEVER win the popular vote in a Presidential election again, at least not during the next 20 - 30 years.

Not without Russia's help, anyway.

You might want to read Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3. While you're at it, you might want to read the rest of the document as well, you appear to be really ignorant about it.

.

Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3:

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

So what am I missing?

The Twelfth Amendment...that’s what you’re missing

 

[strollingbones]

gee mudd are you doing a thread on how the gop has gerry mandered n.c? o wait it the gop doing it ...you are all for it

 

[BULLDOG]

You mean like the recent Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act (i.e. Obamacare)?

Recent, no, the original one.

.

Yep, after Moscow Mitch and the Repugs stole a Supreme Court seat that rightfully belonged to Obama in an egregious, unprecedented move that never occurred before in this country's history. No coincidence there.

And, of course, you anti-democratic Repugs were outraged by that power grab.

OMG, you're not only boring and ignorant, you're redundant in the process, that's a sure sign of a low IQ. Mtich was just following the Biden rule. LMAO

.

The Biden rule that never existed except in some tiny corner of Repugs' minds? Got it, goober.

In his own words.


.

He was talking about an appointment within weeks of both parties conventions. That is not the situation that occurred with Garland dumb ass.

 

[BULLDOG]

Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3:

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

So what am I missing?

enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State,

That.

.

What Agreement do you think they are entering into? Their decision is just for their state, and is not binding on any other state, just as no other state has any binding agreements on them.

It is EVEN called an interstate Compact, it is IN FACT an agreement between the several States to conspire and violate the rule of law and the sanctity of the votes cast by the residents of that and the several States involved in this ILLEGAL agreement.

Call it what you want, each state can independently pass their own law and achieve the same thing. The "compact" is not necessary.

The thing is unConstitutional on multiple levels.

Is the state allowed to determine how their electoral votes are distributed, or not?

 

[BULLDOG]

All you have to do now is prove all those fake votes you expect actually happen. You haven't had any luck proving that in the past, but who knows, You might find something this time.

You mean the same fake votes that dems believe elected trump?

We don't believe there were fake votes for Trump. We just know that thousands of African Americans were prevented from voting in certain states like Wisconsin and North Carolina, that's all. It's called voter suppression. Look it up.

I wonder how many voters didn’t bother voting
because of the fabricated poll numbers
and landslide predictions for Clinton

I'm sure lots of people didn't bother to vote because they thought the election was covered. If they actually thought Trump was going to win, they would have been there to vote even if they had to go in their underwear.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Democrats are a bunch of criminals.
They fully intend on stealing the next presidential election by passing laws that assure that regardless how their state votes, they will award their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote.
This goes directly against the constitution and is an assault on the election process.

All Democrats have to do is generate enough fake votes in Blue States using illegal voters...and then Colorado would award their electoral votes to the fake winner.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Colorado Open Records Act lawsuit on behalf of reporter Todd Shepherd against Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold for records of communications related to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would award Colorado’s presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of whether Colorado’s voters chose that candidate (Todd Shepherd v Jena Griswold in her official capacity as Colorado Secretary of State (No. 2019-cv-032310)).

The suit was filed after Griswold refused to turn over certain documents in response to a February 4, 2019, open records request for records about the Electoral College debate.

On February 21, 2019, the Colorado House passed the National Popular Vote bill and sent it to Governor Jared Polis. Colorado Secretary of State Griswold is a critic of the Electoral College and applauded Gov. Polis’s signing of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Currently, most states award all their Electoral College votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state. But, as described here by the National Conference of State Legislatures, when a state, such as Colorado, “passes legislation to join the National Popular Vote Compact, it pledges that all of that state’s electoral votes will be given to whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote nationwide, rather than the candidate who won the vote in just that state. These bills will take effect only when states with a majority of the electoral votes have passed similar legislation and joined the compact.”

Five times a presidential candidate has won the “popular vote” but lost the election, most recently Hillary Clinton. Many opponents of President Trump have proposed undoing the Electoral College. Supporters of the Electoral College point out that it balances the interests of citizens in both large and small states by requiring candidates to seek votes in less populous states whose interests might otherwise be ignored. In addition, under the reform, a state could award its Electoral College votes to a presidential candidate who lost the state’s popular vote.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Judicial Watch​

I don't know who came up with this stupid idea of national EC. I am in colorado and find this repugnant. I liked it when it was the all or nothing. I wanted the all or nothing because it got rid of some pretty behind the scene underhanded sculduggery crap that used to be used to manipulate the EC. But this takes away the States Identity.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Democrats are a bunch of criminals.
They fully intend on stealing the next presidential election by passing laws that assure that regardless how their state votes, they will award their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote.
This goes directly against the constitution and is an assault on the election process.

All Democrats have to do is generate enough fake votes in Blue States using illegal voters...and then Colorado would award their electoral votes to the fake winner.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Colorado Open Records Act lawsuit on behalf of reporter Todd Shepherd against Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold for records of communications related to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would award Colorado’s presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of whether Colorado’s voters chose that candidate (Todd Shepherd v Jena Griswold in her official capacity as Colorado Secretary of State (No. 2019-cv-032310)).

The suit was filed after Griswold refused to turn over certain documents in response to a February 4, 2019, open records request for records about the Electoral College debate.

On February 21, 2019, the Colorado House passed the National Popular Vote bill and sent it to Governor Jared Polis. Colorado Secretary of State Griswold is a critic of the Electoral College and applauded Gov. Polis’s signing of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Currently, most states award all their Electoral College votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state. But, as described here by the National Conference of State Legislatures, when a state, such as Colorado, “passes legislation to join the National Popular Vote Compact, it pledges that all of that state’s electoral votes will be given to whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote nationwide, rather than the candidate who won the vote in just that state. These bills will take effect only when states with a majority of the electoral votes have passed similar legislation and joined the compact.”

Five times a presidential candidate has won the “popular vote” but lost the election, most recently Hillary Clinton. Many opponents of President Trump have proposed undoing the Electoral College. Supporters of the Electoral College point out that it balances the interests of citizens in both large and small states by requiring candidates to seek votes in less populous states whose interests might otherwise be ignored. In addition, under the reform, a state could award its Electoral College votes to a presidential candidate who lost the state’s popular vote.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Judicial Watch​

Which part of the Constitution does this violate?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Democrats are a bunch of criminals.
They fully intend on stealing the next presidential election by passing laws that assure that regardless how their state votes, they will award their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote.
This goes directly against the constitution and is an assault on the election process.

All Democrats have to do is generate enough fake votes in Blue States using illegal voters...and then Colorado would award their electoral votes to the fake winner.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Colorado Open Records Act lawsuit on behalf of reporter Todd Shepherd against Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold for records of communications related to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would award Colorado’s presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of whether Colorado’s voters chose that candidate (Todd Shepherd v Jena Griswold in her official capacity as Colorado Secretary of State (No. 2019-cv-032310)).

The suit was filed after Griswold refused to turn over certain documents in response to a February 4, 2019, open records request for records about the Electoral College debate.

On February 21, 2019, the Colorado House passed the National Popular Vote bill and sent it to Governor Jared Polis. Colorado Secretary of State Griswold is a critic of the Electoral College and applauded Gov. Polis’s signing of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Currently, most states award all their Electoral College votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state. But, as described here by the National Conference of State Legislatures, when a state, such as Colorado, “passes legislation to join the National Popular Vote Compact, it pledges that all of that state’s electoral votes will be given to whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote nationwide, rather than the candidate who won the vote in just that state. These bills will take effect only when states with a majority of the electoral votes have passed similar legislation and joined the compact.”

Five times a presidential candidate has won the “popular vote” but lost the election, most recently Hillary Clinton. Many opponents of President Trump have proposed undoing the Electoral College. Supporters of the Electoral College point out that it balances the interests of citizens in both large and small states by requiring candidates to seek votes in less populous states whose interests might otherwise be ignored. In addition, under the reform, a state could award its Electoral College votes to a presidential candidate who lost the state’s popular vote.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Judicial Watch​

Can't change the Constitution without amending it. The law in Colorado is illegal. But then demoncraps care less about the law.

Please list the part of the Constitution this violates.

 

[Cellblock2429]

All you have to do now is prove all those fake votes you expect actually happen. You haven't had any luck proving that in the past, but who knows, You might find something this time.

/—-/ Here ya go libtard— for the hundredth time: The Heritage Foundation

 

[JoeB131]

Democrats are a bunch of criminals.
They fully intend on stealing the next presidential election by passing laws that assure that regardless how their state votes, they will award their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote.
This goes directly against the constitution and is an assault on the election process.

The Constitution doesn't say how a state allocates it's electors. It can do winner take all, it can divided by congressional district. (as NE and ME do). At one point, electors were selected by state legislators in some states

So there's really no reason why they can't allocate their electors to the person who wins the national popular vote.

 

[mudwhistle]

Democrats are a bunch of criminals.
They fully intend on stealing the next presidential election by passing laws that assure that regardless how their state votes, they will award their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote.
This goes directly against the constitution and is an assault on the election process.

All Democrats have to do is generate enough fake votes in Blue States using illegal voters...and then Colorado would award their electoral votes to the fake winner.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Colorado Open Records Act lawsuit on behalf of reporter Todd Shepherd against Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold for records of communications related to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would award Colorado’s presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of whether Colorado’s voters chose that candidate (Todd Shepherd v Jena Griswold in her official capacity as Colorado Secretary of State (No. 2019-cv-032310)).

The suit was filed after Griswold refused to turn over certain documents in response to a February 4, 2019, open records request for records about the Electoral College debate.

On February 21, 2019, the Colorado House passed the National Popular Vote bill and sent it to Governor Jared Polis. Colorado Secretary of State Griswold is a critic of the Electoral College and applauded Gov. Polis’s signing of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Currently, most states award all their Electoral College votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state. But, as described here by the National Conference of State Legislatures, when a state, such as Colorado, “passes legislation to join the National Popular Vote Compact, it pledges that all of that state’s electoral votes will be given to whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote nationwide, rather than the candidate who won the vote in just that state. These bills will take effect only when states with a majority of the electoral votes have passed similar legislation and joined the compact.”

Five times a presidential candidate has won the “popular vote” but lost the election, most recently Hillary Clinton. Many opponents of President Trump have proposed undoing the Electoral College. Supporters of the Electoral College point out that it balances the interests of citizens in both large and small states by requiring candidates to seek votes in less populous states whose interests might otherwise be ignored. In addition, under the reform, a state could award its Electoral College votes to a presidential candidate who lost the state’s popular vote.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Judicial Watch​

This doesn't go against the Constitution at all. That is wishful thinking on your part. You will have a very difficult time proving that it does go against the Constitution. Bravo, Colorado.

Let's face it - The only hope that Repubs have of winning another Presidential election is the Electoral College. Repubs will NEVER win the popular vote in a Presidential election again, at least not during the next 20 - 30 years.

Not without Russia's help, anyway.

They did a reassessment of the vote in California, where most of the extra votes where created after election night....and they said that Hillary lost enough votes to lose the popular vote in one state alone. They discovered over 3-5 million fake votes that would have reversed the popular vote count in Trump's favor. New Evidence Proves Hillary Won Popular Vote 'Fraudulently'

So when the Dems take over the polls the vote cannot be trusted anymore because you have to rely on the honesty of the Democrats running the counts. All it takes is one district taken over by Democrats that generates a percentage of the vote thru fraud and a state that went Red can be swung to a Blue state through fraud. Democrats could lose every state in the country and all it would take is for California to push the popular vote over to the Democrat weeks after the election, and even a landslide win for the Republican could be reversed.
I suppose you think this is okay...because America is a racist country that needs to be punished. If this happens there literally will be blood in the streets.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Democrats are a bunch of criminals.
They fully intend on stealing the next presidential election by passing laws that assure that regardless how their state votes, they will award their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote.
This goes directly against the constitution and is an assault on the election process.

All Democrats have to do is generate enough fake votes in Blue States using illegal voters...and then Colorado would award their electoral votes to the fake winner.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Colorado Open Records Act lawsuit on behalf of reporter Todd Shepherd against Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold for records of communications related to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would award Colorado’s presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of whether Colorado’s voters chose that candidate (Todd Shepherd v Jena Griswold in her official capacity as Colorado Secretary of State (No. 2019-cv-032310)).

The suit was filed after Griswold refused to turn over certain documents in response to a February 4, 2019, open records request for records about the Electoral College debate.

On February 21, 2019, the Colorado House passed the National Popular Vote bill and sent it to Governor Jared Polis. Colorado Secretary of State Griswold is a critic of the Electoral College and applauded Gov. Polis’s signing of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Currently, most states award all their Electoral College votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state. But, as described here by the National Conference of State Legislatures, when a state, such as Colorado, “passes legislation to join the National Popular Vote Compact, it pledges that all of that state’s electoral votes will be given to whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote nationwide, rather than the candidate who won the vote in just that state. These bills will take effect only when states with a majority of the electoral votes have passed similar legislation and joined the compact.”

Five times a presidential candidate has won the “popular vote” but lost the election, most recently Hillary Clinton. Many opponents of President Trump have proposed undoing the Electoral College. Supporters of the Electoral College point out that it balances the interests of citizens in both large and small states by requiring candidates to seek votes in less populous states whose interests might otherwise be ignored. In addition, under the reform, a state could award its Electoral College votes to a presidential candidate who lost the state’s popular vote.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Judicial Watch​

This doesn't go against the Constitution at all. That is wishful thinking on your part. You will have a very difficult time proving that it does go against the Constitution. Bravo, Colorado.

Let's face it - The only hope that Repubs have of winning another Presidential election is the Electoral College. Repubs will NEVER win the popular vote in a Presidential election again, at least not during the next 20 - 30 years.

Not without Russia's help, anyway.

They did a reassessment of the vote in California, where most of the extra votes where created after election night....and they said that Hillary lost enough votes to lose the popular vote in one state alone. They discovered over 3-5 million fake votes that would have reversed the popular vote count in Trump's favor. New Evidence Proves Hillary Won Popular Vote 'Fraudulently'

So when the Dems take over the polls the vote cannot be trusted anymore because you have to rely on the honesty of the Democrats running the counts. All it takes is one district taken over by Democrats that generates a percentage of the vote thru fraud and a state that went Red can be swung to a Blue state through fraud. Democrats could lose every state in the country and all it would take is for California to push the popular vote over to the Democrat weeks after the election, and even a landslide win for the Republican could be reversed.
I suppose you think this is okay...because America is a racist country that needs to be punished. If this happens there literally will be blood in the streets.

Thanks for the fake news.

 

[mudwhistle]

Because there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that stipulates that a state must award its EC votes based on who wins the state's popular vote. There may be state laws that direct how EC votes are allocated, but there is nothing in the Constitution about this. And state laws can be changed, as Colorado just illustrated.

It's all about them states' rights, ain't it Repubs?

Except the US Federal Government promises to ensure a REPUBLICAN democracy to each State. Changing the peoples vote is NOT Democracy and is not a Republican form of Government.

Your definition of "Republican" government is not the definition in the Constitution. The Constitution states absolutely nothing about how electoral votes should be allocated in regards to the popular vote in each state vs the entire country.

Electors belong to the States and their citizens, not the country. No State can bind the future votes of their citizens, just like no legislature can bind votes of future legislatures.

.

OK, so why haven't previous EC laws passed by the states been deemed unconstitutional?

You can't challenge a law till someone tries to use it, till then it's inoperative. You're not very smart, are ya?

.

Jesus you're a dumbass.
You can challenge any law. Laws have been deemed unconstitutional before they go into effect.

 

[mudwhistle]

Democrats are a bunch of criminals.
They fully intend on stealing the next presidential election by passing laws that assure that regardless how their state votes, they will award their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote.
This goes directly against the constitution and is an assault on the election process.

All Democrats have to do is generate enough fake votes in Blue States using illegal voters...and then Colorado would award their electoral votes to the fake winner.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Colorado Open Records Act lawsuit on behalf of reporter Todd Shepherd against Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold for records of communications related to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would award Colorado’s presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of whether Colorado’s voters chose that candidate (Todd Shepherd v Jena Griswold in her official capacity as Colorado Secretary of State (No. 2019-cv-032310)).

The suit was filed after Griswold refused to turn over certain documents in response to a February 4, 2019, open records request for records about the Electoral College debate.

On February 21, 2019, the Colorado House passed the National Popular Vote bill and sent it to Governor Jared Polis. Colorado Secretary of State Griswold is a critic of the Electoral College and applauded Gov. Polis’s signing of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Currently, most states award all their Electoral College votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state. But, as described here by the National Conference of State Legislatures, when a state, such as Colorado, “passes legislation to join the National Popular Vote Compact, it pledges that all of that state’s electoral votes will be given to whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote nationwide, rather than the candidate who won the vote in just that state. These bills will take effect only when states with a majority of the electoral votes have passed similar legislation and joined the compact.”

Five times a presidential candidate has won the “popular vote” but lost the election, most recently Hillary Clinton. Many opponents of President Trump have proposed undoing the Electoral College. Supporters of the Electoral College point out that it balances the interests of citizens in both large and small states by requiring candidates to seek votes in less populous states whose interests might otherwise be ignored. In addition, under the reform, a state could award its Electoral College votes to a presidential candidate who lost the state’s popular vote.

Judicial Watch Sues Colorado for Documents on Electoral College Change, Files Suit on Behalf of Reporter Over State’s New National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Judicial Watch​

I don't know who came up with this stupid idea of national EC. I am in colorado and find this repugnant. I liked it when it was the all or nothing. I wanted the all or nothing because it got rid of some pretty behind the scene underhanded sculduggery crap that used to be used to manipulate the EC. But this takes away the States Identity.

The purpose of an EC is to prevent one state from ruling the entire country just because they packed their state full of illegal immigrants that are told to just sign a ballot and the ballot filled out for the Democrat running for POTUS. Colorado is showing us how they plan on stealing the White House back.