Dems hate voter suppression but want to deprive entire states of their right to vote via the compact

[g5000]

I went to 270 to win and created a blank map, and just counted the rural states - West and South and old civil war border - that ALWAYS vote gop, and came up with 128 EV. And that doesn't count Tex, Fla, NC, Ohio, Ind, Iowa, or Virg.

The current system is just as unfair as a no-EC system, it is just unfair to different groups.

To make this argument, you would have to believe it is unfair for every state to have 2 senators regardless of their population.

So are you SURE you want to make this argument?

Do you want to defend the current state of the Congress? Anyway, the Senators powers are offset in the House by numbers, there is no such balance in the EC and why we keep getting minority presidents.

There have been only two "minority presidents" in the last 100 years. We don't "keep getting" presidents who have lost the popular vote.

Our system is working just fine.

As for the "current state of the Congress", any student of our history knows we have had much, much worse periods.

Two for Five now ….

1876 and 1888 were two for three.

Our system is working just fine.

 

[Rustic]

Lol
Like the old saying says don’t fix what’s not broken

Just because it is working for you doesn't mean it is working for everyone. I suspect slave owners said the same thing to their slaves.

Elections have consequences… You can’t win every game

 

[g5000]

We are a republic, not a democracy.

Running for President is not the Super Bowl. It's the World Series. We're going for endurance and representation of the entire country, not just the cities.

Once in a great while, a team scores the most runs but still loses the World Series. Ce la vie!

 

[rightwinger]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

 

[alang1216]

Elections have consequences… You can’t win every game

True but you have the right to try and fix rules that are unfair to you.

 

[g5000]

1824. Now there was an election.

Andrew Jackson not only won the most popular votes, he also won the most electoral votes. But he still didn't get elected. He did not score more than 50 percent of either, and so the contest went to the House where John Quincy Adams had a friend in the Speaker.

Adams won, and the phrase "corrupt bargain" entered the vernacular.

And that, boys and girls, was the end of The Era Of Good Feelings.

 

[Rustic]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Lol
With a pure popular vote rural America would lose every single presidential election... fact

 

[g5000]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Nope. That would make us a democracy and not a republic.

Disastrous.

Mob rule.

No thanks.

 

[The Original Tree]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

Lack of Voter ID laws is Voter Suppression via Voting Fraud.

What voter fraud? Voter ID is a solution in search of a problem. Ask the task force that Trump put together after the election and then quietly dissolved when they found nothing.

Estimated that 5 Million Illegal Aliens voted in the last election do to Motor Voter Registration in states where Illegal Aliens are Illegally give Drivers Licenses by Democrat Lead Governments.

Who estimated? You?

It's a made up figure the Rube Herd actually bleevs without a shred of evidence.

The Truth is, that The Democrat Party has been trying to steal America from Americans for the last few decades. This is why they oppose voter ID, and why they fight tooth and nail to keep a simple question of "are you an American citizen?" off of The Census.

They don't want us to know how many illegal aliens are here, and they don't want us to know how many of them illegally vote in our elections, and illegally help Leftist States steal Federal Tax Dollars off of Red States, and defraud them of their proper and legitimate representation in Congress.

Trump Is Right — Millions Of Illegals Probably Did Vote In 2016 | Investor's Business Daily

But, in fact, it's almost certain that illegals did vote — and in significant numbers. Whether it was three million or not is another question.

While states control the voter registration process, some states are so notoriously slipshod in their controls (California, Virginia and New York — all of which have political movements to legalize voting by noncitizens — come to mind) that it would be shocking if many illegals didn'tvote. Remember, a low-ball estimate says there are at least 11 million to 12 million illegals in the U.S., but that's based on faulty Census data. More likely estimates put the number at 20 million to 30 million.

What's disappointing is that instead of at least seriously considering Trump's charge, many media reports merely parrot leftist talking points and anti-Trump rhetoric by pushing the idea that Republicans and others not of the progressive left who seek to limit voting to citizens only are racist, xenophobic nuts.

But there is evidence to back Trump's claims. A 2014 study in the online Electoral Studies Journal shows that in the 2008 and 2010 elections, illegal immigrant votes were in fact quite high.

"We find that some noncitizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and congressional elections," wrote Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, both of Old Dominion University, and David C. Earnest of George Mason University.

More specifically, they write, "Noncitizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress."

Specifically, the authors say that illegals may have cast as many as 2.8 million votes in 2008 and 2010. That's a lot of votes. And when you consider the population of illegal inhabitants has only grown since then, it's not unreasonable to suppose that their vote has, too.

 

[g5000]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Lol
With a pure popular vote rural America would lose every single presidential election... fact

I tell you that the great cities rest upon these broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic. But destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country. - William Jennings Bryan

 

[rightwinger]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Nope. That would make us a democracy and not a republic.

Disastrous.

Mob rule.

No thanks.

We would still be a Republic with the Senate and House decided by the state

Only the President would be elected by popular nationwide vote

 

[g5000]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Nope. That would make us a democracy and not a republic.

Disastrous.

Mob rule.

No thanks.

We would still be a Republic with the Senate and House decided by the state

Only the President would be elected by popular nationwide vote

The Senate is elected by popular vote. It didn't used to be.

We were less of a Republic after the 17th amendment. And now you want to make it even worse.

 

[bendog]

I went to 270 to win and created a blank map, and just counted the rural states - West and South and old civil war border - that ALWAYS vote gop, and came up with 128 EV. And that doesn't count Tex, Fla, NC, Ohio, Ind, Iowa, or Virg.

The current system is just as unfair as a no-EC system, it is just unfair to different groups.

To make this argument, you would have to believe it is unfair for every state to have 2 senators regardless of their population.

So are you SURE you want to make this argument?

Do you want to defend the current state of the Congress? Anyway, the Senators powers are offset in the House by numbers, there is no such balance in the EC and why we keep getting minority presidents.

There have been only two "minority presidents" in the last 100 years. We don't "keep getting" presidents who have lost the popular vote.

Our system is working just fine.

As for the "current state of the Congress", any student of our history knows we have had much, much worse periods.

Two for Five now ….

1876 and 1888 were two for three.

Our system is working just fine.

I disagree. IF we apportioned EV within states, I might. But we are arguing eras of no free soil and coporate oligarchy with media saturation. Our 'system" is inherently undemocratic. The Founders intended that. But the Founders were not infallible humans. They wanted to deny the election to anyone who bypassed state legislatures. Reagan remade states, but he's been dead for a long time, and his party will never return

Compromise has been a dirty word since 1990. 1860 was not a great year for our Founders either.

 

[alang1216]

Lack of Voter ID laws is Voter Suppression via Voting Fraud.

What voter fraud? Voter ID is a solution in search of a problem. Ask the task force that Trump put together after the election and then quietly dissolved when they found nothing.

Estimated that 5 Million Illegal Aliens voted in the last election do to Motor Voter Registration in states where Illegal Aliens are Illegally give Drivers Licenses by Democrat Lead Governments.

Who estimated? You?

It's a made up figure the Rube Herd actually bleevs without a shred of evidence.

The Truth is, that The Democrat Party has been trying to steal America from Americans for the last few decades. This is why they oppose voter ID, and why they fight tooth and nail to keep a simple question of "are you an American citizen?" off of The Census.

They don't want us to know how many illegal aliens are here, and they don't want us to know how many of them illegally vote in our elections, and illegally help Leftist States steal Federal Tax Dollars off of Red States, and defraud them of their proper and legitimate representation in Congress.

Trump Is Right — Millions Of Illegals Probably Did Vote In 2016 | Investor's Business Daily

But, in fact, it's almost certain that illegals did vote — and in significant numbers. Whether it was three million or not is another question.

While states control the voter registration process, some states are so notoriously slipshod in their controls (California, Virginia and New York — all of which have political movements to legalize voting by noncitizens — come to mind) that it would be shocking if many illegals didn'tvote. Remember, a low-ball estimate says there are at least 11 million to 12 million illegals in the U.S., but that's based on faulty Census data. More likely estimates put the number at 20 million to 30 million.

What's disappointing is that instead of at least seriously considering Trump's charge, many media reports merely parrot leftist talking points and anti-Trump rhetoric by pushing the idea that Republicans and others not of the progressive left who seek to limit voting to citizens only are racist, xenophobic nuts.

But there is evidence to back Trump's claims. A 2014 study in the online Electoral Studies Journal shows that in the 2008 and 2010 elections, illegal immigrant votes were in fact quite high.

"We find that some noncitizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and congressional elections," wrote Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, both of Old Dominion University, and David C. Earnest of George Mason University.

More specifically, they write, "Noncitizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress."

Specifically, the authors say that illegals may have cast as many as 2.8 million votes in 2008 and 2010. That's a lot of votes. And when you consider the population of illegal inhabitants has only grown since then, it's not unreasonable to suppose that their vote has, too.

The study this is based on begins:

In spite of substantial public controversy, very little reliable data exists concerning the frequency with which non-citizen immigrants participate in United States elections.​

I found:

"There’s zero evidence of even dozens, let alone millions, of non citizens voting in this or any other election," said according to David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, a non-profit focused on election integrity.​

 

[BlindBoo]

So this compact violates the intention of the electoral college, and I therefore do not believe the Supreme Court would abide it.

The Constitution gives the state legislators the duty to choose their electors. How they choose is not up to any branch of the federal government. If the court were to strike down their method of choosing, who has the right to choose for them? Would they send it back to the states and say "Choose any other method besides that one" or what?

This is an attempt to circumvent the EC without a constitutional amendment.

I think it's an attempt to switch to a popular vote while still incorporating the EC system to choose the presidency.

If it passed in enough state to enact it, I think it will have unintended consensuses that could prove hilarious.

 

[Rustic]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Nope. That would make us a democracy and not a republic.

Disastrous.

Mob rule.

No thanks.

We would still be a Republic with the Senate and House decided by the state

Only the President would be elected by popular nationwide vote

Lol
With a pure popular vote rural America would zero say in presidential elections... fact

 

[BlindBoo]

Our Founders did not want America to be a democracy. They rightly saw we needed to be a republic.

But directly electing the president will hardly change us from a Republic to a straight up Democracy either.

 

[alang1216]

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Nope. That would make us a democracy and not a republic.

Disastrous.

Mob rule.

No thanks.

We would still be a Republic with the Senate and House decided by the state

Only the President would be elected by popular nationwide vote

Lol
With a pure popular vote rural America would zero say in presidential elections... fact

No they would just have the same say as everyone else.

 

[Rustic]

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Nope. That would make us a democracy and not a republic.

Disastrous.

Mob rule.

No thanks.

We would still be a Republic with the Senate and House decided by the state

Only the President would be elected by popular nationwide vote

Lol
With a pure popular vote rural America would zero say in presidential elections... fact

No they would just have the same say as everyone else.

Lol
Na, not really
Rural America would lose every single presidential election... because the numbers just are not there. Fact

 

[Rustic]

Our Founders did not want America to be a democracy. They rightly saw we needed to be a republic.

But directly electing the president will hardly change us from a Republic to a straight up Democracy either.

A pure popular vote makes for mob rule = shit eating democracy