'Hacking the Constitution': States Quietly Plan to Ditch Electoral College

[Lovebears65]

States Quietly Sign Onto Plan to Change Election System | Fox News Insider


Guess which party rules these states.

 

[American Horse]

It would seem that if all states followed that policy that there would be the same end result - but in actuality the result would be more elections like Bush/Gore in 2000. And a major problem with that happening would be that it would not be able to be resolved in a single state but instead would be fought over country wide.

That will mean that voter fraud would have exponentially greater impact.

It would also mean that the side with the greatest public media voice would have an outsized advantage.

 

[Moonglow]

He said the “plan is to subvert the will of the Constitution and the founders.”

Yeah the Founders thought the masses uneducated and unable to vote for their leaders....how elitist of them...

 

[whitehall]

Be careful what you wish for. Among others, Lincoln, Wilson, Truman, Kennedy and Clinton (twice) were elected with less than the popular majority vote.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

He said the “plan is to subvert the will of the Constitution and the founders.”

Yeah the Founders thought the masses uneducated and unable to vote for their leaders....how elitist of them...

Yeppers, that they were, and also dead on...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Be careful what you wish for. Among others, Lincoln, Wilson, Truman, Kennedy and Clinton (twice) were elected with less than the popular majority vote.

True enough, but in the run-off the results would have likely been the same. They would not have had issues breaking 50% plus one.

 

[OKTexas]

And the libs are accusing republicans of wanting to disenfranchise voters. This plan could disenfranchise whole states, not just individuals.

 

[blackhawk]

I'm sure those who live in the smaller states and low population districts will thrilled to find out the politicians would care even less about them then they already do.

 

[Nutz]

And the libs are accusing republicans of wanting to disenfranchise voters. This plan could disenfranchise whole states, not just individuals.

Absolutely. Not to mention, residents in the bigger cities will determine the outcome for the rest of the state. Under this plan, why would a politician even bother to campaijgn in rural areas? To win NY, just campaign in NYC. To win IL, stay in Chicago...and so on.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nothing unconstitutional and illegal about this, although I do not think it is wise.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

And the libs are accusing republicans of wanting to disenfranchise voters. This plan could disenfranchise whole states, not just individuals.

Absolutely. Not to mention, residents in the bigger cities will determine the outcome for the rest of the state. Under this plan, why would a politician even bother to campaijgn in rural areas? To win NY, just campaign in NYC. To win IL, stay in Chicago...and so on.

Yep. The flyover doesn't matter a damn, it never did.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I'm sure those who live in the smaller states and low population districts will thrilled to find out the politicians would care even less about them then they already do.

Reality bites eh...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

And the libs are accusing republicans of wanting to disenfranchise voters. This plan could disenfranchise whole states, not just individuals.

Oh, their votes count, unlike your plans, they just won't be thought of as important of to visit. That's common sense actually.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

He said the “plan is to subvert the will of the Constitution and the founders.”

Yeah the Founders thought the masses uneducated and unable to vote for their leaders....how elitist of them...

The founders wanted to be led?

That is a new one on me.

 

[OKTexas]

And the libs are accusing republicans of wanting to disenfranchise voters. This plan could disenfranchise whole states, not just individuals.

Absolutely. Not to mention, residents in the bigger cities will determine the outcome for the rest of the state. Under this plan, why would a politician even bother to campaijgn in rural areas? To win NY, just campaign in NYC. To win IL, stay in Chicago...and so on.

Yep. The flyover doesn't matter a damn, it never did.

Fine, we'll stop shipping you food, then see how it doesn't matter a damn.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Absolutely. Not to mention, residents in the bigger cities will determine the outcome for the rest of the state. Under this plan, why would a politician even bother to campaijgn in rural areas? To win NY, just campaign in NYC. To win IL, stay in Chicago...and so on.

Yep. The flyover doesn't matter a damn, it never did.

Fine, we'll stop shipping you food, then see how it doesn't matter a damn.

Do so. We can import but you can't export. Interesting eh?

 

[blackhawk]

I'm sure those who live in the smaller states and low population districts will thrilled to find out the politicians would care even less about them then they already do.

Reality bites eh...

No but stupidity does which is what this idea is.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

The founding fathers set up the electoral college because they believed in states rights. To them the states were countries and something like the EC was obviously essential. All elections, even of federal officials, had to be conducted at the state level.

Those that wish to rid us of the EC want the feds running everything.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Stirewalt pointed out that this plan is part of a larger trend on the part of "frustrated" liberals who haven't been able to bring about the changes they want.

Ignorant partisan nonsense.

Having won four of the last six presidential elections, ‘liberals’ aren’t ‘frustrated’ about anything.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I'm sure those who live in the smaller states and low population districts will thrilled to find out the politicians would care even less about them then they already do.

Reality bites eh...

No but stupidity does which is what this idea is.

The president being elected by a popular vote is stupid? Interesting...