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

[Londoner]

Whichever scenario is selected by a state - that is the state's choice.
Why should anyone outside of Florida tell Florida how to allocate their EC votes?

There was a very famous case where Florida's right to control its own election was superseded by an activist federal judiciary. The Supreme Court decided that the Florida Supremes would rather meet a purely administrative safe harbor deadline than count legal votes. They also used an equal protection law, which, if enforced, would invalidate all past elections and every future election (because standards change from county to county and state to state). Of course, this is why they said their ruling could not be used as a precedent in future cases. This was the greatest instance of a federal body arbitrarily controlling the states in my lifetime, and it renders mute any claim a particular party makes to State's Rights or Constitutionality.

 

[rightwinger]

Because of the amnesty push, now approved by the RINO GOP leaders, (suicide is simple, isn't it!) we better hope that the EC is dropped, as undocumented democrats are going to now control, Texas, and all of the other border states, including Florida, and that will tip the EC into a continual Democratic win cycle. The DIRECT vote is the only way the RIGHT could even have a small chance of taking back the country.....think about that!

You funny

 

[rightwinger]

Lest the left forgets... each branch is chosen differently ON PURPOSE... to ensure there is not just a system of tyranny of the masses... the electoral college gives the voice to the STATES... you know.. those things that actually give the power to the fed (not the other way around)... each state then has a voice, pretty important in a union of states

The Constitution says the states get to decide how their electoral votes are allocated. If a state says it will allocate based on the national popular vote, isn't that the voice of the state?

Not really.. for if the state votes 70% in favor of candidate A, 30% in favor of candidate B and Candidate B gets 50.01% of the national vote, it is not being done for the voice of the state, rather the voice of the other parts of the country... If a state chooses to divide its votes based on result in different parts of the states, all well and good as it is still about the state.... this is not the case with your scenario

This way the minority in a state have their vote count

If NY is 55% Dem and 45% Republican, the EV of those Republicans go to the Democratic candidate. Now the vote of those 45% NY Republicans would count towards the nationwide popular vote.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Whichever scenario is selected by a state - that is the state's choice.
Why should anyone outside of Florida tell Florida how to allocate their EC votes?

There was a very famous case where Florida's right to control its own election was superseded by an activist federal judiciary. The Supreme Court decided that the Florida Supremes would rather meet a purely administrative safe harbor deadline than count legal votes. They also used an equal protection law, which, if enforced, would invalidate all past elections and every future election (because standards change from county to county and state to state). Of course, this is why they said their ruling could not be used as a precedent in future cases. This was the greatest instance of a federal body arbitrarily controlling the states in my lifetime, and it renders mute any claim a particular party makes to State's Rights or Constitutionality.

That case was decided the way it was because the Florida Supreme court was given the opportunity to explain why they endorsed a cherry-picked recount rather than a recount that was justifiable under the equal-protection clause. You can just pick counties where the recount is likely to produce more votes for one side rather than the other. You have to say "all punch-card ballots" or all "butterfly ballots" or something other than "counties that are most likely to produce a win for Democrats,"

The SCOTUS ruled they only way possible - even those some activist judges dissented.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Because of the amnesty push, now approved by the RINO GOP leaders, (suicide is simple, isn't it!) we better hope that the EC is dropped, as undocumented democrats are going to now control, Texas, and all of the other border states, including Florida, and that will tip the EC into a continual Democratic win cycle. The DIRECT vote is the only way the RIGHT could even have a small chance of taking back the country.....think about that!

1) Republicans get to choose who are "real Republicans" and given the fact that most Republicans appear to be throwing the radical right under the bus right now, it appears that the radical right are the "RINOs."

2) Dropping the EC will hurt conservatives (that why Democrats are talking about wanting to do it). It's been spelled out pretty clearly here how the EC benefits the more rural voters. Those voters tend to vote conservative.

The influx of immigrants who typically vote more progressive only makes the EC "firewall" that much more important for conservatives.

 

[DiamondDave]

The Constitution says the states get to decide how their electoral votes are allocated. If a state says it will allocate based on the national popular vote, isn't that the voice of the state?

Not really.. for if the state votes 70% in favor of candidate A, 30% in favor of candidate B and Candidate B gets 50.01% of the national vote, it is not being done for the voice of the state, rather the voice of the other parts of the country... If a state chooses to divide its votes based on result in different parts of the states, all well and good as it is still about the state.... this is not the case with your scenario

This way the minority in a state have their vote count

If NY is 55% Dem and 45% Republican, the EV of those Republicans go to the Democratic candidate. Now the vote of those 45% NY Republicans would count towards the nationwide popular vote.

That is putting it down to the individual, not the state.... big difference.. the state as an entity matters in a union of states

 

[rightwinger]

Not really.. for if the state votes 70% in favor of candidate A, 30% in favor of candidate B and Candidate B gets 50.01% of the national vote, it is not being done for the voice of the state, rather the voice of the other parts of the country... If a state chooses to divide its votes based on result in different parts of the states, all well and good as it is still about the state.... this is not the case with your scenario

This way the minority in a state have their vote count

If NY is 55% Dem and 45% Republican, the EV of those Republicans go to the Democratic candidate. Now the vote of those 45% NY Republicans would count towards the nationwide popular vote.

That is putting it down to the individual, not the state.... big difference.. the state as an entity matters in a union of states

I know it does

And those states are deciding on how they want to distribute their electoral vote

 

[Vigilante]

Because of the amnesty push, now approved by the RINO GOP leaders, (suicide is simple, isn't it!) we better hope that the EC is dropped, as undocumented democrats are going to now control, Texas, and all of the other border states, including Florida, and that will tip the EC into a continual Democratic win cycle. The DIRECT vote is the only way the RIGHT could even have a small chance of taking back the country.....think about that!

You funny

You stupid

 

[DiamondDave]

This way the minority in a state have their vote count

If NY is 55% Dem and 45% Republican, the EV of those Republicans go to the Democratic candidate. Now the vote of those 45% NY Republicans would count towards the nationwide popular vote.

That is putting it down to the individual, not the state.... big difference.. the state as an entity matters in a union of states

I know it does

And those states are deciding on how they want to distribute their electoral vote

If it is based on state results or results of counties or parishes within the state, I have no problem with it... if it is based on something OUTSIDE the state like the popular vote of the rest of the country, I have a problem with it

 

[nodoginnafight]

That is putting it down to the individual, not the state.... big difference.. the state as an entity matters in a union of states

I know it does

And those states are deciding on how they want to distribute their electoral vote

If it is based on state results or results of counties or parishes within the state, I have no problem with it... if it is based on something OUTSIDE the state like the popular vote of the rest of the country, I have a problem with it

But if you don't live in that state, your problem is just that - your problem.

 

[Vigilante]

Because of the amnesty push, now approved by the RINO GOP leaders, (suicide is simple, isn't it!) we better hope that the EC is dropped, as undocumented democrats are going to now control, Texas, and all of the other border states, including Florida, and that will tip the EC into a continual Democratic win cycle. The DIRECT vote is the only way the RIGHT could even have a small chance of taking back the country.....think about that!

1) Republicans get to choose who are "real Republicans" and given the fact that most Republicans appear to be throwing the radical right under the bus right now, it appears that the radical right are the "RINOs."

2) Dropping the EC will hurt conservatives (that why Democrats are talking about wanting to do it). It's been spelled out pretty clearly here how the EC benefits the more rural voters. Those voters tend to vote conservative.

The influx of immigrants who typically vote more progressive only makes the EC "firewall" that much more important for conservatives.

1. That's your opinion, the fact that the republican base is made up of strong conservatives means little to you, I see. Republican is a political party whereas conservative is a philosophy.

2. What does it matter how those small states vote when the subversives have Kalipornia, Texas, Florida, and the whole North East....add up just those votes in the EC and what do you get? Add in traditional Dem states such as Wash. Or. Ohio, Ind. Ill Mich, Wisc and the game is lost! We're not even counting N.M. Ariz. and Hawaii that are even blue now, or will be when undocumented Dens are allowed to vote!

 

[editec]

The electoral college is an affront to democracy.

Of course the entire COTUS is, too, so let's not make too big a deal of it.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Because of the amnesty push, now approved by the RINO GOP leaders, (suicide is simple, isn't it!) we better hope that the EC is dropped, as undocumented democrats are going to now control, Texas, and all of the other border states, including Florida, and that will tip the EC into a continual Democratic win cycle. The DIRECT vote is the only way the RIGHT could even have a small chance of taking back the country.....think about that!

1) Republicans get to choose who are "real Republicans" and given the fact that most Republicans appear to be throwing the radical right under the bus right now, it appears that the radical right are the "RINOs."

2) Dropping the EC will hurt conservatives (that why Democrats are talking about wanting to do it). It's been spelled out pretty clearly here how the EC benefits the more rural voters. Those voters tend to vote conservative.

The influx of immigrants who typically vote more progressive only makes the EC "firewall" that much more important for conservatives.

1. That's your opinion, the fact that the republican base is made up of strong conservatives means little to you, I see. Republican is a political party whereas conservative is a philosophy.

2. What does it matter how those small states vote when the subversives have Kalipornia, Texas, Florida, and the whole North East....add up just those votes in the EC and what do you get? Add in traditional Dem states such as Wash. Or. Ohio, Ind. Ill Mich, Wisc and the game is lost! We're not even counting N.M. Ariz. and Hawaii that are even blue now, or will be when undocumented Dens are allowed to vote!

1. You certainly aren't suggesting that all people who claim to be conservative, fall in the same place on the ideological scale. The radical right aren't really conservatives - they are reactionaries. They are the RINOs.

2. What you have done here is to highlight what a small minority the radical-right is. And you are right, there is nothing that can rescue the radical right. They can continue to make a lot of noise, but their political influence is waning.

 

[Plasmaball]

The need for the Electoral College is over folks. It's the 21st century. We are capable, in the 21st century, of electing our President by popular vote. People living in bumfuck don't get their news by wagon train anymore. The hicks in bumfuck can be as educated as the folks in the "inner cities" are.

10 reasons why the Electoral College is a problem

Our Electoral College system is weird — and not in a good way

No..This would swing power more towards a few states.
This isn't a good idea and should not see the light of day.
We have a balance now...leave it....the real problem is partisan politics and that it costs millions to run, and special interests..

 

[Vigilante]

1) Republicans get to choose who are "real Republicans" and given the fact that most Republicans appear to be throwing the radical right under the bus right now, it appears that the radical right are the "RINOs."

2) Dropping the EC will hurt conservatives (that why Democrats are talking about wanting to do it). It's been spelled out pretty clearly here how the EC benefits the more rural voters. Those voters tend to vote conservative.

The influx of immigrants who typically vote more progressive only makes the EC "firewall" that much more important for conservatives.

1. That's your opinion, the fact that the republican base is made up of strong conservatives means little to you, I see. Republican is a political party whereas conservative is a philosophy.

2. What does it matter how those small states vote when the subversives have Kalipornia, Texas, Florida, and the whole North East....add up just those votes in the EC and what do you get? Add in traditional Dem states such as Wash. Or. Ohio, Ind. Ill Mich, Wisc and the game is lost! We're not even counting N.M. Ariz. and Hawaii that are even blue now, or will be when undocumented Dens are allowed to vote!

1. You certainly aren't suggesting that all people who claim to be conservative, fall in the same place on the ideological scale. The radical right aren't really conservatives - they are reactionaries. They are the RINOs.

2. What you have done here is to highlight what a small minority the radical-right is. And you are right, there is nothing that can rescue the radical right. They can continue to make a lot of noise, but their political influence is waning.

1. Tht's your problem right there. It's YOUR PARTY over principles. This is where the Democrats were back in the late 60's when the liberal wing was able to usurp power from men that were still country over party. I've said many times we need to form a third conservative party. It would not only punish the MODERATE Republicans that are the leaders it would give the run of the country to the liberals, who would in another decade or so, collapse our system of government with their DEBT. Once the entitlements are gone, the country can start to rebuild, but we will need many decades to get back to where we once were.

2. Again, your opinion, which means about as much as mine. Because we are not now pushing things as we did in 2010, doesn't mean we aren't out there. The IRS scandal, just shows how many of the 1200 CONSERVATIVE groups have been targeted by the current regime, and the RINO elite goes along with the subversives, not for the betterment of the country, but to KEEP POWER and WEALTH in their pockets. Argue that if you'd like!

 

[Erand7899]

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...

Your ignorance of the reason for the electoral college is right up there with your ignorance on most political issues.

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector."

A popular vote for the President of the United States is completely at the whim of the individual state legislatures. Consequently, it is obvious that the founders were not at all concerned with the uneducated masses. The founders desired that the President would be elected by states, with each state entitled to the number of votes that totaled the number of senators and representatives that each state was entitled to.

The electoral vote and the electoral college are separate issues. We can do away with the electoral college and retain the electoral vote. The electoral college was designed to prevent the election of a dead man, a sick man, or one who was found to be corrupt between the time the electors were chosen, and the electoral vote was counted. That is no longer necessary.

The original design was for the House of Representatives to be the people's house, representing the people of each state. The senate would represent the state legislatures, and the president would represent both.

 

[Katzndogz]

We are guaranteed a republican form of government not a democrat form of government.

 

[jillian]

We are guaranteed a republican form of government not a democrat form of government.

you do understand that has nothing to do with party affiliation, right?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

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


Guess which party rules these states.

The Communist Party

 

[Erand7899]

Reality bites eh...

No but stupidity does which is what this idea is.

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

Yes, it is a stupid idea, because it completely ends the concept of soverign states. A concept that modern/liberal socialists have never really understood. We are not a nation with 50 political sub-divisions, we are 50 soverign states united to form a union that benefits all.