Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
I would sue that state for a million dollars for every citizen it defrauded. That Lawsuits alone would bankrupt the state.That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
And frankly, common sense dictates that any state government attempting to do so would place itself in great jeopardy.
Unlawful? What law are you referring to?That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
Look Dummy, the Electoral College is set up as a State by State Independent series of 50 Independent National Elections. Each State votes for the President Independently of all other states. Then those states votes are added to the candidates EV haul for that election.Unlawful? What law are you referring to?That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
You are dead wrong.That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
Nothing unconstitutional about it. The only constitutional challenge is if it is an interstate compact that requires the approval of Congress or not.
You cannot create an Interstate Compact that Defrauds Voters of their Constitutional Right to be Represented in Government.That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
Nothing unconstitutional about it. The only constitutional challenge is if it is an interstate compact that requires the approval of Congress or not.
That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
Nothing unconstitutional about it. The only constitutional challenge is if it is an interstate compact that requires the approval of Congress or not.
You are dead wrong.That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
Nothing unconstitutional about it. The only constitutional challenge is if it is an interstate compact that requires the approval of Congress or not.
Let's say Donald Trump loses in Maine, and Queer Libphuckistan wins Maine.
Donald Trump goes on to win The Popular Vote.
How many Law Suits are going to happen in MAINE, when Maine's Voters find out that their Electoral Votes are going to go to Donald Trump, and not Queer Libphuckistan who won The State of MAINE?
It will end up in SCOTUS and struck down because Maine's Government is Disenfranchising Maine's Voters.
Why do you got to show your stupid today?
Yea...well like most things there are exceptions. Various Constitutional Amendments prevent what you are talking aboutConstitutionally states can apportion their electoral votes in any way they see fit
Not entirely accurate. Under your standard, it would be legal for a formerly Confederate state to ensure its EC votes would NEVER go to a black candidate, and I do believe it is a Very Bad Thing to nullify the voices of minority voters.
Or a state could ensure it would never vote for a Muslim, or a homosexual candidate.
So, if it is, as you say, constitutional, then laws prohibiting such things are UNconstitutional, and must be overturned.
That Law will go down in flames as it's Unconstitutional.
You cannot lawfully assign your Electoral Votes to someone who loses your State's Election, just because they lost in your state, but won the overall popular vote.
Nothing unconstitutional about it. The only constitutional challenge is if it is an interstate compact that requires the approval of Congress or not.
What do you think the reaction of a state's voters will be if the state government arbitrarily negates their majority preference in favor of a popular winner?
Wait, are you saying the fee will refuse to accept the electoral votes from a state if they don't like the way they are arrived at?No it isn't. States rights.Will end up in court. Definitely a Constitutional issue.
No.... The state has the right to present the electoral votes anyway they like. The feds are under no obligation to accept them in an improper form.
It will be overturned... And quickly too I imagine.
Jo
I don't think that's true.
Absolutely it's true. Do you really believe that had Ovama won the popular vote in a formerly Confederate state, but the state's EC votes went to Mitt Romney, the feds would accept them? No, they would not have.
Why wouldn't they accept them?
"There have been a total of 167[5] instances of faithlessness as of 2016. Nearly all have voted for third party candidates or non-candidates, as opposed to switching their support to a major opposing candidate. Ultimately, faithless electors have only impacted the outcome of an election once, during the 1796 election where Thomas Pinckney would have become the President and John Adams the Vice President.[6]
The United States Constitution does not specify a notion of pledging; no federal law or constitutional statute binds an elector's vote to anything. All pledging laws originate at the state level."
Faithless elector - Wikipedia
In 2018, 19 states had federal monitors to ensure they followed federal election laws, primarily to ensure that no voters were prevented from voting and that fraud did not occur. Given this, do you really think a blatantly racist reversal of a state's popular vote would allowed to stand? In 2008, Obama beat McCain in NC. Under your standard, NC could have given its EC votes to McCain anyway, on the grounds that they would never vote for a black candidate. Still think that would stand? And suppose enough states took that action that it denied a black candidate the presidency, even though he/she won both the national popular vote and the popular vote in those states.
So the state's ability to assign their EC votes is NOT absolute. Therefore, Congress CAN step in and alter the situation.
This will result in a civil war.Sounds to me like a perverted form of voter suppression....no matter how the state votes its legislature gives its electoral votes to the person who at the end of voting wins the popular vote throughout the entire country....also sounds like a strong SCOTUS issue!
Maine's lawmakers passed a bill that would give the state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who won the national popular vote, taking a step toward becoming the 15th state to enact such a law. The Maine Senate voted 19-16 Tuesday to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would give all committed states' electoral votes to the winning popular vote candidate should the group accrue the 270 votes necessary for a majority.
California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington state and the District of Columbia have all committed to the pact. The most recent addition, New Mexico, put the total at 189 electoral votes....I believe those listed states are all DeathRAT controlled states!
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Has anyone ever bothered to determine how these states will determine the national popular vote winner since there is no government entity that determines that result?
The President and Vice President are elected via the Electoral College, so the national vote is actually never even counted, except in the media and for historical purposes. No one actually certifies the result.
