|
Replies: 21
| visibility 434
|
110%er [6101]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 10117
Joined: 11/1/11
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [47750]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30413
Joined: 11/15/99
|
This seems destined for a SCOTUS challenge.
Apr 6, 2019, 9:06 AM
|
|
The 12th Amendment says:
"The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President"
It does not allow for a "pooling" between states.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1405]
TigerPulse: 54%
Posts: 3412
Joined: 1/10/13
|
Re: This seems destined for a SCOTUS challenge.
Apr 6, 2019, 9:09 AM
|
|
It doesn't prohibit that either
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47750]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30413
Joined: 11/15/99
|
Which is exactly why it will go to the courts.***
Apr 6, 2019, 9:18 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6101]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 10117
Joined: 11/1/11
|
Re: This seems destined for a SCOTUS challenge.
Apr 6, 2019, 9:21 AM
[ in reply to This seems destined for a SCOTUS challenge. ] |
|
Yes. And if you look at the political affiliation of the states doing this it looks like a brazen attempt to force electoral votes to the left:
*The most populated areas are sanctuary cities harboring fugitive aliens.
*The establishment does not want to close or control our borders.
*Voter fraud (popular vote) will allow more electoral votes to be awarded to the left’s candidate.
*Repeat until all power is acquired.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97716]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64855
Joined: 7/13/02
|
They won't challenge it. States have latitude to decide how
Apr 6, 2019, 10:43 AM
[ in reply to This seems destined for a SCOTUS challenge. ] |
|
They select electors and how they vote. They used to have the legislature pick the electors instead of the voters. If they want to change electors to represent their popular vote they can. The founders though preferred the legislature do it and supported a popular vote least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155901]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65819
Joined: 5/6/13
|
yes, but interstate pooling of votes via an agreement
Apr 6, 2019, 10:45 AM
|
|
Is absolutely a new and debatable concept. You addressed the intrastate aspect of it, and I agree, but this is new.
It will be challenged also by those within the states who feel like their votes are now disenfranchised by voters a couple thousand miles away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97716]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64855
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Can't do interstate. Didn't know they would do it together..
Apr 6, 2019, 11:25 AM
|
|
They can't but functionally it would make little difference if each state reflects the popular vote. But each state must submit their electors no matter what.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155901]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65819
Joined: 5/6/13
|
Re: Can't do interstate. Didn't know they would do it together..
Apr 6, 2019, 11:32 AM
|
|
“The NPVIC is an agreement between states to pool their electoral votes together for the candidate who wins the states’ aggregated popular vote. States will award their electoral votes regardless of individual state voting results.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97716]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64855
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Can't do. Not legally. But who cares about that anymore***
Apr 6, 2019, 1:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34108]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33611
Joined: 9/13/99
|
They can, because the states are free to use any method.***
Apr 8, 2019, 7:32 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I'm sorry, this makes no sense to me.
Apr 7, 2019, 8:04 AM
|
|
Wouldn't this make it more likely for a Republican candidate to win? These are all "blue" states anyway. So if a Democrat wins the national popular vote, then the same electoral votes are cast that already would have been.
But if a Republican wins the national popular vote, then all these electoral votes, which would have been Democratic, will become Republican.
No?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Never mind, now I see that it's not a national popular vote
Apr 7, 2019, 8:07 AM
|
|
but a popular vote just among the "compacted" states. Seems like it wouldn't change many, if any, electoral votes.
Also, it's stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34108]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33611
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Never mind, now I see that it's not a national popular vote
Apr 8, 2019, 7:34 AM
|
|
It's unusual to see you this judgmental on an issue you first learned about 5 seconds ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31891]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37177
Joined: 11/22/03
|
No, it's the states agreeing to pledge their electors to...
Apr 8, 2019, 7:56 AM
|
|
vote the way the national popular vote goes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31891]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37177
Joined: 11/22/03
|
Should have added...
Apr 8, 2019, 7:59 AM
|
|
"according to the guy how founded the concept". I heard him interviewed on the Michael Smerconish show and it was discussed in great detail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155901]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65819
Joined: 5/6/13
|
That’s incorrect as I understand it.
Apr 8, 2019, 9:57 AM
[ in reply to No, it's the states agreeing to pledge their electors to... ] |
|
It’s the states in the agreement pledging their votes to the aggregate total popular vote winner from within the states in the compact.
So just using nice round numbers, let’s say candidate A wins New Mexico by 100k votes. If you add up the other states in the agreement, and Candidate B is the popular vote winner in those states by more than 100k votes, Colorado’s electoral votes go to Candidate B, despite candidate A clearly winning the state.
Any popular vote totals from states not in the agreement will be disregarded. They aren’t looking to partner with South Carolina and Alabama in this effort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Why would a state cast electoral votes
Apr 8, 2019, 9:57 AM
|
|
based on anything besides how that specific state votes? What reason would a state have for doing this, besides politicians wanting to manipulate an election toward a particular candidate?
Not only do I think the concept is illogical, I don't even see how it would be "effective" in changing anything for these states doing it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155901]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65819
Joined: 5/6/13
|
For purple states with Dem leaders in power right now,
Apr 8, 2019, 10:00 AM
|
|
This is an effort to make them solidly blue states by hitching their electoral votes to solidly blue states.
It would be very effective in ensuring a Democrat President for perpetuity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Didn't really see any purple states...
Apr 8, 2019, 11:14 AM
|
|
Maybe Colorado, but I thought it was trending blue, and would continue to go that way in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1187
Joined: 1/3/19
|
Re: Popular vote compact adds New Mexico reaching 189 electoral votes.
Apr 8, 2019, 5:43 AM
|
|
There is a counter compact in the works. It calls for states to award all if their electoral votes to the Presidential candidate who wins the popular vote in the most counties nationwide.
That would be very, very good for Republican candidates if it gets traction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 21
| visibility 434
|
|
|
50
