It takes 3/4 of the States to ratify an Amendment to the Constitution: The Electoral College is safe

...and it takes a Constitutional amendment, not an interstate compact, to abolish the Electoral College.

Abolishing the Electoral College would be to disenfranchise the smaller states...

How so?
It’s obvious, Rural America does not have the numbers to matter in a pure popular vote... End of story
Nonsense.
Of course they matter. Each and every vote is counted.
Lol
Rural America would lose every single presidential election with a pure popular vote... That is all there is to it. Thank God for the electoral college

So, you're saying that the system as it is now is artificially propping up their lack of power.

Sounds like affirmative action.
Lol
No, this is supposed to be a republic not a shit eating democracy
 
Their math is built on the faulty premise of acting as though the popular vote is already in effect and meaningful.
Their math is built on the faulty premise of acting as though the popular vote is already in effect and meaningful.
It is. Every other election functions just fine by popular vote.
Lol
Pure popular vote ~ mob rule
Sure. By your logic, every elected official in your state from dog catcher to governor was elected by mob rule then.:cuckoo:
Lol
This is supposed to be a republic not a shit eating democracy... Pay attention boy

You still have your two Senators, fool.
Right now they're the only thing keeping Trump out of prison.
Lol
Na, not really
 
A fair system for the elites since the common citizen was not suppose to elect the president and vice president.
Exactly, the constitution says that the states are to choose electors based on the total number of representatives and senators, those electors are supposed to choose 2 people, one of them not living in the same state as them. The winner becomes president the runner up becomes vp. The vote of the citizen isnt supposed to even come into play, if i read it correctly.
 
A fair system for the elites since the common citizen was not suppose to elect the president and vice president.
Exactly, the constitution says that the states are to choose electors based on the total number of representatives and senators, those electors are supposed to choose 2 people, one of them not living in the same state as them. The winner becomes president the runner up becomes vp. The vote of the citizen isnt supposed to even come into play, if i read it correctly.
They mass populace was allowed to vote for the House and the Senators were to be put into the position by the governor of the state..
 
No, every election would be decided by the people of America. Each vote having equal value rather than the current system of a vote in Wyoming being worth 3 times the vote of a Californian. One person, one vote.

Not planning to remake the country on the basis of your faulty math equations.

Nothing wrong with my math your bitchiness.

Voters In Wyoming Have 3.6 Times The Voting Power That I Have. It's Time To End The Electoral College. | HuffPost

There's one thing very wrong with your math, Your Foolishness (aside from the fact that you let Hufflepuff Post do your thinking for you): It's based on a false and illogical premise. You ASSume that numbers of individual people voting is supposed to matter on a national scale.

It should matter in a small d democracy. I noticed you can’t actually counter the math with anything but bitchiness and pathetic attacking of the source.

Whose votes count the least in the Electoral College?

"I notice that you didn't do something you actually did, but which I'm choosing to pretend wasn't there."

And we don't happen to BE a democracy, dear. We happen to be a republic. In this case, that is an important distinction.

State representation in federal government has NEVER been intended to directly represent population on an exactly proportional scale. This is not a design flaw, or a breakdown of the system. It's quite intentional.

Republic, Democracy, not mutually exclusive.
 
You are 100% correct. Every election would be decided by the States with the most people. All the smile states votes would count for nothing.
No, every election would be decided by the people of America. Each vote having equal value rather than the current system of a vote in Wyoming being worth 3 times the vote of a Californian. One person, one vote.

The average person in Wyoming is likely worth more than three assholes from California likely even more.

^ Elitist.
 
...and it takes a Constitutional amendment, not an interstate compact, to abolish the Electoral College.

Abolishing the Electoral College would be to disenfranchise the smaller states...

How so?
It’s obvious, Rural America does not have the numbers to matter in a pure popular vote... End of story
Nonsense.
Of course they matter. Each and every vote is counted.
Lol
Rural America would lose every single presidential election with a pure popular vote... That is all there is to it. Thank God for the electoral college

Have you ever thought about rural Californians?
 
Incorrect. If enough states (the magic 270) agree to the popular vote compact, it's done.
Wrong.

That is an unconstitutional interstate compact that becomes federal law if congress consents, thereby bypassing the amendment process and working contrary tot the 12th.

.

They are almost there...we’ll maybe get to see...

See what? Whether or not Congress and the Courts let you get away with undermining and destroying our system of government to suit yourselves? Whether or not your incessant tantrums about not being able to get your way on every single thing you demand, every single time you demand it, pushes the nation to the point of an irreconcilable divide?

We'll see whose opinion is correct. Until 270 is reached and legal challenges begin, it's an exercise in conjecture.
 
No, every election would be decided by the people of America. Each vote having equal value rather than the current system of a vote in Wyoming being worth 3 times the vote of a Californian. One person, one vote.

Not planning to remake the country on the basis of your faulty math equations.

Nothing wrong with my math your bitchiness.

Voters In Wyoming Have 3.6 Times The Voting Power That I Have. It's Time To End The Electoral College. | HuffPost

There's one thing very wrong with your math, Your Foolishness (aside from the fact that you let Hufflepuff Post do your thinking for you): It's based on a false and illogical premise. You ASSume that numbers of individual people voting is supposed to matter on a national scale.

It should matter in a small d democracy. I noticed you can’t actually counter the math with anything but bitchiness and pathetic attacking of the source.

Whose votes count the least in the Electoral College?

"I notice that you didn't do something you actually did, but which I'm choosing to pretend wasn't there."

And we don't happen to BE a democracy, dear. We happen to be a republic. In this case, that is an important distinction.

State representation in federal government has NEVER been intended to directly represent population on an exactly proportional scale. This is not a design flaw, or a breakdown of the system. It's quite intentional.

Yes, we know what the slave owners set up. The argument is that it is no longer needed. It no longer takes weeks for news to reach the masses. The rural dweller can be as informed as the city dwellers. One person, one vote is as representative as it gets.

(And still lots of bitchy from you but zero facts or math)
 
I find it amusing that only big blue state liberals want to take power from smaller states so they can affect more punishment to those of the minority.
 
You are 100% correct. Every election would be decided by the States with the most people. All the smile states votes would count for nothing.
No, every election would be decided by the people of America. Each vote having equal value rather than the current system of a vote in Wyoming being worth 3 times the vote of a Californian. One person, one vote.


Still lying?

Once again each state has a minimum of two senators for states rights


.
 
Article V, USC:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

God Bless our Founding Fathers in their infinite wisdom. Even to this very day they watch over us, protecting us from the modern horrors of big centralized government.

How exactly do Democrats propose to compel the smaller states into submission to ratify an amendment abolishing the electoral college.

Notice I said "compel," because the majority of the States will not surrender the Electoral College willingly. It would take a full scale military invasion of the small States to force through such an amendment.

Nothing is 'safe' in politics.

If you don't know that - you know excrement about the Constitution.
 
Article V, USC:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

God Bless our Founding Fathers in their infinite wisdom. Even to this very day they watch over us, protecting us from the modern horrors of big centralized government.

How exactly do Democrats propose to compel the smaller states into submission to ratify an amendment abolishing the electoral college.

Notice I said "compel," because the majority of the States will not surrender the Electoral College willingly. It would take a full scale military invasion of the small States to force through such an amendment.

Nothing is 'safe' in politics.

If you don't know that - you know excrement about the Constitution.

This is a given
 
It is. Every other election functions just fine by popular vote.
Lol
Pure popular vote ~ mob rule
Sure. By your logic, every elected official in your state from dog catcher to governor was elected by mob rule then.:cuckoo:
Lol
This is supposed to be a republic not a shit eating democracy... Pay attention boy

You still have your two Senators, fool.
Right now they're the only thing keeping Trump out of prison.
Lol
Na, not really
Yes, exactly.
Senate GOP vows to quickly quash any impeachment charges
 
Lol
Pure popular vote ~ mob rule
Sure. By your logic, every elected official in your state from dog catcher to governor was elected by mob rule then.:cuckoo:
Lol
This is supposed to be a republic not a shit eating democracy... Pay attention boy

You still have your two Senators, fool.
Right now they're the only thing keeping Trump out of prison.
Lol
Na, not really
Yes, exactly.
Senate GOP vows to quickly quash any impeachment charges


And... it was a given the democrats should of won the Senate in 2016, what happened?


The current U.S. Senate has 54 Republicans and 45 Democrats (including one independent). The2016 Senate election takes place on November 8, 2016. There are 34 seats up in 2016, of which 24 are held by Republicans. Democrats will need to gain 4 or 5seats to take control.
upload_2019-6-1_6-59-48.png

270toWin.com › 2016-senate-election
2016 Senate Election Interactive Map - 270toWin
 
I wouldn't say it's a done deal, even if the Compact reaches 270 it'll get challenged in court. No telling how that goes.

There's no money changing hands, so yes there's easy telling how that goes.

Other thing is, what happens if legislatures and governorships in Compact states flip to RED in 2020, they could change their laws and get out of the Compact. It could be that voters in some of those Compact states might vote out the fucking democrats who disenfranchised their vote in 2020.

:lmao:

They were ALREADY disenfranchised. We ALL are, when up to half, or in multitudinous cases MORE than half of the state's popular vote gets immediately tossed in the shitcan (e.g. as mentioned earlier Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Colorado, Michigan, North Cackalackee, Florida, Virginia, Utah, AridZona in the last one alone). I don't know what kind of hallucinogenics you need to bring a level of self-delusion to have posted that with a straight face but keep those suspect substances locked up wouldja.

By the way it's "Democrats". Proper names get capitals.

That disenfranchisement is due to how the states allocate their EVs, which is an obvious discrepancy. This would be one way to change that allocation --- which is each state's prerogative, per Article II Section 2 of the COTUS.


It's going to be an election issue in those states next year, do you want your state's electoral votes to go for the candidate that your state picked or the candidate that the fucking Californians picked? Many of whom probably aren't legal.

:lol: Unfortunately the real world doesn't run on your "three million illegals" fantasies. :haha:
 
You are 100% correct. Every election would be decided by the States with the most people. All the smile states votes would count for nothing.
No, every election would be decided by the people of America. Each vote having equal value rather than the current system of a vote in Wyoming being worth 3 times the vote of a Californian. One person, one vote.

The average person in Wyoming is likely worth more than three assholes from California likely even more.

Ah, so all men are NOT created equal. Thanks for uh, clearing that up. :rolleyes:

Say... what happens in the event a Californian moves to Wyoming? Do they go through some kind of Transmogrifier Room where they get de-asshollized? Howzat work?


Blanket generalizers are such cat toys.....
 
You are 100% correct. Every election would be decided by the States with the most people. All the smile states votes would count for nothing.
No, every election would be decided by the people of America. Each vote having equal value rather than the current system of a vote in Wyoming being worth 3 times the vote of a Californian. One person, one vote.

One person, one vote.

Even the illegal aliens and the dead.
 
...and it takes a Constitutional amendment, not an interstate compact, to abolish the Electoral College.
Nobody is abolishing the electoral college. They are working within it to see that the majority is actually represented.
even if it's at the expense of the smaller states?

this really how we push a UNION of American citizens?
Are you OK with it being used to disenfranchise millions of voters in the larger states?
Larger state have more EC votes, they're not at all "disenfranchised"
Smaller states EC votes carry more weight. Larger states are indeed disenfranchised by the electoral college.

Make you a deal, Hillary becomes President of Los Angeles takes the illegals, nonliving and Antifa Progressives with her and we build Our Wall around it
 

Forum List

Back
Top