The attempt to dismantle the electoral college begins. SCOTUS to hear arguments.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Grampa Murked U, Jan 19, 2020.

  1. Grampa Murked U
    Offline

    Grampa Murked U Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    Messages:
    77,402
    Thanks Received:
    14,130
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Ratings:
    +60,238
    • Informative Informative x 5
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 4
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. LeeOnLido
    Online

    LeeOnLido Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2018
    Messages:
    4,002
    Thanks Received:
    340
    Trophy Points:
    170
    Ratings:
    +3,207
    what the left wants to do is evidence that millions of illegal votes were casted in 2016. thats the only way they can win elections, does anyone actually believe that not one illegal alien voted in 2016?
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. kyzr
    Offline

    kyzr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    12,033
    Thanks Received:
    2,399
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +11,754
    The USSC is looking at the "electors" and state rights, not necessarily the electoral college.
    1. Can electors be bound to the vote's decision? (i.e. no "faithless" EC voters)
    2. Can states tie electoral votes to the national popular vote? (voids the state voters)
    3. Can states use virtual electors, meaning no physical electors, just use the states' EC votes as voted on (Constitutional?)
    4. Can states allocate EC votes per congressional district? (instead of winner take all)

    It will be interesting to see how much flexibility states have regarding the EC.
     
    • Informative Informative x 8
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2020
  4. TroglocratsRdumb
    Offline

    TroglocratsRdumb Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2017
    Messages:
    14,107
    Thanks Received:
    2,699
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +19,229
    The Corrupt Democratic Party cannot function in a free democracy*, therefore they must destroy it.
     
    • Winner Winner x 5
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  5. Seawytch
    Offline

    Seawytch Information isnt Advocacy

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    38,423
    Thanks Received:
    5,234
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    Peaking out from the redwoods
    Ratings:
    +12,805
    You think our entire nation will end if we become an actual democracy? Yeah, okay....
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  6. Circe
    Offline

    Circe Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Messages:
    4,834
    Thanks Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    Aeaea
    Ratings:
    +1,973
    I'm thinking this USSC input is a good thing, not a bad thing: apparently TEN electors voted, or tried to vote, for someone besides who they were supposed to!! That's pretty awful and needs fixing.

    From the article I read, I am not clear whether they were replaced or stopped before they did that, or whether their faithless votes counted AGAINST Trump.

    The article said that analysis showed that fully five past presidential elections would have been changed by this many faithless votes happening! This is a much worse problem than I realized. I am sure it's not in the Constitution that these people get to simply decide the election on their own (purchased or grumpy) opinions!!

    Important topic, thanx to the Thread Parent.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2020
  7. Circe
    Offline

    Circe Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Messages:
    4,834
    Thanks Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    Aeaea
    Ratings:
    +1,973
    I sure would like to see another Trump appointee on the Supreme Court soon ---- very soon.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. colfax_m
    Offline

    colfax_m VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2019
    Messages:
    5,267
    Thanks Received:
    275
    Trophy Points:
    65
    Ratings:
    +1,944
    This is a great post. I think the constitution demand electors be appointed but precedent is on the side of allowing states to enforce any number of rules on those individuals since the constitution is silent on this.

    However, original intent is for electors to be independent, so it’ll be interesting to see if we have originalists or strict textualists as majority.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Maxdeath
    Offline

    Maxdeath Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,562
    Thanks Received:
    754
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Ratings:
    +4,228
    Actually I believe that the state is bound to have their electoral votes by the will of its people. If it decides to go with the so called popular vote then it is negating the votes of its citizens.
    A faithless electorate should not be allowed. That person has promised to cast a vote for whoever was voted for by the citizenry of the state. Their vote was counted as well as everyone else. Once they are chosen to vote in the electoral college the become an arm of the people. Their pledge, promise should mean more then their personal beliefs or feelings.
    I have no problem with virtual virtual electors.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    89,640
    Thanks Received:
    25,076
    Trophy Points:
    2,260
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +62,021
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1

Share This Page