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

Invalidating the popular vote of their citizens is irrelevant. The founders had no intention to have electors be bound to the popular vote of citizens.

Neither did the founders have any intention to have electoral votes distributed through Congressional districts. The two Constitutional options are direct popular vote within a State or a vote by its legislature. Invalidating the popular vote for President is not one of them.

There are no such "two Constitutional optiojns". You just optioned to pull that out of your ass. What the ACTUAL Constitution says is that each state chooses its electors "in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct" and says *NOTHING* about how they must direct it.

Do you deliberately misconstrue what I write or are you just too stupid to understand it? I did not say that the Constitution specifies two options for each state to choose its electors; I said that there were two options that were Constitutional.

Providing for a direct popular vote but then invalidating the results through Congressional District manipulations violates federal voting rights. In contrast, awarding Electoral votes on a proportional basis does not. We will have to see with which of us the Supreme Court agrees.

Again --- the Constitution says a state's electors are chosen, QUOTE, "in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct", END QUOTE. It does not say anything about "but don't do it by district or proportional to the vote". It doesn't say anything about needing to hold a vote at all. Holding a popular vote IS an option; NOT holding a vote is an option; apportioning electors proportional to that vote IS an option; apportioning electors by district IS an option; apportioning EVs as WTA is unfortunately also an option. It's left wide open.
 
It's eminently explainable once you grok what the aforementioned "Three-Fifths Compromise" and "Slave Power" were all about. Virginia was the largest most electorally-powerful state at the time, directly because of that setup. It was the big winner. Statistically we should have had at most ONE from Virginia or any other state. Four out of five, all with two terms? There's sump'm behind that -- the Slave Power Electrical College.

No.....they definitely did not explain any of that in my elementary school. :) We always called it The War Between the States and the cause was whether states had the right to leave the Union. I gather that this as the cause is controversial today.

aHA. The old UDC textbooks at work.

Watch this.



That would lead us off to a whole tangent about the Cult of the Lost Cause and statue removal, best done elsewhere...

Ironic that they taught this in East Tennessee which was dead set against the War.
shakehead.gif



So many misconceptions about this stuff. I was driving with the radio on and heard some talking head bemoaning the fact that there were no black people on the Andy Griffith Show. "You're in the South and you don't have black people?" he says. I pounded my dashboard over the ignorance.


I'm not aware of current "national insurrections" in Virginia though, even though both your state and mine border it.

Not this week.

I think these things take awhile to build up: namely, between ten and fifteen years. Like WWI, which in 1900 everyone knew was coming, but ---- friction slows things down. Let's see: 2016 is my Date of Truth --- so I'd say around 2030, bust-up.

Umma be out of town that day. :uhh:
 
. Can states allocate EC votes per congressional district? (instead of winner take all)
This is a good question.
In MN Hillary only won by 75K popular votes and took all 10 electoral votes for the state. Effectively eliminating the voices of rural districts that were fully red on the electoral map.
If the state allowed the vote to be split, Trump would have gotten at least half the electors in the state.
MN is not a liberal state as only a few populated counties speak for the entire state.View attachment 301262
My district 6 which includes the northern counties of the metro region extending to St. Cloud to the northwest 60 miles from the Twin Cities is republican along with much of the state. Yet in the eyes of the rest of the country the state is determined to be liberal, far from actual reality.
Even though the electoral college is supposed to protect small states from the tyranny of large states. Rules in MN use the tyranny of a large city population to override the voices of smaller communities.
Should instead the rules use the tyranny of rural communities to overrule the voices of the majority of the citizens?
No.
If you paid attention, the votes in my state would have been split, giving voice to the rural districts instead of entire state going to Hillary who only took state by 1.5%. About 2 million live in metro and about 2 million rural. There is no majority of any party in this state, just the appearance of it.
 
Supreme Court to Look at Electoral College Rules

Depending on the outcome this could be the beginning of the end of our nations great experiment.
You don’t think this is worth debate? The EC was set up a long time ago and our society has evolved tremendously since then. What was a smart system then may not be smart now. Either way, why do you feel it’s a threat to our great experiment?
 
. Can states allocate EC votes per congressional district? (instead of winner take all)
This is a good question.
In MN Hillary only won by 75K popular votes and took all 10 electoral votes for the state. Effectively eliminating the voices of rural districts that were fully red on the electoral map.
If the state allowed the vote to be split, Trump would have gotten at least half the electors in the state.
MN is not a liberal state as only a few populated counties speak for the entire state.View attachment 301262
My district 6 which includes the northern counties of the metro region extending to St. Cloud to the northwest 60 miles from the Twin Cities is republican along with much of the state. Yet in the eyes of the rest of the country the state is determined to be liberal, far from actual reality.
Even though the electoral college is supposed to protect small states from the tyranny of large states. Rules in MN use the tyranny of a large city population to override the voices of smaller communities.
Should instead the rules use the tyranny of rural communities to overrule the voices of the majority of the citizens?
No.
If you paid attention, the votes in my state would have been split, giving voice to the rural districts instead of entire state going to Hillary who only took state by 1.5%. About 2 million live in metro and about 2 million rural. There is no majority of any party in this state, just the appearance of it.

I'm not opposed to that either. I think proportional allocation of electoral votes based on percentage vote won in the state makes a lot of sense.

Clinton would have won in 2016 had that been the case.

R for Political Data Science Week 10: What If Each State Allocated Their Electoral College Votes Proportionally? | The Crosstab by G. Elliott Morris
 
The Electoral College is in the Constitution. Only liberals could think you could get the Constitution declared unconstitutional.
 
The Electoral College is in the Constitution. Only liberals could think you could get the Constitution declared unconstitutional.

That would be a neat trick since Liberals wrote the Constitution. I dunno, this has gotta violate some law of physics.
 
Supreme Court to Look at Electoral College Rules

Depending on the outcome this could be the beginning of the end of our nations great experiment.
You don’t think this is worth debate? The EC was set up a long time ago and our society has evolved tremendously since then. What was a smart system then may not be smart now. Either way, why do you feel it’s a threat to our great experiment?

OP seems to have vanished from his own debate.

Course I'm sure he's busy watching his football team. But that does tell us which is the more important.
 
Supreme Court to Look at Electoral College Rules

Depending on the outcome this could be the beginning of the end of our nations great experiment.

You think our entire nation will end if we become an actual democracy? Yeah, okay....

We are a Democratic Republic and never been a Democracy for a reason...

The left hate the idea smaller States can override a popular vote that happened because of a landslide victory in California...

Make sure your candidate win the right amount of States to become President...
 
Supreme Court to Look at Electoral College Rules

Depending on the outcome this could be the beginning of the end of our nations great experiment.
The Electoral College is one of the best things our forefathers came up with. It, of course, prevents just a few states or cities from determining the president for ALL of our country. The Dim Dems seemed to have no problem with it until their beloved Hildabeast was defeated in 2016. We HAVE to keep the Electoral College, it's the fair and RIGHT way to elect our presidents.
 
Supreme Court to Look at Electoral College Rules

Depending on the outcome this could be the beginning of the end of our nations great experiment.

You think our entire nation will end if we become an actual democracy? Yeah, okay....

We are a Democratic Republic and never been a Democracy for a reason...

The left hate the idea smaller States can override a popular vote that happened because of a landslide victory in California...

Make sure your candidate win the right amount of States to become President...

You might wanna reread that while you can still edit.
 
Supreme Court to Look at Electoral College Rules

Depending on the outcome this could be the beginning of the end of our nations great experiment.

You think our entire nation will end if we become an actual democracy? Yeah, okay....

We are a Democratic Republic and never been a Democracy for a reason...

The left hate the idea smaller States can override a popular vote that happened because of a landslide victory in California...

Make sure your candidate win the right amount of States to become President...

You might wanna reread that while you can still edit.

What part?

We are a Republic and never been a damn Democracy, so I will not edit that.

The part you believe the Popular vote should override the Electoral College?

Not changing that either.

So what part Pogo do you believe I am wrong about and let be clear California is the only reason Clinton won the Popular vote!
 
Supreme Court to Look at Electoral College Rules

Depending on the outcome this could be the beginning of the end of our nations great experiment.

You think our entire nation will end if we become an actual democracy? Yeah, okay....

We are a Democratic Republic and never been a Democracy for a reason...

The left hate the idea smaller States can override a popular vote that happened because of a landslide victory in California...

Make sure your candidate win the right amount of States to become President...

You might wanna reread that while you can still edit.

What part?

We are a Republic and never been a damn Democracy, so I will not edit that.

The part you believe the Popular vote should override the Electoral College?

Not changing that either.

So what part Pogo do you believe I am wrong about and let be clear California is the only reason Clinton won the Popular vote!

The middle part. Because it doesn't say what you seem to think it says.
Followed by the last part, because there simply is no "required number of states".
 
Supreme Court to Look at Electoral College Rules

Depending on the outcome this could be the beginning of the end of our nations great experiment.
You don’t think this is worth debate? The EC was set up a long time ago and our society has evolved tremendously since then. What was a smart system then may not be smart now. Either way, why do you feel it’s a threat to our great experiment?

OP seems to have vanished from his own debate.

Course I'm sure he's busy watching his football team. But that does tell us which is the more important.
Im doing both while also walking around and chewing gum. How do you like them apples?!
 
They could use some help in The House since the past 2 years have been a dismal failure for them.

Maybe you can send Pelosi a Bribe to get you a job.

Supreme Court to Look at Electoral College Rules

Depending on the outcome this could be the beginning of the end of our nations great experiment.
You don’t think this is worth debate? The EC was set up a long time ago and our society has evolved tremendously since then. What was a smart system then may not be smart now. Either way, why do you feel it’s a threat to our great experiment?

OP seems to have vanished from his own debate.

Course I'm sure he's busy watching his football team. But that does tell us which is the more important.
Im doing both while also walking around and chewing gum. How do you like them apples?!
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top