A possible suggestion for a Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina, New York Prsditential vote pact.

[M14 Shooter]

If TX, FL, and all the other Red states agreed, why not?

Because Democrats.

 

[alang1216]

Because Democrats.

What about them? This isn't a proposal to aid one party over the other, only to make our democracy stronger and more inclusive. Do Republicans in CA even bother to vote?

 

[M14 Shooter]

What about them?

Giving EVs to Republicans helps Republicans get elected.
They won't do it.
The moment some agreement forces CA NY IL to give EVs to a Republican - short of him actually winning the election in the state - Democrats will back out of said agreement.

 

[M14 Shooter]

This isn't a proposal to aid one party over the other, only to make our democracy stronger and more inclusive. Do Republicans in CA even bother to vote?

Election of of he President isn't democratic.
Never was. Never intended to be.

 

[alang1216]

Election of of he President isn't democratic.
Never was. Never intended to be.

Ironic (and hypocritical maybe) that Trump and many conservatives bemoan the way Harris has gotten the Democratic nomination.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Ironic (and hypocritical maybe) that Trump and many conservatives bemoan the way Harris has gotten the Democratic nomination.

Not really. Political parties can nominate their candidates however they want.
The point Republicans make is that no one who identifies as a Democrat chose Harris when she ran for the nomination, and now they believe she's the best thing since partial birth abortion.

 

[alang1216]

Not really. Political parties can nominate their candidates however they want.
The point Republicans make is that no one who identifies as a Democrat chose Harris when she ran for the nomination, and now they believe she's the best thing since partial birth abortion.

Quite untrue. EVERYONE who chose Harris when she ran for the nomination was a Democrat. From Biden to the delegates chosen in the primary by the primary voters. Everyone of them are Democrats.

 

[22lcidw]

I have looked at
(Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina) v New York Presidential vote.

Added together each has 29 votes.

On the 2016 and 2020 Presidential the three republican states voted Red as much as New York voted Blue...

How about a voting pact for Presidential Elections. Instead of winner takes all they take a share the electoral vote as corresponds to the share of vote they take in each state (rounding would apply).

Why? This would mean the four states above would not be taken for granted. Presidential candidates would have to campaign there. It wouldn't make them swing states but at present they have zero influence in the race, zero influence means you get nothing.

I think the winners here would be the voters (not by much but better than zero which they have today).

Just a thought, this is as non partisan as it gets, so could you not descend into a mudslinging match. There are advantages and disadvantages but neither are Red v Blue.

One of the Prog named newcomers here that mowed the apartment lawn had some attitude today as he was banging gates, a stare down and stayed in the rest room for over a half hour as I was in the pool exercising my old painful bones. However, I always give people the benefit of the doubt until proven differently. People do not have good days.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Quite untrue. EVERYONE who chose Harris when she ran for the nomination was a Democrat.

She received not quite 2% of the vote on the 2020 primaries.
Pretty sure you knew that's what I meant.

 

[alang1216]

She received not quite 2% of the vote on the 2020 primaries.
Pretty sure you knew that's what I meant.

I think most Dems wanted the strongest, best known candidate in 2020 and that was clearly Biden. Who knows how well she'd do today?

 

[Independent thinker]

I have looked at
(Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina) v New York Presidential vote.

Added together each has 29 votes.

On the 2016 and 2020 Presidential the three republican states voted Red as much as New York voted Blue...

How about a voting pact for Presidential Elections. Instead of winner takes all they take a share the electoral vote as corresponds to the share of vote they take in each state (rounding would apply).

Why? This would mean the four states above would not be taken for granted. Presidential candidates would have to campaign there. It wouldn't make them swing states but at present they have zero influence in the race, zero influence means you get nothing.

I think the winners here would be the voters (not by much but better than zero which they have today).

Just a thought, this is as non partisan as it gets, so could you not descend into a mudslinging match. There are advantages and disadvantages but neither are Red v Blue.

I say one county, one electoral vote.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I say one county, one electoral vote.

How many counties can a state have?

 

[ThisIsMe]

Very good point... Let me break it down...

As I understand it a state can award votes to electoral college on anyway as long as it is democratic in nature. I am thinking that is same idea that covers this idea:

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

For the Tennessee Government, this is Presidential only, this is about not about giving Tennessee votes to Democrats but getting Republican votes from New Yorkers... The main winner here is Tennessee, now your vote matters, politicians have to promise you something for your vote., at the moment they need to do jackshit because both sides already know how the state is going. No politician has to work for your vote.

Congressional voting, I would be pushing multi-seat preference voting but that is dead at the moment because turkeys don't vote for thanksgiving..

That national vote compact is both immoral and illegal. If they try to use it, it will be shot down by scotus.

They are suggesting that their ec votes will go to the winner of the national popular vote if it can change the outcome of an election…as stated in the compact.

First, compacts between states are unconstitutional, second, you are potentially ignoring the will of the voters.

 

[CowboyTed]

That national vote compact is both immoral and illegal. If they try to use it, it will be shot down by scotus.

They are suggesting that their ec votes will go to the winner of the national popular vote if it can change the outcome of an election…as stated in the compact.

First, compacts between states are unconstitutional, second, you are potentially ignoring the will of the voters.

immoral??? How is a popular vote immoral... It makes all votes equal...

illegal - Well that is up for debate. Constitutionality of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

How would we be ignoring the will of the voters? The voters initially agree they want there votes to goto the person who gets the most votes...

Anyway it just needs consent of Congress... You think Congress is going to vote against the wishes of there own people?

 

[M14 Shooter]

How would we be ignoring the will of the voters?

60-70% of the people in CA will vote for the Dem.
45-55% of CAs electoral votes will go to the Republican.
This denies the will of CA voters .

 

[whitehall]

Electoral votes depend on popular votes. Engaging in some sort of conspiracy to rig the electoral outcome might get you federal prison time.

 

[M14 Shooter]

illegal - Well that is up for debate. Constitutionality of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

However, the Court required explicit congressional consent for interstate compacts that are "directed to the formation of any combination tending to the increase of political power in the States, which may encroach upon or interfere with the just supremacy of the United States"

A compact which will render irrelevant the electoral votes irrelevant in any Presidential election will "increase the political power" of the member states relative to the non-member states.
Even the 9th circuit will strike this.

 

[Polishprince]

immoral??? How is a popular vote immoral... It makes all votes equal...

illegal - Well that is up for debate. Constitutionality of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

How would we be ignoring the will of the voters? The voters initially agree they want there votes to goto the person who gets the most votes...

Anyway it just needs consent of Congress... You think Congress is going to vote against the wishes of there own people?

Is such a compact even enforceable? Will Far Left states like NY or Cali even allow their electors to vote for Trump if they could just renege on the "deal" and put their own candidate in?

Whether or not its "constitutional" or not if irrelevant. Because even it was constitutional it would be foolish to trust Marxist libs to keep their word.

 

[CowboyTed]

60-70% of the people in CA will vote for the Dem.
45-55% of CAs electoral votes will go to the Republican.
This denies the will of CA voters .

Nope that is not how it works and we haven't even mentioned CA...

We are talking about the four states in the OP...

And what the proposal is, that if 70% of the vote goes to a party they receive 70% of the electoral votes (with allowances for rounding)...

 

[CowboyTed]

Is such a compact even enforceable? Will Far Left states like NY or Cali even allow their electors to vote for Trump if they could just renege on the "deal" and put their own candidate in?

Whether or not its "constitutional" or not if irrelevant. Because even it was constitutional it would be foolish to trust Marxist libs to keep their word.

It need congressional approvement for the Compact but I assuming that is got in advance. this would make it constitutional and also legally binding from a Federal level.

The electors would be republicans from the republican campaign. New Yorkers have GOP representatives internally and no one tells them they can't do there job.

This is about these states getting their voices heard and no be a sure thing and thus not listened too... Alabama is just as much a winner as New York is...

If we take off the Red and Blue for moment, the states involved are really the winners if even only a small bit.. This is about voters winning..