I don't know if the risk of legal action is a serious one. From what I've read, no one has ever been prosecuted for being a faithless elector. It's even possible the Supreme Court could end up ruling that laws against faithless electors are unconstitutional.
"The other 29 and the District do have such laws, but no faithless electors have ever been prosecuted, according to the Archives."
How 'faithless electors' are messing with our electoral maps, explained
They would be found unconstitutional, States have no authority to consider votes cast outside the Sate in determining how their electors vote.
I'm not sure what you are talking about. Who said anything about considering votes cast outside the state of a given elector? My point was that the court might decide that electors have the same right to vote their consciences as any other voter and that states do not have the authority to tell electors how they must vote. It's just a possibility I've seen brought up.
Electors are there to represent their State, not themselves, they do that when they vote in their State elections.
But they are able to vote pretty much however they want as electors. It doesn't happen that often, but it certainly does happen that electors go against the voters of their state. They have, to this point at least, faced no legal consequences. The Supreme Court ruled in Ray v Blair that electors can be required to pledge to vote for the party's nominee before being certified, but did not say anything about having to follow that pledge.
I agree they should vote in the manner their particular state has determined, but they are not bound to do so.
I've been hearing that the Electorate could possibly change the results of the election come December 19th(?) when it's officiated or confirmed and thereby POSSIBLY giving it to Hillary and booting Trump out.
Is this possible? Has it ever been done before? And do you think they'd really risk doing that & creating an all out civil war?
Pogo you are a young girl.. The electoral college never cancels out anyone's vote... Again it was designed to make everything thing fair.. Other wise the guys and girls who wanted to run for president wouldn't campaign in Des Moines Iowa
Nope, I didn't. I just addressed the general question, which I figured you already laid out.
"Electrical College" is just a pun I toss out now and then to see if anyone's reading. But I will take this as an invitation.
That Constitution and its shocking Electrical College set the latter up in such a way, and for the purpose of, protecting slavery. It came in the same package with the Three Fifths Compromise by which the South could count, for the purpose of representation and thereby votes in the Electrical College, the number of slaves they owned, times 60 percent ---- giving them more representation than their eligible voter population did, and therefore more clout, which is, again, why six of our first seven POTUSes were Southern slaveowners. And that in turn ensured that the influence of slaveholder interests had more clout than Abolitionists, set up artificially by the spark-gap of the Electrical College.
You might say the infamous Three Fifths Compromise was the "batteries included" in the Electrical College...
So much for "giving up freedoms" huh?
But wait... there's more.
Whether that emphasis on the interests of slave states prolonged the unaddressed agony that led to the Civil War we will never know, but obviously the War and its aftermath blew that Three-Fifths thing out of the water, and the Fourteenth Amendment immediately after that War guaranteed citizenship to the ex-slaves, and guaranteed that no male citizen could be deprived. Again, it specifically said no MALE citizen.
Whelp, now you've got all the states, not just the South, counting their representation including adult citizens who, again like the slaves before them, had no vote in the matter, and that was women. Of course any state could have enfranchised women and doubled their vote count, but --- they were already counting them for the purpose of representation AND Electrical College votes so..... where was the incentive?
Exactly, so it didn't happen, until 1920, several decades later.
Of course now women have a vote so that disparity is gone. Today what the EC does is nullify the votes of every voter in a locked-red or locked-blue state and remove their incentive to vote at all, even if they agree with their state. And it creates this wacko concept of "red states" and "blue states" as if we have different countries sitting side by side on the same land. And further it requires we all enslave ourselves to poll-watching so that we know whether or not we're going to have a vote at all, because with the EC around our collective neck, the only voters who have a vote that counts are those in a "battleground" state, like me, another concept that would not exist if the Electrical College were just switched off and grounded.
So in other words everywhere the Electrical College has been shunted, it's short-circuited somebody's vote, and it's still doing it today. It's like a great big....
Oh but it does. See, it works like this:
I had a vote in the recent election. That's only because my state was "in play" according to the EC.
But my friends and relatives in Mississippi and Louisiana and Texas had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat. Similarly my friends and relatives in California and Vermont and Washington had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat.
In every case if they voted a different way from how their state did, the state cancelled their vote and made it meaningless. And if they voted the same way their state did, the state didn't even notice, because it was already going that way.
Which is also how it discourages voting. There's no point if your state is already decided.
The EC in effect decides what states are "in play". The rest of y'all are just like a foul ball --- out of play.
You have to be a moron to be OK with that.
Pogo you are a young girl.. The electoral college never cancels out anyone's vote... Again it was designed to make everything thing fair.. Other wise the guys and girls who wanted to run for president wouldn't campaign in Des Moines Iowa
Nope, I didn't. I just addressed the general question, which I figured you already laid out.
"Electrical College" is just a pun I toss out now and then to see if anyone's reading. But I will take this as an invitation.
That Constitution and its shocking Electrical College set the latter up in such a way, and for the purpose of, protecting slavery. It came in the same package with the Three Fifths Compromise by which the South could count, for the purpose of representation and thereby votes in the Electrical College, the number of slaves they owned, times 60 percent ---- giving them more representation than their eligible voter population did, and therefore more clout, which is, again, why six of our first seven POTUSes were Southern slaveowners. And that in turn ensured that the influence of slaveholder interests had more clout than Abolitionists, set up artificially by the spark-gap of the Electrical College.
You might say the infamous Three Fifths Compromise was the "batteries included" in the Electrical College...
So much for "giving up freedoms" huh?
But wait... there's more.
Whether that emphasis on the interests of slave states prolonged the unaddressed agony that led to the Civil War we will never know, but obviously the War and its aftermath blew that Three-Fifths thing out of the water, and the Fourteenth Amendment immediately after that War guaranteed citizenship to the ex-slaves, and guaranteed that no male citizen could be deprived. Again, it specifically said no MALE citizen.
Whelp, now you've got all the states, not just the South, counting their representation including adult citizens who, again like the slaves before them, had no vote in the matter, and that was women. Of course any state could have enfranchised women and doubled their vote count, but --- they were already counting them for the purpose of representation AND Electrical College votes so..... where was the incentive?
Exactly, so it didn't happen, until 1920, several decades later.
Of course now women have a vote so that disparity is gone. Today what the EC does is nullify the votes of every voter in a locked-red or locked-blue state and remove their incentive to vote at all, even if they agree with their state. And it creates this wacko concept of "red states" and "blue states" as if we have different countries sitting side by side on the same land. And further it requires we all enslave ourselves to poll-watching so that we know whether or not we're going to have a vote at all, because with the EC around our collective neck, the only voters who have a vote that counts are those in a "battleground" state, like me, another concept that would not exist if the Electrical College were just switched off and grounded.
So in other words everywhere the Electrical College has been shunted, it's short-circuited somebody's vote, and it's still doing it today. It's like a great big....
Oh but it does. See, it works like this:
I had a vote in the recent election. That's only because my state was "in play" according to the EC.
But my friends and relatives in Mississippi and Louisiana and Texas had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat. Similarly my friends and relatives in California and Vermont and Washington had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat.
In every case if they voted a different way from how their state did, the state cancelled their vote and made it meaningless. And if they voted the same way their state did, the state didn't even notice, because it was already going that way.
Which is also how it discourages voting. There's no point if your state is already decided.
The EC in effect decides what states are "in play". The rest of y'all are just like a foul ball --- out of play.
You have to be a moron to be OK with that.
I do have to agree with you on that point......of the 'safe' states. It is unfair to the opposing voters because they are not represented. In fact, even in swing states the minority are also not represented. But at least they do get their votes counted in order to determine the majority. In addition, those that live on the west coast, Alaska or Hawaii have a hard time justifying their votes count either way they voted. I have yet to see an election that hasn't been called long before they got that far west. It's as if we don't count or exist.
I don't deny there needs to be changes to the electoral college & how it works, but I do think it needs to stay.
Perhaps a better system would be for all states to vote and the electorals be divided up accordingly instead of the whole state being determined by the majority. As the map of Washington shows, there is a whole lot of Republicans that aren't accounted for even though they are more rural areas. And don't forget even in the counties that are determined, there are opposing voters in each. Believe it or not, there are still over 400,000 votes that haven't been counted yet and won't be until the end of this month.
November 8, 2016 General Election - Voter Turnout
In other words, Washington has 12 delegates and 4.2m registered voters but only 67% or 3.2m actually voted. If 2.2m voted Democrat and 1m voted Republican, then proportionately the delegates would vote accordingly. Assign 1 or 2 of those 12 to those who didn't vote & not count those so that the non voter is represented (yes it sucks but that would also get those people to vote if they knew they were being represented). With the remainder, 3 vote Republican, 7 Democrat. That way each portion of the population is counted & represented and each state is also included before an election is called.
View attachment 98364
Pogo you are a young girl.. The electoral college never cancels out anyone's vote... Again it was designed to make everything thing fair.. Other wise the guys and girls who wanted to run for president wouldn't campaign in Des Moines Iowa
Nope, I didn't. I just addressed the general question, which I figured you already laid out.
"Electrical College" is just a pun I toss out now and then to see if anyone's reading. But I will take this as an invitation.
That Constitution and its shocking Electrical College set the latter up in such a way, and for the purpose of, protecting slavery. It came in the same package with the Three Fifths Compromise by which the South could count, for the purpose of representation and thereby votes in the Electrical College, the number of slaves they owned, times 60 percent ---- giving them more representation than their eligible voter population did, and therefore more clout, which is, again, why six of our first seven POTUSes were Southern slaveowners. And that in turn ensured that the influence of slaveholder interests had more clout than Abolitionists, set up artificially by the spark-gap of the Electrical College.
You might say the infamous Three Fifths Compromise was the "batteries included" in the Electrical College...
So much for "giving up freedoms" huh?
But wait... there's more.
Whether that emphasis on the interests of slave states prolonged the unaddressed agony that led to the Civil War we will never know, but obviously the War and its aftermath blew that Three-Fifths thing out of the water, and the Fourteenth Amendment immediately after that War guaranteed citizenship to the ex-slaves, and guaranteed that no male citizen could be deprived. Again, it specifically said no MALE citizen.
Whelp, now you've got all the states, not just the South, counting their representation including adult citizens who, again like the slaves before them, had no vote in the matter, and that was women. Of course any state could have enfranchised women and doubled their vote count, but --- they were already counting them for the purpose of representation AND Electrical College votes so..... where was the incentive?
Exactly, so it didn't happen, until 1920, several decades later.
Of course now women have a vote so that disparity is gone. Today what the EC does is nullify the votes of every voter in a locked-red or locked-blue state and remove their incentive to vote at all, even if they agree with their state. And it creates this wacko concept of "red states" and "blue states" as if we have different countries sitting side by side on the same land. And further it requires we all enslave ourselves to poll-watching so that we know whether or not we're going to have a vote at all, because with the EC around our collective neck, the only voters who have a vote that counts are those in a "battleground" state, like me, another concept that would not exist if the Electrical College were just switched off and grounded.
So in other words everywhere the Electrical College has been shunted, it's short-circuited somebody's vote, and it's still doing it today. It's like a great big....
Oh but it does. See, it works like this:
I had a vote in the recent election. That's only because my state was "in play" according to the EC.
But my friends and relatives in Mississippi and Louisiana and Texas had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat. Similarly my friends and relatives in California and Vermont and Washington had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat.
In every case if they voted a different way from how their state did, the state cancelled their vote and made it meaningless. And if they voted the same way their state did, the state didn't even notice, because it was already going that way.
Which is also how it discourages voting. There's no point if your state is already decided.
The EC in effect decides what states are "in play". The rest of y'all are just like a foul ball --- out of play.
You have to be a moron to be OK with that.
I do have to agree with you on that point......of the 'safe' states. It is unfair to the opposing voters because they are not represented. In fact, even in swing states the minority are also not represented. But at least they do get their votes counted in order to determine the majority. In addition, those that live on the west coast, Alaska or Hawaii have a hard time justifying their votes count either way they voted. I have yet to see an election that hasn't been called long before they got that far west. It's as if we don't count or exist.
I don't deny there needs to be changes to the electoral college & how it works, but I do think it needs to stay.
Perhaps a better system would be for all states to vote and the electorals be divided up accordingly instead of the whole state being determined by the majority. As the map of Washington shows, there is a whole lot of Republicans that aren't accounted for even though they are more rural areas. And don't forget even in the counties that are determined, there are opposing voters in each. Believe it or not, there are still over 400,000 votes that haven't been counted yet and won't be until the end of this month.
November 8, 2016 General Election - Voter Turnout
In other words, Washington has 12 delegates and 4.2m registered voters but only 67% or 3.2m actually voted. If 2.2m voted Democrat and 1m voted Republican, then proportionately the delegates would vote accordingly. Assign 1 or 2 of those 12 to those who didn't vote & not count those so that the non voter is represented (yes it sucks but that would also get those people to vote if they knew they were being represented). With the remainder, 3 vote Republican, 7 Democrat. That way each portion of the population is counted & represented and each state is also included before an election is called.
View attachment 98364
I know what you are saying my friend but the electoral college was set up perfectly.. Liberals going to bitch about this for 8 years the right president again came in at the right time
Pogo you are a young girl.. The electoral college never cancels out anyone's vote... Again it was designed to make everything thing fair.. Other wise the guys and girls who wanted to run for president wouldn't campaign in Des Moines Iowa
Nope, I didn't. I just addressed the general question, which I figured you already laid out.
"Electrical College" is just a pun I toss out now and then to see if anyone's reading. But I will take this as an invitation.
That Constitution and its shocking Electrical College set the latter up in such a way, and for the purpose of, protecting slavery. It came in the same package with the Three Fifths Compromise by which the South could count, for the purpose of representation and thereby votes in the Electrical College, the number of slaves they owned, times 60 percent ---- giving them more representation than their eligible voter population did, and therefore more clout, which is, again, why six of our first seven POTUSes were Southern slaveowners. And that in turn ensured that the influence of slaveholder interests had more clout than Abolitionists, set up artificially by the spark-gap of the Electrical College.
You might say the infamous Three Fifths Compromise was the "batteries included" in the Electrical College...
So much for "giving up freedoms" huh?
But wait... there's more.
Whether that emphasis on the interests of slave states prolonged the unaddressed agony that led to the Civil War we will never know, but obviously the War and its aftermath blew that Three-Fifths thing out of the water, and the Fourteenth Amendment immediately after that War guaranteed citizenship to the ex-slaves, and guaranteed that no male citizen could be deprived. Again, it specifically said no MALE citizen.
Whelp, now you've got all the states, not just the South, counting their representation including adult citizens who, again like the slaves before them, had no vote in the matter, and that was women. Of course any state could have enfranchised women and doubled their vote count, but --- they were already counting them for the purpose of representation AND Electrical College votes so..... where was the incentive?
Exactly, so it didn't happen, until 1920, several decades later.
Of course now women have a vote so that disparity is gone. Today what the EC does is nullify the votes of every voter in a locked-red or locked-blue state and remove their incentive to vote at all, even if they agree with their state. And it creates this wacko concept of "red states" and "blue states" as if we have different countries sitting side by side on the same land. And further it requires we all enslave ourselves to poll-watching so that we know whether or not we're going to have a vote at all, because with the EC around our collective neck, the only voters who have a vote that counts are those in a "battleground" state, like me, another concept that would not exist if the Electrical College were just switched off and grounded.
So in other words everywhere the Electrical College has been shunted, it's short-circuited somebody's vote, and it's still doing it today. It's like a great big....
Oh but it does. See, it works like this:
I had a vote in the recent election. That's only because my state was "in play" according to the EC.
But my friends and relatives in Mississippi and Louisiana and Texas had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat. Similarly my friends and relatives in California and Vermont and Washington had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat.
In every case if they voted a different way from how their state did, the state cancelled their vote and made it meaningless. And if they voted the same way their state did, the state didn't even notice, because it was already going that way.
Which is also how it discourages voting. There's no point if your state is already decided.
The EC in effect decides what states are "in play". The rest of y'all are just like a foul ball --- out of play.
You have to be a moron to be OK with that.
I do have to agree with you on that point......of the 'safe' states. It is unfair to the opposing voters because they are not represented. In fact, even in swing states the minority are also not represented. But at least they do get their votes counted in order to determine the majority. In addition, those that live on the west coast, Alaska or Hawaii have a hard time justifying their votes count either way they voted. I have yet to see an election that hasn't been called long before they got that far west. It's as if we don't count or exist.
I don't deny there needs to be changes to the electoral college & how it works, but I do think it needs to stay.
Perhaps a better system would be for all states to vote and the electorals be divided up accordingly instead of the whole state being determined by the majority. As the map of Washington shows, there is a whole lot of Republicans that aren't accounted for even though they are more rural areas. And don't forget even in the counties that are determined, there are opposing voters in each. Believe it or not, there are still over 400,000 votes that haven't been counted yet and won't be until the end of this month.
November 8, 2016 General Election - Voter Turnout
In other words, Washington has 12 delegates and 4.2m registered voters but only 67% or 3.2m actually voted. If 2.2m voted Democrat and 1m voted Republican, then proportionately the delegates would vote accordingly. Assign 1 or 2 of those 12 to those who didn't vote & not count those so that the non voter is represented (yes it sucks but that would also get those people to vote if they knew they were being represented). With the remainder, 3 vote Republican, 7 Democrat. That way each portion of the population is counted & represented and each state is also included before an election is called.
View attachment 98364
I know what you are saying my friend but the electoral college was set up perfectly.. Liberals going to bitch about this for 8 years the right president again came in at the right time
Pogo you are a young girl.. The electoral college never cancels out anyone's vote... Again it was designed to make everything thing fair.. Other wise the guys and girls who wanted to run for president wouldn't campaign in Des Moines Iowa
Nope, I didn't. I just addressed the general question, which I figured you already laid out.
"Electrical College" is just a pun I toss out now and then to see if anyone's reading. But I will take this as an invitation.
That Constitution and its shocking Electrical College set the latter up in such a way, and for the purpose of, protecting slavery. It came in the same package with the Three Fifths Compromise by which the South could count, for the purpose of representation and thereby votes in the Electrical College, the number of slaves they owned, times 60 percent ---- giving them more representation than their eligible voter population did, and therefore more clout, which is, again, why six of our first seven POTUSes were Southern slaveowners. And that in turn ensured that the influence of slaveholder interests had more clout than Abolitionists, set up artificially by the spark-gap of the Electrical College.
You might say the infamous Three Fifths Compromise was the "batteries included" in the Electrical College...
So much for "giving up freedoms" huh?
But wait... there's more.
Whether that emphasis on the interests of slave states prolonged the unaddressed agony that led to the Civil War we will never know, but obviously the War and its aftermath blew that Three-Fifths thing out of the water, and the Fourteenth Amendment immediately after that War guaranteed citizenship to the ex-slaves, and guaranteed that no male citizen could be deprived. Again, it specifically said no MALE citizen.
Whelp, now you've got all the states, not just the South, counting their representation including adult citizens who, again like the slaves before them, had no vote in the matter, and that was women. Of course any state could have enfranchised women and doubled their vote count, but --- they were already counting them for the purpose of representation AND Electrical College votes so..... where was the incentive?
Exactly, so it didn't happen, until 1920, several decades later.
Of course now women have a vote so that disparity is gone. Today what the EC does is nullify the votes of every voter in a locked-red or locked-blue state and remove their incentive to vote at all, even if they agree with their state. And it creates this wacko concept of "red states" and "blue states" as if we have different countries sitting side by side on the same land. And further it requires we all enslave ourselves to poll-watching so that we know whether or not we're going to have a vote at all, because with the EC around our collective neck, the only voters who have a vote that counts are those in a "battleground" state, like me, another concept that would not exist if the Electrical College were just switched off and grounded.
So in other words everywhere the Electrical College has been shunted, it's short-circuited somebody's vote, and it's still doing it today. It's like a great big....
Oh but it does. See, it works like this:
I had a vote in the recent election. That's only because my state was "in play" according to the EC.
But my friends and relatives in Mississippi and Louisiana and Texas had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat. Similarly my friends and relatives in California and Vermont and Washington had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat.
In every case if they voted a different way from how their state did, the state cancelled their vote and made it meaningless. And if they voted the same way their state did, the state didn't even notice, because it was already going that way.
Which is also how it discourages voting. There's no point if your state is already decided.
The EC in effect decides what states are "in play". The rest of y'all are just like a foul ball --- out of play.
You have to be a moron to be OK with that.
I do have to agree with you on that point......of the 'safe' states. It is unfair to the opposing voters because they are not represented. In fact, even in swing states the minority are also not represented. But at least they do get their votes counted in order to determine the majority. In addition, those that live on the west coast, Alaska or Hawaii have a hard time justifying their votes count either way they voted. I have yet to see an election that hasn't been called long before they got that far west. It's as if we don't count or exist.
I don't deny there needs to be changes to the electoral college & how it works, but I do think it needs to stay.
Perhaps a better system would be for all states to vote and the electorals be divided up accordingly instead of the whole state being determined by the majority. As the map of Washington shows, there is a whole lot of Republicans that aren't accounted for even though they are more rural areas. And don't forget even in the counties that are determined, there are opposing voters in each. Believe it or not, there are still over 400,000 votes that haven't been counted yet and won't be until the end of this month.
November 8, 2016 General Election - Voter Turnout
In other words, Washington has 12 delegates and 4.2m registered voters but only 67% or 3.2m actually voted. If 2.2m voted Democrat and 1m voted Republican, then proportionately the delegates would vote accordingly. Assign 1 or 2 of those 12 to those who didn't vote & not count those so that the non voter is represented (yes it sucks but that would also get those people to vote if they knew they were being represented). With the remainder, 3 vote Republican, 7 Democrat. That way each portion of the population is counted & represented and each state is also included before an election is called.
View attachment 98364
Pogo you are a young girl.. The electoral college never cancels out anyone's vote... Again it was designed to make everything thing fair.. Other wise the guys and girls who wanted to run for president wouldn't campaign in Des Moines IowaNope, I didn't. I just addressed the general question, which I figured you already laid out.
"Electrical College" is just a pun I toss out now and then to see if anyone's reading. But I will take this as an invitation.
That Constitution and its shocking Electrical College set the latter up in such a way, and for the purpose of, protecting slavery. It came in the same package with the Three Fifths Compromise by which the South could count, for the purpose of representation and thereby votes in the Electrical College, the number of slaves they owned, times 60 percent ---- giving them more representation than their eligible voter population did, and therefore more clout, which is, again, why six of our first seven POTUSes were Southern slaveowners. And that in turn ensured that the influence of slaveholder interests had more clout than Abolitionists, set up artificially by the spark-gap of the Electrical College.
You might say the infamous Three Fifths Compromise was the "batteries included" in the Electrical College...
So much for "giving up freedoms" huh?
But wait... there's more.
Whether that emphasis on the interests of slave states prolonged the unaddressed agony that led to the Civil War we will never know, but obviously the War and its aftermath blew that Three-Fifths thing out of the water, and the Fourteenth Amendment immediately after that War guaranteed citizenship to the ex-slaves, and guaranteed that no male citizen could be deprived. Again, it specifically said no MALE citizen.
Whelp, now you've got all the states, not just the South, counting their representation including adult citizens who, again like the slaves before them, had no vote in the matter, and that was women. Of course any state could have enfranchised women and doubled their vote count, but --- they were already counting them for the purpose of representation AND Electrical College votes so..... where was the incentive?
Exactly, so it didn't happen, until 1920, several decades later.
Of course now women have a vote so that disparity is gone. Today what the EC does is nullify the votes of every voter in a locked-red or locked-blue state and remove their incentive to vote at all, even if they agree with their state. And it creates this wacko concept of "red states" and "blue states" as if we have different countries sitting side by side on the same land. And further it requires we all enslave ourselves to poll-watching so that we know whether or not we're going to have a vote at all, because with the EC around our collective neck, the only voters who have a vote that counts are those in a "battleground" state, like me, another concept that would not exist if the Electrical College were just switched off and grounded.
So in other words everywhere the Electrical College has been shunted, it's short-circuited somebody's vote, and it's still doing it today. It's like a great big....
Oh but it does. See, it works like this:
I had a vote in the recent election. That's only because my state was "in play" according to the EC.
But my friends and relatives in Mississippi and Louisiana and Texas had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat. Similarly my friends and relatives in California and Vermont and Washington had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat.
In every case if they voted a different way from how their state did, the state cancelled their vote and made it meaningless. And if they voted the same way their state did, the state didn't even notice, because it was already going that way.
Which is also how it discourages voting. There's no point if your state is already decided.
The EC in effect decides what states are "in play". The rest of y'all are just like a foul ball --- out of play.
You have to be a moron to be OK with that.
I do have to agree with you on that point......of the 'safe' states. It is unfair to the opposing voters because they are not represented. In fact, even in swing states the minority are also not represented. But at least they do get their votes counted in order to determine the majority. In addition, those that live on the west coast, Alaska or Hawaii have a hard time justifying their votes count either way they voted. I have yet to see an election that hasn't been called long before they got that far west. It's as if we don't count or exist.
I don't deny there needs to be changes to the electoral college & how it works, but I do think it needs to stay.
Perhaps a better system would be for all states to vote and the electorals be divided up accordingly instead of the whole state being determined by the majority. As the map of Washington shows, there is a whole lot of Republicans that aren't accounted for even though they are more rural areas. And don't forget even in the counties that are determined, there are opposing voters in each. Believe it or not, there are still over 400,000 votes that haven't been counted yet and won't be until the end of this month.
November 8, 2016 General Election - Voter Turnout
In other words, Washington has 12 delegates and 4.2m registered voters but only 67% or 3.2m actually voted. If 2.2m voted Democrat and 1m voted Republican, then proportionately the delegates would vote accordingly. Assign 1 or 2 of those 12 to those who didn't vote & not count those so that the non voter is represented (yes it sucks but that would also get those people to vote if they knew they were being represented). With the remainder, 3 vote Republican, 7 Democrat. That way each portion of the population is counted & represented and each state is also included before an election is called.
View attachment 98364
I know what you are saying my friend but the electoral college was set up perfectly.. Liberals going to bitch about this for 8 years the right president again came in at the right time
If by "set up perfectly" you mean subject to changes over time and differences on a state by state basis, maybe you are right.
Pogo you are a young girl.. The electoral college never cancels out anyone's vote... Again it was designed to make everything thing fair.. Other wise the guys and girls who wanted to run for president wouldn't campaign in Des Moines Iowa
Nope, I didn't. I just addressed the general question, which I figured you already laid out.
"Electrical College" is just a pun I toss out now and then to see if anyone's reading. But I will take this as an invitation.
That Constitution and its shocking Electrical College set the latter up in such a way, and for the purpose of, protecting slavery. It came in the same package with the Three Fifths Compromise by which the South could count, for the purpose of representation and thereby votes in the Electrical College, the number of slaves they owned, times 60 percent ---- giving them more representation than their eligible voter population did, and therefore more clout, which is, again, why six of our first seven POTUSes were Southern slaveowners. And that in turn ensured that the influence of slaveholder interests had more clout than Abolitionists, set up artificially by the spark-gap of the Electrical College.
You might say the infamous Three Fifths Compromise was the "batteries included" in the Electrical College...
So much for "giving up freedoms" huh?
But wait... there's more.
Whether that emphasis on the interests of slave states prolonged the unaddressed agony that led to the Civil War we will never know, but obviously the War and its aftermath blew that Three-Fifths thing out of the water, and the Fourteenth Amendment immediately after that War guaranteed citizenship to the ex-slaves, and guaranteed that no male citizen could be deprived. Again, it specifically said no MALE citizen.
Whelp, now you've got all the states, not just the South, counting their representation including adult citizens who, again like the slaves before them, had no vote in the matter, and that was women. Of course any state could have enfranchised women and doubled their vote count, but --- they were already counting them for the purpose of representation AND Electrical College votes so..... where was the incentive?
Exactly, so it didn't happen, until 1920, several decades later.
Of course now women have a vote so that disparity is gone. Today what the EC does is nullify the votes of every voter in a locked-red or locked-blue state and remove their incentive to vote at all, even if they agree with their state. And it creates this wacko concept of "red states" and "blue states" as if we have different countries sitting side by side on the same land. And further it requires we all enslave ourselves to poll-watching so that we know whether or not we're going to have a vote at all, because with the EC around our collective neck, the only voters who have a vote that counts are those in a "battleground" state, like me, another concept that would not exist if the Electrical College were just switched off and grounded.
So in other words everywhere the Electrical College has been shunted, it's short-circuited somebody's vote, and it's still doing it today. It's like a great big....
Oh but it does. See, it works like this:
I had a vote in the recent election. That's only because my state was "in play" according to the EC.
But my friends and relatives in Mississippi and Louisiana and Texas had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat. Similarly my friends and relatives in California and Vermont and Washington had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat.
In every case if they voted a different way from how their state did, the state cancelled their vote and made it meaningless. And if they voted the same way their state did, the state didn't even notice, because it was already going that way.
Which is also how it discourages voting. There's no point if your state is already decided.
The EC in effect decides what states are "in play". The rest of y'all are just like a foul ball --- out of play.
You have to be a moron to be OK with that.
I do have to agree with you on that point......of the 'safe' states. It is unfair to the opposing voters because they are not represented. In fact, even in swing states the minority are also not represented. But at least they do get their votes counted in order to determine the majority. In addition, those that live on the west coast, Alaska or Hawaii have a hard time justifying their votes count either way they voted. I have yet to see an election that hasn't been called long before they got that far west. It's as if we don't count or exist.
I don't deny there needs to be changes to the electoral college & how it works, but I do think it needs to stay.
Perhaps a better system would be for all states to vote and the electorals be divided up accordingly instead of the whole state being determined by the majority. As the map of Washington shows, there is a whole lot of Republicans that aren't accounted for even though they are more rural areas. And don't forget even in the counties that are determined, there are opposing voters in each. Believe it or not, there are still over 400,000 votes that haven't been counted yet and won't be until the end of this month.
November 8, 2016 General Election - Voter Turnout
In other words, Washington has 12 delegates and 4.2m registered voters but only 67% or 3.2m actually voted. If 2.2m voted Democrat and 1m voted Republican, then proportionately the delegates would vote accordingly. Assign 1 or 2 of those 12 to those who didn't vote & not count those so that the non voter is represented (yes it sucks but that would also get those people to vote if they knew they were being represented). With the remainder, 3 vote Republican, 7 Democrat. That way each portion of the population is counted & represented and each state is also included before an election is called.
View attachment 98364
Yes, I know there are literally millions of votes not counted yet and I agree it's not fair to you western time zones, and yes it is as if you don't count. That shouldn't be.
In another thread we were musing about what if the Electors voted proportionally by how their state voted, so that in the example of my state with 15 total, according to the PV Rump would get 8 and Hillary would get 7.... and yes that would be more fair. But then again if you do that, you're just reflecting the popular vote anyway so -- what's the point. Cut out the middleman and get straight to it.
There's really no reason we should have to send our vote through some kind of relay system.
I've been hearing that the Electorate could possibly change the results of the election come December 19th(?) when it's officiated or confirmed and thereby POSSIBLY giving it to Hillary and booting Trump out.
Is this possible? Has it ever been done before? And do you think they'd really risk doing that & creating an all out civil war?
Pogo you are a young girl.. The electoral college never cancels out anyone's vote... Again it was designed to make everything thing fair.. Other wise the guys and girls who wanted to run for president wouldn't campaign in Des Moines IowaNope, I didn't. I just addressed the general question, which I figured you already laid out.
"Electrical College" is just a pun I toss out now and then to see if anyone's reading. But I will take this as an invitation.
That Constitution and its shocking Electrical College set the latter up in such a way, and for the purpose of, protecting slavery. It came in the same package with the Three Fifths Compromise by which the South could count, for the purpose of representation and thereby votes in the Electrical College, the number of slaves they owned, times 60 percent ---- giving them more representation than their eligible voter population did, and therefore more clout, which is, again, why six of our first seven POTUSes were Southern slaveowners. And that in turn ensured that the influence of slaveholder interests had more clout than Abolitionists, set up artificially by the spark-gap of the Electrical College.
You might say the infamous Three Fifths Compromise was the "batteries included" in the Electrical College...
So much for "giving up freedoms" huh?
But wait... there's more.
Whether that emphasis on the interests of slave states prolonged the unaddressed agony that led to the Civil War we will never know, but obviously the War and its aftermath blew that Three-Fifths thing out of the water, and the Fourteenth Amendment immediately after that War guaranteed citizenship to the ex-slaves, and guaranteed that no male citizen could be deprived. Again, it specifically said no MALE citizen.
Whelp, now you've got all the states, not just the South, counting their representation including adult citizens who, again like the slaves before them, had no vote in the matter, and that was women. Of course any state could have enfranchised women and doubled their vote count, but --- they were already counting them for the purpose of representation AND Electrical College votes so..... where was the incentive?
Exactly, so it didn't happen, until 1920, several decades later.
Of course now women have a vote so that disparity is gone. Today what the EC does is nullify the votes of every voter in a locked-red or locked-blue state and remove their incentive to vote at all, even if they agree with their state. And it creates this wacko concept of "red states" and "blue states" as if we have different countries sitting side by side on the same land. And further it requires we all enslave ourselves to poll-watching so that we know whether or not we're going to have a vote at all, because with the EC around our collective neck, the only voters who have a vote that counts are those in a "battleground" state, like me, another concept that would not exist if the Electrical College were just switched off and grounded.
So in other words everywhere the Electrical College has been shunted, it's short-circuited somebody's vote, and it's still doing it today. It's like a great big....
Oh but it does. See, it works like this:
I had a vote in the recent election. That's only because my state was "in play" according to the EC.
But my friends and relatives in Mississippi and Louisiana and Texas had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat. Similarly my friends and relatives in California and Vermont and Washington had no vote. Their state was already decided regardless what they did. They could have voted this way, that way, or not voted at all. Wouldn't mean jack squat.
In every case if they voted a different way from how their state did, the state cancelled their vote and made it meaningless. And if they voted the same way their state did, the state didn't even notice, because it was already going that way.
Which is also how it discourages voting. There's no point if your state is already decided.
The EC in effect decides what states are "in play". The rest of y'all are just like a foul ball --- out of play.
You have to be a moron to be OK with that.
I do have to agree with you on that point......of the 'safe' states. It is unfair to the opposing voters because they are not represented. In fact, even in swing states the minority are also not represented. But at least they do get their votes counted in order to determine the majority. In addition, those that live on the west coast, Alaska or Hawaii have a hard time justifying their votes count either way they voted. I have yet to see an election that hasn't been called long before they got that far west. It's as if we don't count or exist.
I don't deny there needs to be changes to the electoral college & how it works, but I do think it needs to stay.
Perhaps a better system would be for all states to vote and the electorals be divided up accordingly instead of the whole state being determined by the majority. As the map of Washington shows, there is a whole lot of Republicans that aren't accounted for even though they are more rural areas. And don't forget even in the counties that are determined, there are opposing voters in each. Believe it or not, there are still over 400,000 votes that haven't been counted yet and won't be until the end of this month.
November 8, 2016 General Election - Voter Turnout
In other words, Washington has 12 delegates and 4.2m registered voters but only 67% or 3.2m actually voted. If 2.2m voted Democrat and 1m voted Republican, then proportionately the delegates would vote accordingly. Assign 1 or 2 of those 12 to those who didn't vote & not count those so that the non voter is represented (yes it sucks but that would also get those people to vote if they knew they were being represented). With the remainder, 3 vote Republican, 7 Democrat. That way each portion of the population is counted & represented and each state is also included before an election is called.
View attachment 98364
Yes, I know there are literally millions of votes not counted yet and I agree it's not fair to you western time zones, and yes it is as if you don't count. That shouldn't be.
In another thread we were musing about what if the Electors voted proportionally by how their state voted, so that in the example of my state with 15 total, according to the PV Rump would get 8 and Hillary would get 7.... and yes that would be more fair. But then again if you do that, you're just reflecting the popular vote anyway so -- what's the point. Cut out the middleman and get straight to it.
There's really no reason we should have to send our vote through some kind of relay system.
Because it's within the Constitution and how the Founding Fathers wanted that extra step to ensure everyone is represented. You can't pick & choose what suits you about the law of the land, it must be taken as a whole. Once you start taking from it, like in the game Jenga or house of cards, it's only a matter of time before it implodes.
That Constitution is what keeps us from becoming like North Korea or China of the Tiananmen Square days where you could be shot for even saying anything like that. And anyone that speaks against it is in effect thumbing their nose at all those who have served &/or died fighting on it's behalf. Shame on you for even thinking that because of convenience.
