It's Time to Award Electoral College Votes by Congressional District

[NYcarbineer]

By gerrymandered congressional districts? Are you mental?

You got a better idea? What makes you so certain there would be gerrymandering. ? THINK

The popular vote is the better idea, then no one can claim their vote doesn't count.

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

If the People are a mob that shouldn't be allowed a voice in government, then you're opting for rule by a few.

Who should that few be?

 

[NYcarbineer]

By gerrymandered congressional districts? Are you mental?

You got a better idea? What makes you so certain there would be gerrymandering. ? THINK

The popular vote is the better idea, then no one can claim their vote doesn't count.

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

Then every governor in this country is elected by mob rule, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Rustic]

I was wondering when we’d get our first crybaby thread about the EC.

The winning position is that you make it to where the President-elect would have to win both the majority of EV and the plurality of the PV. We can’t get rid of the EC all together because people would only campaign in the large cities. Congressional districts would also be a stupid idea given how the media is dominant over a region. However, in this day and age of being able to tally votes within days if not hours…it makes no sense to ignore the popular vote any longer.

It's crazy because the EC already favors them. They have multiple states that are just empty land, but still get the minimum 3 EV's even though their population doesn't warrant it.

If it was a national popular vote, small states might as well not even vote. A City like Baltimore would displace the whole of the northern plains states. No fairness in that at all...
This is supposed to be a republic not a shit eating democracy.

The small states get displaced anyway. One person one vote is superior to any system concocted to advantage conservatives.

Na, with the federal government disregarding the 10th amendment. Nothings gonna be fair

 

[NYcarbineer]

Unable to agree on any particular method for selecting presidential electors, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method exclusively to the states in Article II, Section 1

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors….”

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive."

The constitutional wording does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for awarding a state's electoral votes.

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country, by changing state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.

Every vote, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election.
No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps of pre-determined outcomes.
No more handful of 'battleground' states (where the two major political parties happen to have similar levels of support among voters) where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 38+ predictable states that have just been 'spectators' and ignored after the conventions.

The bill would take effect when enacted by states with a majority of the electoral votes—270 of 538.

All of the presidential electors from the enacting states will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC)—thereby guaranteeing that candidate with an Electoral College majority.

The bill has passed 34 state legislative chambers in 23 rural, small, medium, large, red, blue, and purple states with 261 electoral votes.

The bill has been enacted by 11 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes – 61% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.

NationalPopularVote

NPV is a stupid idea and ***** over smaller States. Candidates would only campaign in urban areas and promise most federal spending goes to the urban area. This is a liberal trick to have power for eternity.

What makes the rural citizen superior to the urban citizen?

 

[Rustic]

By gerrymandered congressional districts? Are you mental?

You got a better idea? What makes you so certain there would be gerrymandering. ? THINK

The popular vote is the better idea, then no one can claim their vote doesn't count.

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

If the People are a mob that shouldn't be allowed a voice in government, then you're opting for rule by a few.

Who should that few be?

People in rural America should not be told what to do by urban America…

 

[NYcarbineer]

I was wondering when we’d get our first crybaby thread about the EC.

The winning position is that you make it to where the President-elect would have to win both the majority of EV and the plurality of the PV. We can’t get rid of the EC all together because people would only campaign in the large cities. Congressional districts would also be a stupid idea given how the media is dominant over a region. However, in this day and age of being able to tally votes within days if not hours…it makes no sense to ignore the popular vote any longer.

It's crazy because the EC already favors them. They have multiple states that are just empty land, but still get the minimum 3 EV's even though their population doesn't warrant it.

If it was a national popular vote, small states might as well not even vote. A City like Baltimore would displace the whole of the northern plains states. No fairness in that at all...
This is supposed to be a republic not a shit eating democracy.

The small states get displaced anyway. One person one vote is superior to any system concocted to advantage conservatives.

Na, with the federal government disregarding the 10th amendment. Nothings gonna be fair

The federal government is the legitimate supreme governmental authority in this country.

 

[Rustic]

By gerrymandered congressional districts? Are you mental?

You got a better idea? What makes you so certain there would be gerrymandering. ? THINK

The popular vote is the better idea, then no one can claim their vote doesn't count.

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

Then every governor in this country is elected by mob rule, if I'm not mistaken.

Governors have little control over their state… In general

 

[NYcarbineer]

By gerrymandered congressional districts? Are you mental?

You got a better idea? What makes you so certain there would be gerrymandering. ? THINK

The popular vote is the better idea, then no one can claim their vote doesn't count.

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

If the People are a mob that shouldn't be allowed a voice in government, then you're opting for rule by a few.

Who should that few be?

People in rural America should not be told what to do by urban America…

The urban person has one vote. The rural person has one vote.

 

[NYcarbineer]

By gerrymandered congressional districts? Are you mental?

You got a better idea? What makes you so certain there would be gerrymandering. ? THINK

The popular vote is the better idea, then no one can claim their vote doesn't count.

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

Then every governor in this country is elected by mob rule, if I'm not mistaken.

Governors have little control over their state… In general

The state legislatures are elected by mob rule.

 

[Rustic]

You got a better idea? What makes you so certain there would be gerrymandering. ? THINK

The popular vote is the better idea, then no one can claim their vote doesn't count.

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

If the People are a mob that shouldn't be allowed a voice in government, then you're opting for rule by a few.

Who should that few be?

People in rural America should not be told what to do by urban America…

The urban person has one vote. The rural person has one vote.

One problem, they should have no say on each other's place of living. That's what the 10th amendments for

 

[Rustic]

You got a better idea? What makes you so certain there would be gerrymandering. ? THINK

The popular vote is the better idea, then no one can claim their vote doesn't count.

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

Then every governor in this country is elected by mob rule, if I'm not mistaken.

Governors have little control over their state… In general

The state legislatures are elected by mob rule.

The urban areas of the state elect their own and in the rural areas elect their own simple as that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The popular vote is the better idea, then no one can claim their vote doesn't count.

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

If the People are a mob that shouldn't be allowed a voice in government, then you're opting for rule by a few.

Who should that few be?

People in rural America should not be told what to do by urban America…

The urban person has one vote. The rural person has one vote.

One problem, they should have no say on each other's place of living. That's what the 10th amendments for

You still get to say how long your deer season will be and what color license plates you'll have.

What more do you want?

 

[Rustic]

Going by popular vote is just mob rule. Dip shit

If the People are a mob that shouldn't be allowed a voice in government, then you're opting for rule by a few.

Who should that few be?

People in rural America should not be told what to do by urban America…

The urban person has one vote. The rural person has one vote.

One problem, they should have no say on each other's place of living. That's what the 10th amendments for

You still get to say how long your deer season will be and what color license plates you'll have.

What more do you want?

Bingo! Yes, we do live in the socialist society. You do know it has a 100% fail rate long-term?

 

[rightwinger]

I was wondering when we’d get our first crybaby thread about the EC.

The winning position is that you make it to where the President-elect would have to win both the majority of EV and the plurality of the PV. We can’t get rid of the EC all together because people would only campaign in the large cities. Congressional districts would also be a stupid idea given how the media is dominant over a region. However, in this day and age of being able to tally votes within days if not hours…it makes no sense to ignore the popular vote any longer.

It's crazy because the EC already favors them. They have multiple states that are just empty land, but still get the minimum 3 EV's even though their population doesn't warrant it.

If it was a national popular vote, small states might as well not even vote. A City like Baltimore would displace the whole of the northern plains states. No fairness in that at all...
This is supposed to be a republic not a shit eating democracy.

The small states get displaced anyway. One person one vote is superior to any system concocted to advantage conservatives.

Right now, small states have power far in excess of their population

Just look at Wyoming with 3 EVs for a population of 600,000
That is less than live in my county and we get no electoral votes

 

[Rustic]

I was wondering when we’d get our first crybaby thread about the EC.

The winning position is that you make it to where the President-elect would have to win both the majority of EV and the plurality of the PV. We can’t get rid of the EC all together because people would only campaign in the large cities. Congressional districts would also be a stupid idea given how the media is dominant over a region. However, in this day and age of being able to tally votes within days if not hours…it makes no sense to ignore the popular vote any longer.

It's crazy because the EC already favors them. They have multiple states that are just empty land, but still get the minimum 3 EV's even though their population doesn't warrant it.

If it was a national popular vote, small states might as well not even vote. A City like Baltimore would displace the whole of the northern plains states. No fairness in that at all...
This is supposed to be a republic not a shit eating democracy.

The small states get displaced anyway. One person one vote is superior to any system concocted to advantage conservatives.

Right now, small states have power far in excess of their population

Just look at Wyoming with 3 EVs for a population of 600,000
That is less than live in my county an we get no electoral votes

So, this is a republic or at least supposed to be one not a shit eating democracy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You and your one horse town.

Doesn't matter. I don't think the electoral vote should be based on districts but on the nation as a whole. We are no longer a majority of rural farming communities living in the 18th century.

WTF are you talking about? Try addressing my point. This is like the fourth time in a row you couldn't. You a mutt or a *****?

Democrats Gerrymandered for 50 years. What is wrong with you that you don't even grasp that's what I'm saying? I mean duh, what does it take for you to process a point?

Swish. I thought you were older than me, and you still don't get it? Democrats Gerrymandered the majority of my life. You're like WTF, they did? OK, well, now it's the Republicans and you're against it ... all of a sudden ...

GOP have always gerrymandered when possible, just like the Dems. Your bold assertions mean nothing without evidence. I knew both of those thing in my teens.

That's what I said you ******* retard. What does it take for you to grasp a point? My point, Jake, is that when the Republicans do it, you squeal like a stuck pig and when the Democrats do it you ho hum. But they both do it. Buy a clue

You always squeal when you get caught in your lies. When have I ever not condemned or excused gerrymandering? You put words in other peoples' mouths they did not say because you don't have the truth. You are a mental midget.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Why not go with the nationwide popular vote?

Federalism.

 

[rightwinger]

Why not go with the nationwide popular vote?

Federalism.

We can still be Federalist with a popular vote for President

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why not go with the nationwide popular vote?

Federalism.

We can still be Federalist with a popular vote for President

If an amendment is passed, sure.

 

[Deleted member 53821]

I wouldn't mind that either because in some states the minority party really has no real vote in the elections.