CDZ “National Popular Vote” ... in 2024 and beyond ?

[eagle1462010]

NPV does not require a Constitutional convention. It is a consortium of state agreements, that is all that is needed.

The electoral college is in the constitution. To move to NPV or any other method would requite a change to the constitution...which would require a constitutional convention and ratification.

The National Vote Compact does NOT remove or replace or in any way alter the assembling of the Electoral College. It only changes the way individual states decide to select their electors.

Dream on ..............change the rules when you lose...........losers always say they will do their best....lmao

 

[Wyatt earp]

NPV does not require a Constitutional convention. It is a consortium of state agreements, that is all that is needed.

The electoral college is in the constitution.

To move to NPV or any other method would requite a change to the constitution...which would require a constitutional convention and ratification.

Already noted, rebutted, and overruled. You will find no law to that effect. The path of NPV is constitutional, and nothing can stop it except the votes of the states. And the states' will will be reflected in the final tabulation of the EC.

legal scholars have argued that the power of non-compacting states would be altered because, under the NPVIC, a state's power in determining the outcomes of presidential elections would be changed from the percentage of electors it has in the electoral college to the state's percentage of the popular vote, rendering the right of non-compacting state governments to appoint their own electors moot.[53][61][62][63] Additionally, Ian J. Drake, an associate professor of political science and law at Montclair State University, has argued that because Cuyler v. Adams held that congressional approval of interstate compacts makes them federal laws,[64] Congress cannot consent to the NPVIC without violating the Supremacy Clause, because under Article I, Section VIII, Congress has no enumerated or implied powers to alter the presidential election process except as part of the constitutional amendment process.[63][65] Labor lawyer Bradley T. Turflinger and the organizers of NPV Inc. dispute Drake's conclusion, and the NPV Inc. organizers have stated that they plan to seek congressional approval if the compact is approved by a sufficient number of states

 

[Wyatt earp]

NPV does not require a Constitutional convention. It is a consortium of state agreements, that is all that is needed.

The electoral college is in the constitution.

To move to NPV or any other method would requite a change to the constitution...which would require a constitutional convention and ratification.

Already noted, rebutted, and overruled. You will find no law to that effect. The path of NPV is constitutional, and nothing can stop it except the votes of the states. And the states' will will be reflected in the final tabulation of the EC.

legal scholars have argued that the power of non-compacting states would be altered because, under the NPVIC, a state's power in determining the outcomes of presidential elections would be changed from the percentage of electors it has in the electoral college to the state's percentage of the popular vote, rendering the right of non-compacting state governments to appoint their own electors moot.[53][61][62][63] Additionally, Ian J. Drake, an associate professor of political science and law at Montclair State University, has argued that because Cuyler v. Adams held that congressional approval of interstate compacts makes them federal laws,[64] Congress cannot consent to the NPVIC without violating the Supremacy Clause, because under Article I, Section VIII, Congress has no enumerated or implied powers to alter the presidential election process except as part of the constitutional amendment process.[63][65] Labor lawyer Bradley T. Turflinger and the organizers of NPV Inc. dispute Drake's conclusion, and the NPV Inc. organizers have stated that they plan to seek congressional approval if the compact is approved by a sufficient number of states

.....



and the NPV Inc. organizers have stated that they plan to seek congressional approval if the compact is approved by a sufficient number of states

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Not being a Democrat, and hoping to see new parties develop, I see both parties as obstacles to political change in the U.S. That’s why I see reforms like Ranked Choice Voting — which will give third parties an easier road to emerge as stable formations — as important. The National Popular Vote Compact is not nearly so important to me, but “winner-take-all” voting for state electors clearly has been an irritant to many, including to Donald Trump in the past. That is why, looking forward, I think this overall divisive irritant should be removed.

Most questions about the Interstate Compact are answered here:

Answering Myths

Changing the way we elect the President is an important topic that deserves careful scrutiny. This page summarizes the concerns that have been raised during the course of the debate on the National Popular Vote bill, and shows how they are myths. The myths are grouped into categories that can be...

www.nationalpopularvote.com

 

[Faun]

Nothing seems likely to prevent the upcoming Presidential Election from being another disaster for U.S. political institutions and popular confidence in elections. My (worthless) gut feeling is that Trump will win another term. Whether it will be overwhelming, a squeaker in which he again loses the popular vote but wins the electoral vote, or whether Biden gets elected, popular unhappiness with the Electoral College system (certainly not the only problem with elections or our political system!) will likely remain highly disruptive going forward.

There was a long and interesting article Sept. 8 in the “liberal” NY. Times which discussed the proposal for a “National Popular Vote” for President. Unfortunately, you may find it’s behind an Internet pay wall. It was rather provocatively titled “The Electoral College Will Destroy America...” A few excerpts below:

“If Mr. Biden wins by five percentage points or more — if he beats Donald Trump by more than seven million votes — he’s a virtual shoo-in. If he wins 4.5 million more votes than the president? He’s still got a three-in-four chance to be president.

Anything less, however, and Mr. Biden’s odds drop like a rock. A mere three million-vote Biden victory? A second Trump term suddenly becomes more likely than not. If Mr. Biden’s margin drops to 1.5 million — about the populations of Rhode Island and Wyoming combined — forget about it. The chance of a Biden presidency in that scenario is less than one in 10....

“Given that abolishing the Electoral College is not on the table at the moment, for a number of reasons, the best solution would be to do what Madison tried to do more than two centuries ago: get rid of statewide winner-take-all laws. That can be achieved through the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact ...

If you think this is a plot by bitter Democrats who just want to win, consider this: Texas is going to turn blue. Maybe not this year, maybe not even in 2024. But it’s headed in that direction, and when it gets there, Republicans will be in for an unpleasant surprise. In 2016, Donald Trump won about 4.5 million votes in Texas. The moment the Democratic nominee wins more, all those Republican voters suddenly disappear, along with any realistic shot at winning the White House....

“Every time a new national poll ... is released, it’s followed by a chorus of responses along the lines of, Who cares? The national popular vote is meaningless. Well, I care. So do tens of millions of other Americans.

“And so does Donald Trump. ‘The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy,’ he tweeted on election night 2012. Why? Because he believed Mitt Romney would win the popular vote and lose the Electoral College. Not only has he never taken that tweet down, but he continues to claim that he won the popular vote in 2016. Why does he care so much about making that case unless he believed in his heart, like the rest of us do, that the person who gets the most votes should win?“

Opinion | The Electoral College Will Destroy America

We're never getting rid of the electoral college, nor should we. But it does have a gaping head wound that's sucking the life out of it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nothing seems likely to prevent the upcoming Presidential Election from being another disaster for U.S. political institutions and popular confidence in elections. My (worthless) gut feeling is that Trump will win another term. Whether it will be overwhelming, a squeaker in which he again loses the popular vote but wins the electoral vote, or whether Biden gets elected, popular unhappiness with the Electoral College system (certainly not the only problem with elections or our political system!) will likely remain highly disruptive going forward.

There was a long and interesting article Sept. 8 in the “liberal” NY. Times which discussed the proposal for a “National Popular Vote” for President. Unfortunately, you may find it’s behind an Internet pay wall. It was rather provocatively titled “The Electoral College Will Destroy America...” A few excerpts below:

“If Mr. Biden wins by five percentage points or more — if he beats Donald Trump by more than seven million votes — he’s a virtual shoo-in. If he wins 4.5 million more votes than the president? He’s still got a three-in-four chance to be president.

Anything less, however, and Mr. Biden’s odds drop like a rock. A mere three million-vote Biden victory? A second Trump term suddenly becomes more likely than not. If Mr. Biden’s margin drops to 1.5 million — about the populations of Rhode Island and Wyoming combined — forget about it. The chance of a Biden presidency in that scenario is less than one in 10....

“Given that abolishing the Electoral College is not on the table at the moment, for a number of reasons, the best solution would be to do what Madison tried to do more than two centuries ago: get rid of statewide winner-take-all laws. That can be achieved through the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact ...

If you think this is a plot by bitter Democrats who just want to win, consider this: Texas is going to turn blue. Maybe not this year, maybe not even in 2024. But it’s headed in that direction, and when it gets there, Republicans will be in for an unpleasant surprise. In 2016, Donald Trump won about 4.5 million votes in Texas. The moment the Democratic nominee wins more, all those Republican voters suddenly disappear, along with any realistic shot at winning the White House....

“Every time a new national poll ... is released, it’s followed by a chorus of responses along the lines of, Who cares? The national popular vote is meaningless. Well, I care. So do tens of millions of other Americans.

“And so does Donald Trump. ‘The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy,’ he tweeted on election night 2012. Why? Because he believed Mitt Romney would win the popular vote and lose the Electoral College. Not only has he never taken that tweet down, but he continues to claim that he won the popular vote in 2016. Why does he care so much about making that case unless he believed in his heart, like the rest of us do, that the person who gets the most votes should win?“

Opinion | The Electoral College Will Destroy America

We're never getting rid of the electoral college, nor should we. But it does have a gaping head wound that's sucking the life out of it.

The NPV is not going to eliminate the EC, only make sure it works as it should.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

NPV does not require a Constitutional convention. It is a consortium of state agreements, that is all that is needed.

It violates the Constitution because it removes the right of the majority which is guaranteed by said constitution.

False. The NPV guarantees in fact that the majority will rule.

Wrong EACH INDIVIDUAL STATE is a single election and the Constitution guarantees EACH state and it's citizen the protection of the Republican design. A compact that invalidated the popular vote of a State is UNCONSTITUTIONAL on it's face. The State has remedies beyond invalidating the vote THEY gave their citizens. They could make it so each district was a single vote, they could make it so the Legislature determined the electors, they can NOT grant majority rule by vote THEN invalidate that rule.

 

[westwall]

Nothing seems likely to prevent the upcoming Presidential Election from being another disaster for U.S. political institutions and popular confidence in elections. My (worthless) gut feeling is that Trump will win another term. Whether it will be overwhelming, a squeaker in which he again loses the popular vote but wins the electoral vote, or whether Biden gets elected, popular unhappiness with the Electoral College system (certainly not the only problem with elections or our political system!) will likely remain highly disruptive going forward.

There was a long and interesting article Sept. 8 in the “liberal” NY. Times which discussed the proposal for a “National Popular Vote” for President. Unfortunately, you may find it’s behind an Internet pay wall. It was rather provocatively titled “The Electoral College Will Destroy America...” A few excerpts below:

“If Mr. Biden wins by five percentage points or more — if he beats Donald Trump by more than seven million votes — he’s a virtual shoo-in. If he wins 4.5 million more votes than the president? He’s still got a three-in-four chance to be president.

Anything less, however, and Mr. Biden’s odds drop like a rock. A mere three million-vote Biden victory? A second Trump term suddenly becomes more likely than not. If Mr. Biden’s margin drops to 1.5 million — about the populations of Rhode Island and Wyoming combined — forget about it. The chance of a Biden presidency in that scenario is less than one in 10....

“Given that abolishing the Electoral College is not on the table at the moment, for a number of reasons, the best solution would be to do what Madison tried to do more than two centuries ago: get rid of statewide winner-take-all laws. That can be achieved through the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact ...

If you think this is a plot by bitter Democrats who just want to win, consider this: Texas is going to turn blue. Maybe not this year, maybe not even in 2024. But it’s headed in that direction, and when it gets there, Republicans will be in for an unpleasant surprise. In 2016, Donald Trump won about 4.5 million votes in Texas. The moment the Democratic nominee wins more, all those Republican voters suddenly disappear, along with any realistic shot at winning the White House....

“Every time a new national poll ... is released, it’s followed by a chorus of responses along the lines of, Who cares? The national popular vote is meaningless. Well, I care. So do tens of millions of other Americans.

“And so does Donald Trump. ‘The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy,’ he tweeted on election night 2012. Why? Because he believed Mitt Romney would win the popular vote and lose the Electoral College. Not only has he never taken that tweet down, but he continues to claim that he won the popular vote in 2016. Why does he care so much about making that case unless he believed in his heart, like the rest of us do, that the person who gets the most votes should win?“

Opinion | The Electoral College Will Destroy America

We're never getting rid of the electoral college, nor should we. But it does have a gaping head wound that's sucking the life out of it.

The NPV is not going to eliminate the EC, only make sure it works as it should.

Wrong. As with most marxist ideas it will subvert the original intent of the Founders. That's why it will fail.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

NPV does not require a Constitutional convention. It is a consortium of state agreements, that is all that is needed.

The electoral college is in the constitution. To move to NPV or any other method would requite a change to the constitution...which would require a constitutional convention and ratification.

The National Vote Compact does NOT remove or replace or in any way alter the assembling of the Electoral College. It only changes the way individual states decide to select their electors.

Illegally by the Constitution. The State can not give the people the right to popular vote then take it away because they don't like it. They could make any rule that selected Electors but they can not invalidate the law with a separate Compact. That violates the right of the State electorate

 

[Thunk]

The funny thing is...As soon as the dems got their national popular vote...they would lose the next election because of it

And oh how they would

 

[Quasar44]

NPV is inevitable. That will give the Democratic Party a permanent majority party dominance going forward, which will result in blue presidencies, congresses, and an increased number of SCOTUS seats to ensure a Democratic majority.

Are you a white guy ??

 

[MisterBeale]

NPV is inevitable. That will give the Democratic Party a permanent majority party dominance going forward, which will result in blue presidencies, congresses, and an increased number of SCOTUS seats to ensure a Democratic majority.

Are you a white guy ??

This is the CDZ, who cares what color anyone is on the web, what does it matter?

Frankly, in a discussion board on USA politics, I am far more concerned if someone is a citizen of the United States, than what pigmentation or how much melanin they have.

What a dumb question.

Stop watching so much TEE VEE.

 

[candycorn]

The electoral college--in it's current form--isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't. We need the Electoral College; without it the large cities on the coasts will decide the elections using the National Popular Vote format where the person with the plurality becomes President.

One thing that proponents of the NPV never address is this: What happens if we have 3 viable candidates...or 5 viable candidates...that get 20% of the vote each? You really want a President who gets 29% of the vote?

So I think the winning position is to keep the EC in it's current form but add in the stipulation that the President Elect get a plurality of the Popular Vote as well. If both the threshold of the EC majority of 270 AND the plurality of the popular vote are not met, the remedies we have in place currently where the Congress gets involved are activated.

I'll be happy to say this again if Biden is declared the winner of the EC--that we need to change the system that elected the person for whom I am voting. Its really not a political thing with me. Its more of a right and wrong thing. The ordinary voters should have a direct say in who becomes President and the notion of the majority (or at least the plurality) deciding should be addressed.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Again for the slow and stupid..... California and New York do not elect our President alone and that is all that happens if you use popular vote.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

NPV is inevitable. That will give the Democratic Party a permanent majority party dominance going forward, which will result in blue presidencies, congresses, and an increased number of SCOTUS seats to ensure a Democratic majority.

And THAT, ONE PARTY RULE, is why the Founders were MUCH, MUCH smarter than you

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

The electoral college--in it's current form--isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't. We need the Electoral College; without it the large cities on the coasts will decide the elections using the National Popular Vote format where the person with the plurality becomes President.

One thing that proponents of the NPV never address is this: What happens if we have 3 viable candidates...or 5 viable candidates...that get 20% of the vote each? You really want a President who gets 29% of the vote?

So I think the winning position is to keep the EC in it's current form but add in the stipulation that the President Elect get a plurality of the Popular Vote as well. If both the threshold of the EC majority of 270 AND the plurality of the popular vote are not met, the remedies we have in place currently where the Congress gets involved are activated.

I'll be happy to say this again if Biden is declared the winner of the EC--that we need to change the system that elected the person for whom I am voting. Its really not a political thing with me. Its more of a right and wrong thing. The ordinary voters should have a direct say in who becomes President and the notion of the majority (or at least the plurality) deciding should be addressed.

Get this through your collective heads Liberals:

The president IS NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE.

THE PRESIDENT IS CHOSEN BY THE STATES

 

[JakeStarkey]

The electoral college--in it's current form--isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't. We need the Electoral College; without it the large cities on the coasts will decide the elections using the National Popular Vote format where the person with the plurality becomes President.

One thing that proponents of the NPV never address is this: What happens if we have 3 viable candidates...or 5 viable candidates...that get 20% of the vote each? You really want a President who gets 29% of the vote?

So I think the winning position is to keep the EC in it's current form but add in the stipulation that the President Elect get a plurality of the Popular Vote as well. If both the threshold of the EC majority of 270 AND the plurality of the popular vote are not met, the remedies we have in place currently where the Congress gets involved are activated.

I'll be happy to say this again if Biden is declared the winner of the EC--that we need to change the system that elected the person for whom I am voting. Its really not a political thing with me. Its more of a right and wrong thing. The ordinary voters should have a direct say in who becomes President and the notion of the majority (or at least the plurality) deciding should be addressed.

Get this through your collective heads Liberals:

The president IS NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE.

THE PRESIDENT IS CHOSEN BY THE STATES

And the NPV will allow the states to reflect accurately the majority of the country

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

A compact that invalidated the popular vote of a State is UNCONSTITUTIONAL on it's face.

The NPViC does not “Invalidate the popular vote” of any state in or out of the the Compact, since states in the compact simply by law pledge they will send delegates to the Convention supporting the slate which received the largest popular vote cast nationwide.

As the situation stands now, the popular vote could be “invalidated” in any state by that state simply passing legislation to select their electors without any popular vote whatever, by appointment of the governor or the legislature for example. Such a decision would be perfectly Constitutional at present.

 

[Wyatt earp]

The electoral college--in it's current form--isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't. We need the Electoral College; without it the large cities on the coasts will decide the elections using the National Popular Vote format where the person with the plurality becomes President.

One thing that proponents of the NPV never address is this: What happens if we have 3 viable candidates...or 5 viable candidates...that get 20% of the vote each? You really want a President who gets 29% of the vote?

So I think the winning position is to keep the EC in it's current form but add in the stipulation that the President Elect get a plurality of the Popular Vote as well. If both the threshold of the EC majority of 270 AND the plurality of the popular vote are not met, the remedies we have in place currently where the Congress gets involved are activated.

I'll be happy to say this again if Biden is declared the winner of the EC--that we need to change the system that elected the person for whom I am voting. Its really not a political thing with me. Its more of a right and wrong thing. The ordinary voters should have a direct say in who becomes President and the notion of the majority (or at least the plurality) deciding should be addressed.

Get this through your collective heads Liberals:

The president IS NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE.

THE PRESIDENT IS CHOSEN BY THE STATES

And the NPV will allow the states to reflect accurately the majority of the country

That's a strange post, so you think they want guys in dresses in little girls rooms in kansas?

Btw we are not a democracy

 

[JakeStarkey]

As long as the state's lege, the representatives of the We the People, pass such laws, they are legal and will withstand any constitutional challenge.