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

[eagle1462010]

How many would want to switch to the popular vote for electing the President if California which under this would pretty decide all of the Presidential elections was a rock solid red state instead of a blue one?

If you believe in the principles of the Constitution then you would never want that..............I don't want that......

 

[Jarlaxle]

IOW, the NPV is a done deal when the votes of the states reach an electoral majority in the aggregate. I think states equaling 71 more EVs are required.

It will go to the supreme court when that happens, states cannot make interstate compacts without Congress approval

And Will almost certainly get broomed.

 

[HaShev]

Using this standard that every single person deserves an equal 1 vote then they can only be citizensb not the millions who are not legal citizens whom political tactics use for votes at the damage of the stability and security of the country.
That alone would sway more popular votes to the conservatives then to the liberals sabotaging the country just to grow an illegal voter base.
Then by this standard, licensing to news broadcast companies has to be 1=1 too otherwise the bias is considered campaign fraud over the limit of contribution to a party.
If Dems can't rig the news and voter base rheir pipular vote ratio goes further down the tubes.
But most logical of all arguments is that it has to be fair & accepted that every single state deserves 1 equal vote to every other state (so Cali and NY no longer tells us how we should be like them failed in governance) and since we were formed and are governed as the "UNITED STATES" of America and not based on individual Americans then it has to be vote counts by each State not by populations, which is what we might see if the legislature branch is forced to decide this election.

 

[lg325]

Never gonna happen.

I agree. It wont happen and I will do what I can as a citizen to oppose it. People say what is going on now is a disaster .But its just moving slow. I rather have slow and correct then quick and wrong. So pour a cold drink and relax and wait until it all done to the last count.

 

[HaShev]

By the way:
Where is this boasting about majority rule when taking blame for Covid-19 (mostly fueled by liberal policies in liberal big cities) and the Division (created by the rhetoric & left through media propaganda), instability (same cause and affect), and kvetching about all the things wrong about this country you promise to move away from, but never do leave?
You want to claim majority then claim majority responsibility. -oops

Seriously who's voting for these people, it has to be a computer program manipulated fraud, because our citizens can't be this dumb, our education can't be this bad. I grew up in Philly and I turned out just fine.

 

[candycorn]

Nobody has ever satisfactorily answered....

Whatever system we have, has to work in all conditions...agreed? Meaning that if we put a system in place for an election, there are no do-overs until the next election.

Keeping that in mind...a straight popular vote to where the outcome of the popular vote determines the President is great when you have two candidates. Each one will get somewhere between 45-55% of the vote and the majority of the losing side will learn to live with the loss (as will happen with the just now completed election).

But what if we have 3 or 4 or even 5 major candidates each getting 26-34% of the vote? Are we really going to have a President who was not the choice of 70-80% of the voters?

 

[Sunsettommy]

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

The report is pretty low scholarship, it has some serious errors in it.

America is a REPUBLIC

EC votes are based on states Popular vote with the winner take all in 48 states, which can be changed to proportional voting as done in 2 states.

National vote totals are irrelevant, as they are not a factor in determining EC vote apportionment.

 

[Skylar]

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

I think the issue will be resolved by the States without a constitutional amendment. If 270 elector's worth of states use the national popular vote as their basis of appointing their electors, the issue is resolved.

So far, 190 electors worth of states have signed onto such a compact....which becomes their law when 270's worth signs on.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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

I think the issue will be resolved by the States without a constitutional amendment. If 270 elector's worth of states use the national popular vote as their basis of appointing their electors, the issue is resolved.

So far, 190 electors worth of states have signed onto such a compact....which becomes their law when 270's worth signs on.

Wrong that "law" is Unconstitutional", any state that grants to its people the right to vote for President MUST award the electoral votes per the vote of the people, A state does not have the right to grant the vote then disenfranchise that vote. The Constitution states that the federal Government ensures each state has a republic form of Government. While a State may chose how to allocate their electors if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to Y.

 

[Skylar]

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

I think the issue will be resolved by the States without a constitutional amendment. If 270 elector's worth of states use the national popular vote as their basis of appointing their electors, the issue is resolved.

So far, 190 electors worth of states have signed onto such a compact....which becomes their law when 270's worth signs on.

Wrong that "law" is Unconstitutional", any state that grants to its people the right to vote for President MUST award the electoral votes per the vote of the people, A state does not have the right to grant the vote then disenfranchise that vote.

Nope. There's no such restriction in the constitution. The state legislatures can choose whatever manner they wish.

If they choose that the national popular vote as their method of selection, as long as their state citizens had their votes tallied in that popular vote with everyone else's, there's no credible disenfranchisement argument existing.

And the Popular Vote compact tally them.

The Constitution states that the federal Government ensures each state has a republic form of Government. While a State may chose how to allocate their electors if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to Y.

The constitution doesn't say "if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to"

That would be you citing you. .

The constitution says this:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

That's it. The restrictions you've proposed don't exist. Thus, there's no way violating non-existent restrictions could be unconstitutional.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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

I think the issue will be resolved by the States without a constitutional amendment. If 270 elector's worth of states use the national popular vote as their basis of appointing their electors, the issue is resolved.

So far, 190 electors worth of states have signed onto such a compact....which becomes their law when 270's worth signs on.

Wrong that "law" is Unconstitutional", any state that grants to its people the right to vote for President MUST award the electoral votes per the vote of the people, A state does not have the right to grant the vote then disenfranchise that vote.

Nope. There's no such restriction in the constitution. The state legislatures can choose whatever manner they wish.

If they choose that the national popular vote as their method of selection, as long as their state citizens had their votes tallied in that popular vote with everyone else's, there's no credible disenfranchisement argument existing.

And the Popular Vote compact tally them.

The Constitution states that the federal Government ensures each state has a republic form of Government. While a State may chose how to allocate their electors if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to Y.

The constitution doesn't say "if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to"

That would be you citing you. .

The constitution says this:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

That's it. The restrictions you've proposed don't exist. Thus, there's no way violating non-existent restrictions could be unconstitutional.

Once again RETARD if you give the people the vote then they decide NOT the State Government no law that stiill allows the vote can disenfranchise that vote.

 

[sartre play]

Are some where in the neighborhood of half the American voters looking for a dictatorship ?

 

[Skylar]

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

I think the issue will be resolved by the States without a constitutional amendment. If 270 elector's worth of states use the national popular vote as their basis of appointing their electors, the issue is resolved.

So far, 190 electors worth of states have signed onto such a compact....which becomes their law when 270's worth signs on.

Wrong that "law" is Unconstitutional", any state that grants to its people the right to vote for President MUST award the electoral votes per the vote of the people, A state does not have the right to grant the vote then disenfranchise that vote.

Nope. There's no such restriction in the constitution. The state legislatures can choose whatever manner they wish.

If they choose that the national popular vote as their method of selection, as long as their state citizens had their votes tallied in that popular vote with everyone else's, there's no credible disenfranchisement argument existing.

And the Popular Vote compact tally them.

The Constitution states that the federal Government ensures each state has a republic form of Government. While a State may chose how to allocate their electors if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to Y.

The constitution doesn't say "if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to"

That would be you citing you. .

The constitution says this:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

That's it. The restrictions you've proposed don't exist. Thus, there's no way violating non-existent restrictions could be unconstitutional.

Once again RETARD if you give the people the vote then they decide NOT the State Government no law that stiill allows the vote can disenfranchise that vote.

Dude, this is a clean debate zone. If you can't be civil, please leave.

And again, you're just wrong. If you give the people the chance to vote toward the national popular vote total, with their votes counted like everyone else's.......there are zero 'disenfranchisement' issues.

It a nonsense argument to begin with.....as under your standard, any person voting for a losing candidate would be 'disenfranchised'. The word doesn't mean what you think it means.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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

I think the issue will be resolved by the States without a constitutional amendment. If 270 elector's worth of states use the national popular vote as their basis of appointing their electors, the issue is resolved.

So far, 190 electors worth of states have signed onto such a compact....which becomes their law when 270's worth signs on.

Wrong that "law" is Unconstitutional", any state that grants to its people the right to vote for President MUST award the electoral votes per the vote of the people, A state does not have the right to grant the vote then disenfranchise that vote.

Nope. There's no such restriction in the constitution. The state legislatures can choose whatever manner they wish.

If they choose that the national popular vote as their method of selection, as long as their state citizens had their votes tallied in that popular vote with everyone else's, there's no credible disenfranchisement argument existing.

And the Popular Vote compact tally them.

The Constitution states that the federal Government ensures each state has a republic form of Government. While a State may chose how to allocate their electors if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to Y.

The constitution doesn't say "if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to"

That would be you citing you. .

The constitution says this:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

That's it. The restrictions you've proposed don't exist. Thus, there's no way violating non-existent restrictions could be unconstitutional.

Once again RETARD if you give the people the vote then they decide NOT the State Government no law that stiill allows the vote can disenfranchise that vote.

Dude, this is a clean debate zone. If you can't be civil, please leave.

And again, you're just wrong. If you give the people the chance to vote toward the national popular vote total, with their votes counted like everyone else's.......there are zero 'disenfranchisement' issues.

It a nonsense argument to begin with.....as under your standard, any person voting for a losing candidate would be 'disenfranchised'. The word doesn't mean what you think it means.

Look you liar, any state that the popular vote goes to candidate x and then the State gives the electors to candidate Y has disenfranchises those voters NO MATTER who wins the NATIONS POPULAR vote. Our election for the President is an election of 50 states not a national popular vote never has been never will be. Whom ever wins a state wins that election IN THAT state and to then change the outcome disenfranchises the vote in that state which is NOT democracy nor is it a republican form of Government both protected by the Constitution.

 

[Skylar]

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

I think the issue will be resolved by the States without a constitutional amendment. If 270 elector's worth of states use the national popular vote as their basis of appointing their electors, the issue is resolved.

So far, 190 electors worth of states have signed onto such a compact....which becomes their law when 270's worth signs on.

Wrong that "law" is Unconstitutional", any state that grants to its people the right to vote for President MUST award the electoral votes per the vote of the people, A state does not have the right to grant the vote then disenfranchise that vote.

Nope. There's no such restriction in the constitution. The state legislatures can choose whatever manner they wish.

If they choose that the national popular vote as their method of selection, as long as their state citizens had their votes tallied in that popular vote with everyone else's, there's no credible disenfranchisement argument existing.

And the Popular Vote compact tally them.

The Constitution states that the federal Government ensures each state has a republic form of Government. While a State may chose how to allocate their electors if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to Y.

The constitution doesn't say "if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to"

That would be you citing you. .

The constitution says this:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

That's it. The restrictions you've proposed don't exist. Thus, there's no way violating non-existent restrictions could be unconstitutional.

Once again RETARD if you give the people the vote then they decide NOT the State Government no law that stiill allows the vote can disenfranchise that vote.

Dude, this is a clean debate zone. If you can't be civil, please leave.

And again, you're just wrong. If you give the people the chance to vote toward the national popular vote total, with their votes counted like everyone else's.......there are zero 'disenfranchisement' issues.

It a nonsense argument to begin with.....as under your standard, any person voting for a losing candidate would be 'disenfranchised'. The word doesn't mean what you think it means.

Look you liar, any state that the popular vote goes to candidate x and then the State gives the electors to candidate Y has disenfranchises those voters NO MATTER who wins the NATIONS POPULAR vote. Our election for the President is an election of 50 states not a national popular vote never has been never will be. Whom ever wins a state wins that election IN THAT state and to then change the outcome disenfranchises the vote in that state which is NOT democracy nor is it a republican form of Government both protected by the Constitution.

You're dismissed until you can be civil.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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

I think the issue will be resolved by the States without a constitutional amendment. If 270 elector's worth of states use the national popular vote as their basis of appointing their electors, the issue is resolved.

So far, 190 electors worth of states have signed onto such a compact....which becomes their law when 270's worth signs on.

Wrong that "law" is Unconstitutional", any state that grants to its people the right to vote for President MUST award the electoral votes per the vote of the people, A state does not have the right to grant the vote then disenfranchise that vote.

Nope. There's no such restriction in the constitution. The state legislatures can choose whatever manner they wish.

If they choose that the national popular vote as their method of selection, as long as their state citizens had their votes tallied in that popular vote with everyone else's, there's no credible disenfranchisement argument existing.

And the Popular Vote compact tally them.

The Constitution states that the federal Government ensures each state has a republic form of Government. While a State may chose how to allocate their electors if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to Y.

The constitution doesn't say "if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to"

That would be you citing you. .

The constitution says this:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

That's it. The restrictions you've proposed don't exist. Thus, there's no way violating non-existent restrictions could be unconstitutional.

Once again RETARD if you give the people the vote then they decide NOT the State Government no law that stiill allows the vote can disenfranchise that vote.

Dude, this is a clean debate zone. If you can't be civil, please leave.

And again, you're just wrong. If you give the people the chance to vote toward the national popular vote total, with their votes counted like everyone else's.......there are zero 'disenfranchisement' issues.

It a nonsense argument to begin with.....as under your standard, any person voting for a losing candidate would be 'disenfranchised'. The word doesn't mean what you think it means.

Look you liar, any state that the popular vote goes to candidate x and then the State gives the electors to candidate Y has disenfranchises those voters NO MATTER who wins the NATIONS POPULAR vote. Our election for the President is an election of 50 states not a national popular vote never has been never will be. Whom ever wins a state wins that election IN THAT state and to then change the outcome disenfranchises the vote in that state which is NOT democracy nor is it a republican form of Government both protected by the Constitution.

You're dismissed until you can be civil.

You can lie all you want it will lose in court if ever enacted.

 

[Skylar]

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

I think the issue will be resolved by the States without a constitutional amendment. If 270 elector's worth of states use the national popular vote as their basis of appointing their electors, the issue is resolved.

So far, 190 electors worth of states have signed onto such a compact....which becomes their law when 270's worth signs on.

Wrong that "law" is Unconstitutional", any state that grants to its people the right to vote for President MUST award the electoral votes per the vote of the people, A state does not have the right to grant the vote then disenfranchise that vote.

Nope. There's no such restriction in the constitution. The state legislatures can choose whatever manner they wish.

If they choose that the national popular vote as their method of selection, as long as their state citizens had their votes tallied in that popular vote with everyone else's, there's no credible disenfranchisement argument existing.

And the Popular Vote compact tally them.

The Constitution states that the federal Government ensures each state has a republic form of Government. While a State may chose how to allocate their electors if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to Y.

The constitution doesn't say "if they CHOOSE to allow a vote by the people then THAT determines the winner, they can NOT then say ok you voted for X in the majority but we are going to give our electors to"

That would be you citing you. .

The constitution says this:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

That's it. The restrictions you've proposed don't exist. Thus, there's no way violating non-existent restrictions could be unconstitutional.

Once again RETARD if you give the people the vote then they decide NOT the State Government no law that stiill allows the vote can disenfranchise that vote.

Dude, this is a clean debate zone. If you can't be civil, please leave.

And again, you're just wrong. If you give the people the chance to vote toward the national popular vote total, with their votes counted like everyone else's.......there are zero 'disenfranchisement' issues.

It a nonsense argument to begin with.....as under your standard, any person voting for a losing candidate would be 'disenfranchised'. The word doesn't mean what you think it means.

Look you liar, any state that the popular vote goes to candidate x and then the State gives the electors to candidate Y has disenfranchises those voters NO MATTER who wins the NATIONS POPULAR vote. Our election for the President is an election of 50 states not a national popular vote never has been never will be. Whom ever wins a state wins that election IN THAT state and to then change the outcome disenfranchises the vote in that state which is NOT democracy nor is it a republican form of Government both protected by the Constitution.

You're dismissed until you can be civil.

You can lie all you want it will lose in court if ever enacted.

When you can be civil, we'll resume our conversation.