The Constitution specifically says it's up to each state to choose its own electors however it wants.
Great no disagreement...but they MUST choose electors. The argument is abolition of the electoral college via non complaince by states. THAT is unconstitutional.
It can hold election or not hold an election. It can throw darts at a wall or consult a Ouija board.
No...you dumb paddy...they cannot
14th Amendment
Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed.
But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.
14th Amendment
Uh YES Dippy, they can.
Article II. Roll it.
>> 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. <<
You'll note that your Fourteenth Amendment excluding women does not stipulate that an election must be held, or that there IS a "right to vote" for POTUS. It simply addresses what happens to those
male voters
over 21 IN THE EVENT their assumed vote is denied -----
not that that right exists in the first place.
Lurn two reed. And when you do, find us anywhere the COTUS requires the states to hold a POTUS vote at all.
I have a hypothetical;
I vote for the president. My state chooses not to engage in the electoral college. Has my right to vote be [sic] prevented?
You don't have a right to vote for President. Nor do I Your STATE does. If it chooses not to engage in the EC, then it's preventing itself, but it in no way has to consult you or any other citizen.
Your state need not offer you a vote for POTUS, but if it does offer it, and you exercise it, then that offer has been taken. If it doesn't, then it chooses its Electors in some
other manner, full stop. However if you do get a vote and you didn't vote the way your state sees fit to instruct its Electors to vote, then your personal vote was tossed into the shredder, because the state is going to do what it wants and you or any other citizen can go sit on a tack for all it cares.
That's been going on a long time, which is why our turnout rate is abysmal. Because for most people, what's the point. One can vote with one's state's trend, one can vote against it, or one can stay home and watch Jerry Lewis reruns. In every case one personally has accomplished the same thing --- Zero. So why bother.
Further, I realize that your fenian monkey genes prevent you from providing links. However, to back your argument, can you provide me with a citation which supports your assertion that the states are not required to participate in the electoral college?
Thought I cited my source and it was fairly well known. You need it
linked too? Very well then.
Constitution of the United States --- see Article II, Section 1, paragraph 2.
You'll note that neither this document nor any other anywhere is required to prove a negative. On the contrary you the ass-erter
are required to prove the positive. That means you can use my link to show us anywhere the COTUS says that POTUS elections are required.
Happy hunting.
