So about that Interstate Electoral Vote Compact....

[Marener]

If this is the only counter argument you have, you have nothing.

Your argument is pathetic. You can't change the vote tally just because you think it's wrong.

How is giving say NY's EV's to a Republican Candidate if the Dem candidate got say 75% of the vote constitutional?

What does the constitution say about who gets electoral votes?

 

[martybegan]

Your argument is pathetic. You can't change the vote tally just because you think it's wrong.

What does the constitution say about who gets electoral votes?

it talks about guaranteeing a republican form of government. how does giving your vote away to people outside your own State guarantee that?

 

[Marener]

it talks about guaranteeing a republican form of government. how does giving your vote away to people outside your own State guarantee that?

The guarantee clause refers to the state constitutions being Republican form.

It has nothing to do with electoral votes.

If it did, it would have been equally unconstitutional to have state legislatures appoint new electors because Trump felt like he won. They’d be giving away their vote to Trump.

 

[martybegan]

The guarantee clause refers to the state constitutions being Republican form.

It has nothing to do with electoral votes.

If it did, it would have been equally unconstitutional to have state legislatures appoint new electors because Trump felt like he won. They’d be giving away their vote to Trump.

And how is giving up your vote in a Presidential Election Republican in any way?

This is directly giving up your vote to people outside your State.

You keep ignoring the accusations of fraud involved in Trump's case.

And now with over 10 million democratic votes disappearing in this election compared to the last, questions about last presidential election are back.

 

[HikerGuy83]

So now that Republicans have shown they can still win the popular vote, now many States that signed up for this will be removing the laws from the books?

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

They just can't do the work to amend the Constitution, they have to try this end run. And it's on dubious constitutional grounds anyway.

Dubious ?

It is flat out unconstitutional.

 

[Marener]

And how is giving up your vote in a Presidential Election Republican in any way?

Where does the constitution say we can vote in presidential elections?

This is directly giving up your vote to people outside your State.

Nope. The electors cast the votes. What does the constitution say about how electors are chosen?

You keep ignoring the accusations of fraud involved in Trump's case.

I ignore them because the accusations were without merits. We don’t overturn elections based on mere accusations. Unless you’re into fascism of course.

And now with over 10 million democratic votes disappearing in this election compared to the last, questions about last presidential election are back.

Because MAGA is delusional.

 

[martybegan]

Where does the constitution say we can vote in presidential elections?

Nope. The electors cast the votes. What does the constitution say about how electors are chosen?

I ignore them because the accusations were without merits. We don’t overturn elections based on mere accusations. Unless you’re into fascism of course.

Because MAGA is delusional.

It says the States vote for electors, it doesn't say people in OTHER States can vote for their electors.

And you are flailing, as usual.

 

[Marener]

It says the States vote for electors, it doesn't say people in OTHER States can vote for their electors.

And you are flailing, as usual.

The constitution doesn’t say states vote for electors. It says they’re appointed according to the rules made by the legislature.

That’s exactly what they’re doing by having an popular vote compact.

It would be helpful if you actually read the constitution one of these days.

 

[justoffal]

The real fun would be watching them remove the law if a Republican did win while it was in effect.

Lol..... I always refer back to Harry Reid when these things present themselves.
They we're all Giddy and gleeful when Pelosi carried that gavel across the street like a little asshole..... They weren't so gleeful later on when Mitch McConnell used the same rule to confirm supreme Court justices.

 

[justoffal]

Still worth doing.

The fact that this came down to 7 states should give everyone pause.

Yeah it's annoying to see that happen.
Sometimes it comes down to one or Two states or even worse one or two counties. Somebody had suggested not having the winner take all system for the electoral votes.... But assigning them by district. I like that idea.

 

[martybegan]

The constitution doesn’t say states vote for electors. It says they’re appointed according to the rules made by the legislature.

That’s exactly what they’re doing by having an popular vote compact.

It would be helpful if you actually read the constitution one of these days.

The legislature can't give people's votes to someone else. It fails equal protection, republican form of government.

The popular vote compact is an unconstitutional end run, done by people too lazy to start an amendment movement.

 

[Marener]

The legislature can't give people's votes to someone else. It fails equal protection, republican form of government.

The popular vote compact is an unconstitutional end run, done by people too lazy to start an amendment movement.

How does it violate equal protection?

 

[martybegan]

How does it violate equal protection?

One person one vote?

Your vote now doesn't count, all the counts is the mass of votes outside your own State.

 

[hadit]

So now that Republicans have shown they can still win the popular vote, now many States that signed up for this will be removing the laws from the books?

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

They just can't do the work to amend the Constitution, they have to try this end run. And it's on dubious constitutional grounds anyway.

They will immediately remove the laws the first time California and New York democrats realize their votes were ignored and given to a Republican. It would have been delicious to see that happen this year and we be able to tell them they voted for TRUMP!, but it would only take ONE such event to get rid of those agreements.

 

[martybegan]

They will immediately remove the laws the first time California and New York democrats realize their votes were ignored and given to a Republican. It would have been delicious to see that happen this year and we be able to tell them they voted for TRUMP!, but it would only take ONE such event to get rid of those agreements.

Actually they probably would try to repeal the law between election day and the day the EC meets.

 

[hadit]

One person one vote?

Your vote now doesn't count, all the counts is the mass of votes outside your own State.

And the first time democrats realize their votes were simply ignored and given to a Republican, even though their state voted democrat, it would be over because they would go nuts.

 

[hadit]

Actually they probably would try to repeal the law between election day and the day the EC meets.

Good point and appoint a different slate of electors not bound by the law.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm no constitutional expert by any means, but I suspect that any such compact probably does not carry the force of law behind it. IOW, any state that signed up for it is not legally bound to honor it, because it has no basis in the Constitution or in current law. JMO, for what it's worth. Has any federal court ruled on it one way or another?

You can bet your bippy that if this compact were in place right now, CA IL NY and NJ would all drop out of it.
No way in hell their EVs are going to a Republican.

 

[Marener]

One person one vote?

Your vote now doesn't count, all the counts is the mass of votes outside your own State.

Of course your vote counts. It's included in the national popular vote. Nowhere in the constitution does it say you get to vote for president. Zero mentions. The founders didn't even want that so you can't even claim it was the original intent.

Jesus, you're making really stupid arguments today. It's too early to be this drunk.

 

[hadit]

Of course your vote counts. It's included in the national popular vote. Nowhere in the constitution does it say you get to vote for president. Zero mentions. The founders didn't even want that so you can't even claim it was the original intent.

Jesus, you're making really stupid arguments today. It's too early to be this drunk.

That's right, the presidency was not supposed to be a national popularity contest. I just want to see the reaction of Ca democrats when they realize that, despite the state voting democrat by their normal margin, their state's votes went for a Republican. It would be epic.