So about that Interstate Electoral Vote Compact....

[Marener]

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.

If we stuck to the founding principles, it's unlikely that Trump would have ever become president. The founders were worried that the people would be partisan and vote for demagogues.

 

[martybegan]

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

What law? We never passed any law?

 

[Marener]

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.

That wouldn't be very logical. It wouldn't change the outcome of the election.

 

[hadit]

What law? We never passed any law?

The state laws we're talking about that would give the state's EV to the popular vote winner. They've been talking about doing that, but will likely shut up now that a Republican won the popular vote.

 

[martybegan]

The state laws we're talking about that would give the state's EV to the popular vote winner. They've been talking about doing that, but will likely shut up now that a Republican won the popular vote.

Sorry was being sarcastic and pretending to be Dem lawmakers in a State that passed this after a Republican won the popular vote.

 

[hadit]

Sorry was being sarcastic and pretending to be Dem lawmakers in a State that passed this after a Republican won the popular vote.

Good one.

 

[Marener]

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

It’s amazing how hypocritical you guys can be.

Four years ago, we were told the legislature can do anything they want with electors including changing them after the vote occurred for any reason they want.

 

[hadit]

It’s amazing how hypocritical you guys can be.

Four years ago, we were told the legislature can do anything they want with electors including changing them after the vote occurred for any reason they want.

And we're noting that democrats don't hesitate to change a rule or a law if it inconveniently gets in the way.

 

[Marener]

And we're noting that democrats don't hesitate to change a rule or a law if it inconveniently gets in the way.

Sometimes, but both sides do that.

You’re describing changing the rules after the election, which they’ve not done. It was something that Trump wanted to do in 2020, however. Thats unprecedented and pretty disgusting. Not that you guys cared much. That’s the hypocritical part.

 

[hadit]

Sometimes, but both sides do that.

You’re describing changing the rules after the election, which they’ve not done. It was something that Trump wanted to do in 2020, however. Thats unprecedented and pretty disgusting. Not that you guys cared much. That’s the hypocritical part.

They certainly didn't mind changing deadlines after the election. Anything to keep finding those boxes with 100% Biden votes. That's the cynicism generated by their antics.

 

[martybegan]

It’s amazing how hypocritical you guys can be.

Four years ago, we were told the legislature can do anything they want with electors including changing them after the vote occurred for any reason they want.

It's the same broken record with you.

 

[Marener]

It's the same broken record with you.

Because you keep being a hypocrite.

 

[Marener]

They certainly didn't mind changing deadlines after the election. Anything to keep finding those boxes with 100% Biden votes. That's the cynicism generated by their antics.

Huh? What deadlines were changed after the election? They didn’t keep “funding boxes” with 100% Biden votes. That’s just internet misinformation.

 

[martybegan]

Because you keep being a hypocrite.

Nope. You just latch onto one supposed point and hold onto it like a retarded terrier.

 

[Marener]

Nope. You just latch onto one supposed point and hold onto it like a retarded terrier.

You think we are going to stop reminding you that you’re a hypocrite who wanted to overturn the election?

I’m sure you’d like to forget that.

 

[martybegan]

You think we are going to stop reminding you that you’re a hypocrite who wanted to overturn the election?

I’m sure you’d like to forget that.

Not forgetting anything, including your other socks on this board.

Now hurry curried goathead over to the trans thread.

 

[Marener]

Not forgetting anything, including your other socks on this board.

Now hurry curried goathead over to the trans thread.

You sure as hell whine when you create obviously hypocritical threads pretending to care about the right to vote.

You don’t care about rights.

 

[Jarlaxle]

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

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

If the state legislature votes to give NY's electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote, that is 100% legal. (Indeed: state legislatures explicitly have near carte blanche on HOW electors are chosen.)

 

[martybegan]

You sure as hell whine when you create obviously hypocritical threads pretending to care about the right to vote.

You don’t care about rights.

More banal useless retorts.

Ignoring points as usually do to harp on rehashed bullshit.

 

[martybegan]

If the state legislature votes to give NY's electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote, that is 100% legal. (Indeed: state legislatures explicitly have near carte blanche on HOW electors are chosen.)

Except it basically eliminates a person's vote, and that doesn't provide a republican form of government.

Then you have equal protection under the law to worry about.

It's an end run around the EC, nothing more or less.