Spanberger signs bill sending VA electoral votes to winner of popular vote.

[the watcher]

Well, there it is. Virginia could vote for a candidate 100% and still award the other candidate its EC votes to the other one with the most popular votes. Throw in some 6-month vote window, mail in papers, voting assistance and you have a real program going down. Vote shading and handling and misrepresenting the count so it could be sold as a "landslide". Of course, a "landslide" converts into "mandate" to enable more bullshit in the name of the People. Your vote still counts, just not how you think it does. MSN

 

[forkup]

Well, there it is. Virginia could vote for a candidate 100% and still award the other candidate its EC votes to the other one with the most popular votes. Throw in some 6-month vote window, mail in papers, voting assistance and you have a real program going down. Vote shading and handling and misrepresenting the count so it could be sold as a "landslide". Of course, a "landslide" converts into "mandate" to enable more bullshit in the name of the People. Your vote still counts, just not how you think it does. MSN

I'm a bit confused. What is objectionable here to you?

Because it seems you are somehow trying to claim the people's vote is important just not when that vote goes by the person who actually got the most votes.

 

[the watcher]

This heavily favors the states with the largest populations that are concentrated with differing values. It does not represent different independent State's wishes in favor of mashing numbers. What do you have against the electoral congress, which correctly identifies differing regional interests?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Not a big fan of either the NPV or the current "winner take all" EC concepts.

IMHO two things should happen:

• A federal requirement for federal offices to end gerrymandering for political power and requiring non-political commissions using standardized rules of population distribution with some consideration to natural barriers (rivers, mountains, etc.) and government boundaries (townships, cities, county lines). [US Constitution Article I, Section 4)
• Allocation of EC votes should not be winner take all. EC votes should be allocated as 1 vote to the House District winner and 2 votes (representing the Senator) to the overall state winner.

WW

 

[SeaMajor7]

National general elections should have universal rules across ALL States. We can't have rogue States with bullshit convoluted rules of their own as they affect the WHOLE country.
This Spanberger communist ***** has been trying to twist Virginia's electorate into a pretzel to push her Marxist intentions to DESTROY America. These zombies are out of control with this kind of election madness. "Rank-choise" and this crap is an OFFENCE against the Constitution and the American People. There must be push back against this insanity NOW.

 

[forkup]

This heavily favors the states with the largest populations that are concentrated with differing values. It does not represent different independent State's wishes in favor of mashing numbers. What do you have against the electoral congress, which correctly identifies differing regional interests?

As opposed to heavily favoring states that have smaller populations. What do you have against densily populated States?

The knive cuts both ways.

Here's the thing. You prefer that the power goes to people that you believe to share your values. I perfectly understand that. So I understand that you want to skew the system to allow that. And don't fool yourself it is skewing the system.

A presidential candidate needs to get between 2 and 4 percent more votes to overcome the advantage the electoral college gives Republicans. Gerrymandering has made those systemic disadvantages even more pronounced in the House. God only knows how bad it'll be next cycle when the gutting of the voting rights act will be fully integrated into the voting maps.

This disadvantages both minorities and Democrats. So forgive me when I find this, "you are disadvantagimg regional interests" more than a bit disengenious.

The truth is that you don't give a rats ass that the regional interest of Memphis or Dallas or for that matter any city, state or region that vote Democrats are disadvantaged. Only that the system that benefits you is sustained.

 

[the watcher]

I disagree. There is a nationwide movement by both parties to weaponize the voting process. It is not a beheading of the process; it is a death of a thousand cuts. We no longer have election day; it is a year long carefully groomed process. Mail in ballots sent out by various entities, media involvement in elections (more than in the past), redistricting and states refusing to monitor voter rolls, no accounting for untraceable campaign funds or use of them, and the refusal of the courts to address improprieties in the election. Your vote is being redirected, it may or may not be constitutional, but that is what is happening, if your vote is awarded to someone that someone else votes for. The winner take all system was bad enough, but this is criminal.

 

[SeaMajor7]

I disagree. There is a nationwide movement by both parties to weaponize the voting process. It is not a beheading of the process; it is a death of a thousand cuts. We no longer have election day; it is a year long carefully groomed process. Mail in ballots sent out by various entities, media involvement in elections (more than in the past), redistricting and states refusing to monitor voter rolls, no accounting for untraceable campaign funds or use of them, and the refusal of the courts to address improprieties in the election. Your vote is being redirected, it may or may not be constitutional, but that is what is happening, if your vote is awarded to someone that someone else votes for. The winner take all system was bad enough, but this is criminal.

Disagree with what? Me?
You made my point.

 

[the watcher]

I disagree with your assessment. The only point you have is the top of your head.

 

[WorldWatcher]

We've gotten away from a fundamental view of voting.

Voting should be recognized as a method of determining the will of the people, not a method to be manipulated to retain political power.

WW

 

[the watcher]

We're sleepwalking into servitude.

 

[berg80]

There is a nationwide movement by both parties to weaponize the voting process.

That's the kind of false equivalence bullshit that drives me crazy. trump launches a transparently corrupt, mid decade campaign to gerrymander districts, as well as efforts to end mail-in ballots and enact a national voter ID law..........that he obviously believes will benefit R's so the election can be rigged............D's in some states respond by doing their own redistricting to negate what R's did at trump's direction..........and you falsely claim both parties are at fault for trying to "weaponize the voting process." What a steaming pile.

All lovers of true democracy want the country to elect the prez by way of a national popular vote and get rid of the antiquated, anachronistic EC.

 

[1srelluc]

Pretty much a nothingburger.

The agreement takes effect once participating states collectively control at least 270 electoral votes, the number needed to win the presidency. Until that threshold is reached, Virginia will continue awarding its electors based on its own statewide results.

With Virginia’s addition, the compact now includes 18 states and Washington, D.C., totaling 222 electoral votes, still short of the 270 needed to activate the system.

There are currently 18 blue states, all within the compact.

Unless TX enters the compact it will never happen.

 

[1srelluc]

Ha! Can you even fathom any blue state awarding their electoral votes to a gop hopeful that wins the popular vote.....Nah, never gonna happen.

 

[SeaMajor7]

I disagree with your assessment. The only point you have is the top of your head.

OK Bubbles. Thanks for the clarification that you are an asshole. I suspected as much for a while, but thanks for the confirmation.
GFY.

 

[Clyde 154]

It will not pass the "smell test" of either the US Constitution or the SCOTUS. We do not live in a demobracy, we live in a Constitutional Republic. Each state is bound by the Electoral College, not the popular vote. This stops large populated areas from running roughshod over the smaller populated areas. Politics of the United States - Wikipedia

 

[JoeB131]

Well, there it is. Virginia could vote for a candidate 100% and still award the other candidate its EC votes to the other one with the most popular votes. Throw in some 6-month vote window, mail in papers, voting assistance and you have a real program going down. Vote shading and handling and misrepresenting the count so it could be sold as a "landslide". Of course, a "landslide" converts into "mandate" to enable more bullshit in the name of the People. Your vote still counts, just not how you think it does. MSN

If Virginia is going GOP, then they've probably won the popular vote.

The problem is, Virginia hasn't been a swing state since Bush won in 2004.

They'd have a better chance swinging the election by contributing to a national majority.

So let's count the votes in all 50 states instead of seven swing states. That's a crazy idea.

 

[WorldWatcher]

It will not pass the "smell test" of either the US Constitution or the SCOTUS. We do not live in a demobracy, we live in a Constitutional Republic. Each state is bound by the Electoral College, not the popular vote. This stops large populated areas from running roughshod over the smaller populated areas. Politics of the United States - Wikipedia

United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 3:
"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."

So how does the State Legislature passing a law (then signed by the Governor) directing that EC votes be allocated based on the national popular vote violate the Constitution?

It's right there in the Constitution, they (the State) gets to select the method, they could choose:

• National Popular Vote as the method,
• State wide popular vote as the method (winner take all),
• District specific representing the each House Seat with 2 for the overall state representing the Senate (proportional allocation),
• They could choose NOT to have a vote at all and the Legislature directly appoint EC electors,
• They could choose to have round-robin elimination tournaments of tiddly-winks to choose the elector if they want.

WW

 

[SassyIrishLass]

This flys in the face of the Constitution.

 

[WorldWatcher]

This flys in the face of the Constitution.

United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 3:
"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."

Where?

WW