Stacey Abrams Says She’d ‘Go Around Constitution’ To End ‘Racist’ Electoral College

[Cecilie1200]

So states agreeing to award their EV to the popular winner is treason for you guys? LOL

No, but it does disenfranchise the voters in that state.

I would call that treason by the state government against the citizens of the state it represents. But maybe that's just me.

 

[bendog]

Funny how everyone says the Left hate America.

Stacey Abrams Tells Eager 'View' She'd 'Go Around Constitution' to End 'Racist' Electoral College

Do you know how the EC came into being?

Staci Abrams apparently does not.

You certainly don't. LOL

I have a degree and taught government for most my career as a teacher. How dare you say I am wrong on this topic! You need to just STFU!

And you've demonstrated you have no clue as to the relationship between counting slaves and the EC in the const.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Funny how everyone says the Left hate America.

Stacey Abrams Tells Eager 'View' She'd 'Go Around Constitution' to End 'Racist' Electoral College

Considering several States are already trying this by giving away their EV's to the popular vote winner, I am not surprised.

It would amuse the hell out of me if one of these blue states that've signed on to this little "pact" were forced under it to give their electors to the Republican candidate. The screams would be audible all over the world.

They would also try everything they could to nullify the law before electors were sent to the EC.

Oh, I'm sure. The Democrats are all about "I'm losing the game, so change the rules mid-play."

 

[bendog]

So states agreeing to award their EV to the popular winner is treason for you guys? LOL

No, but it does disenfranchise the voters in that state.

But the EC disenfranchises voters such as gopers in CA and dems throughout the South, in just the same way. The compact proposal at least promises to count each vote equally, so a dem or gop vote in Wyo is worth the same as say …. Tex of CA. Personally, I don't like that as much as just allocated EVs in each state proportionally to the vote in the state. But that's not going to happen unless the EC winner take all in each state is dismantled. And it can be done constitutionally since each state has the power to select its electors as it chooses

 

[M14 Shooter]

But the EC disenfranchises voters such as gopers in CA and dems throughout the South, in just the same way.

Every winner-take-all election does this - someone has to win, and the people who didn't vote for him/her are disenfranchised.
So...?

Personally, I don't like that as much as just allocated EVs in each state proportionally to the vote in the state. But that's not going to happen unless the EC winner take all in each state is dismantled. And it can be done constitutionally since each state has the power to select its electors as it chooses

The Democrats will never allow the electoral votes in CA, NY and IL to split between the Dem and GOP candidates.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Funny how everyone says the Left hate America.

Stacey Abrams Tells Eager 'View' She'd 'Go Around Constitution' to End 'Racist' Electoral College

Do you know how the EC came into being?

Staci Abrams apparently does not.

You certainly don't. LOL

I have a degree and taught government for most my career as a teacher. How dare you say I am wrong on this topic! You need to just STFU!

And you've demonstrated you have no clue as to the relationship between counting slaves and the EC in the const.

I haven't said Jack Schitt about that subtopic. You are confused, dumbass!

 

[martybegan]

So states agreeing to award their EV to the popular winner is treason for you guys? LOL

No, but it does disenfranchise the voters in that state.

But the EC disenfranchises voters such as gopers in CA and dems throughout the South, in just the same way. The compact proposal at least promises to count each vote equally, so a dem or gop vote in Wyo is worth the same as say …. Tex of CA. Personally, I don't like that as much as just allocated EVs in each state proportionally to the vote in the state. But that's not going to happen unless the EC winner take all in each state is dismantled. And it can be done constitutionally since each state has the power to select its electors as it chooses

Each State going say each EV gets assigned to a Congressional district with the 2 Senate EV's going to the Statewide winner would be the best system.

The problem with the Compact is that is basically makes the person's vote in the State meaningless, and each State is supposed to guarantee a "republican" style of government. Sorry, but assigning your vote based on the votes of someone outside your jurisdiction hardly qualifies as a republican style of government.

The other issue with the Compact is that there is no official national vote for President existing, the count is based on State counts quantified by the media. There is no official certification in the Constitution for the National vote for any office.

 

[bendog]

I agree. The best that can be said of the compact it that it's an imperfect alternative that's primary advantage is to force an end to the EC.

 

[martybegan]

I agree. The best that can be said of the compact it that it's an imperfect alternative that's primary advantage is to force an end to the EC.

I would go further and call it unconstitutional and unworkable without a constitutional amendment to eliminate the EC and set up a nationwide voting system.

 

[bendog]

I agree. The best that can be said of the compact it that it's an imperfect alternative that's primary advantage is to force an end to the EC.

I would go further and call it unconstitutional and unworkable without a constitutional amendment to eliminate the EC and set up a nationwide voting system.

It's not unconst. The Const gives each state the power to select electors according to it's own state legislature. Basically, the EC had two purposes. 1) To take the direct vote away from citizens so they would not be able to elect a person who would not guarantee the limits on power provided for in the Const and BoR, and 2) not allow the more populated northern colonies/states to band together and elect a regional candidate to rule over all. And that was why the EC had to be based on the racist agreement to count slaves, who had no rights to anything let alone to vote.

There's really no concern now about 1. As for 2, blacks have the franchise now so despite a racist history, the EC is not racist now. So, the only reason for the EC is to make an individual vote in a small state worth more than that in a big state. Imo that's a valid concern, although the exact historical concern of regional disputes is no longer valid. But rural interests are different from urban. There's no reason to dispute that.

But as you posted, just finding a way to proportionally allocate EVs within each state would preserve the good of interest 2, and still more accurately reflect the voters' will in each state. But neither the dems nor the gop will give up any power unless that system actually is better for them than the status quo. And that is not going to happen unless states force it through something like the compact.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I agree. The best that can be said of the compact it that it's an imperfect alternative that's primary advantage is to force an end to the EC.

I would go further and call it unconstitutional and unworkable without a constitutional amendment to eliminate the EC and set up a nationwide voting system.

It's not unconst. The Const gives each state the power to select electors according to it's own state legislature.

Absent consent of Congress, it violates the Compact and Agreements clause.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I agree. The best that can be said of the compact it that it's an imperfect alternative that's primary advantage is to force an end to the EC.

And doesn't involve all the messy business of doing it the legal, correct way by amending the Constitution.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I agree. The best that can be said of the compact it that it's an imperfect alternative that's primary advantage is to force an end to the EC.

That would be akin to saying internment camps are an imperfect alternative that's primary advantage is to force an end to Democrats!

 

[CWayne]

So states agreeing to award their EV to the popular winner is treason for you guys? LOL

No, but it does disenfranchise the voters in that state.

But the EC disenfranchises voters such as gopers in CA and dems throughout the South, in just the same way. The compact proposal at least promises to count each vote equally, so a dem or gop vote in Wyo is worth the same as say …. Tex of CA. Personally, I don't like that as much as just allocated EVs in each state proportionally to the vote in the state. But that's not going to happen unless the EC winner take all in each state is dismantled. And it can be done constitutionally since each state has the power to select its electors as it chooses

I disagree with that analysis completely. I'm not sure when it started being a thing, but you see, we have 50 elections for the President.

50 EQUAL elections. The EC is what keeps those elections equal and why mob rule should never be considered in a republic.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

So states agreeing to award their EV to the popular winner is treason for you guys? LOL

No, but it does disenfranchise the voters in that state.

But the EC disenfranchises voters such as gopers in CA and dems throughout the South, in just the same way. The compact proposal at least promises to count each vote equally, so a dem or gop vote in Wyo is worth the same as say …. Tex of CA. Personally, I don't like that as much as just allocated EVs in each state proportionally to the vote in the state. But that's not going to happen unless the EC winner take all in each state is dismantled. And it can be done constitutionally since each state has the power to select its electors as it chooses

I disagree with that analysis completely. I'm not sure when it started being a thing, but you see, we have 50 elections for the President.

50 EQUAL elections. The EC is what keeps those elections equal and why mob rule should never be considered in a republic.

It's actually 51 elections. Do try and keep up!

 

[CWayne]

So states agreeing to award their EV to the popular winner is treason for you guys? LOL

No, but it does disenfranchise the voters in that state.

But the EC disenfranchises voters such as gopers in CA and dems throughout the South, in just the same way. The compact proposal at least promises to count each vote equally, so a dem or gop vote in Wyo is worth the same as say …. Tex of CA. Personally, I don't like that as much as just allocated EVs in each state proportionally to the vote in the state. But that's not going to happen unless the EC winner take all in each state is dismantled. And it can be done constitutionally since each state has the power to select its electors as it chooses

I disagree with that analysis completely. I'm not sure when it started being a thing, but you see, we have 50 elections for the President.

50 EQUAL elections. The EC is what keeps those elections equal and why mob rule should never be considered in a republic.

It's actually 51 elections. Do try and keep up!

I try to NOT think about that one.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Funny how everyone says the Left hate America.

Stacey Abrams Tells Eager 'View' She'd 'Go Around Constitution' to End 'Racist' Electoral College

I remember when the electoral vote was the BEST THING since sliced bread..when it was in favor of Democrats. Now that Trump may win again...its time to dump it.

When did a dem win without at least the plurality of votes?

I just don't recall dems being all that enamoured with it.

1992, dumbass!

 

[harmonica]

RACE RACE RACE RACISM RACIST RACIST etc etc
EVERYWHERE

 

[martybegan]

I agree. The best that can be said of the compact it that it's an imperfect alternative that's primary advantage is to force an end to the EC.

I would go further and call it unconstitutional and unworkable without a constitutional amendment to eliminate the EC and set up a nationwide voting system.

It's not unconst. The Const gives each state the power to select electors according to it's own state legislature. Basically, the EC had two purposes. 1) To take the direct vote away from citizens so they would not be able to elect a person who would not guarantee the limits on power provided for in the Const and BoR, and 2) not allow the more populated northern colonies/states to band together and elect a regional candidate to rule over all. And that was why the EC had to be based on the racist agreement to count slaves, who had no rights to anything let alone to vote.

There's really no concern now about 1. As for 2, blacks have the franchise now so despite a racist history, the EC is not racist now. So, the only reason for the EC is to make an individual vote in a small state worth more than that in a big state. Imo that's a valid concern, although the exact historical concern of regional disputes is no longer valid. But rural interests are different from urban. There's no reason to dispute that.

But as you posted, just finding a way to proportionally allocate EVs within each state would preserve the good of interest 2, and still more accurately reflect the voters' will in each state. But neither the dems nor the gop will give up any power unless that system actually is better for them than the status quo. And that is not going to happen unless states force it through something like the compact.

My belief is the unconstitutionality comes from the fact that it transfers the power of the State's voters from inside the State to outside the State. basically they would be allowing a power given not only to the State, but the PEOPLE of the State, to those outside the State. it doesn't modify the republican nature of the States government, i.e. representation by the people, it nullifies it.

 

[basquebromance]