The NPV may be closer than you think

[Independent thinker]

If the NVP passes, I would look forward to CA, OR, WA, IL, NY, etc, sending electoral delegates for the GOP candidate in 2028.

You know darned well if that happened, they wouldn't actually vote for the Republican. They've already tried in more than one Trump election to get delegates to be unfaithful. Screw the laws, even their own.

 

[martybegan]

No it’s not.

It’s the state legislature determining the allocation.

WW

it basically removes the vote of a majority of citizens from State X and replaces it with people out of State.

And we all know if a Blue State ends up getting screwed by this law, it would be repealed before they certify their vote.

 

[Independent thinker]

Good points. I'm also not so sure that the founders weren't on the right track when they set it up that the right to vote required land ownership. Truly land owners are the only folks who have skin in the game.

I totally agree. In fact, I would favor only allowing voters who pay federal income taxes to vote in federal elections as those who are actually paying the taxes should decide how their tax dollars are spent.

 

[Independent thinker]

No it's not....This is like term limits; in order to get it you have to pass an amendment or change through and Article V Con Con....There's absolutely no provision in Article V -the one that deals with how to change the Constitution- for such a compact.

But you mob rule authoritarians keep swingin' away with your little pipe dream...You're not wasting any of my time, money, and energy.

Funny how the mob rule people are the ones claiming that the other side suppresses votes or takes democracy away.

 

[Independent thinker]

Was there any other candidate that received more votes than he did? You democrats will grasp at anything to gaslight your point--LOL, whatever makes you sleep better.

They don't sleep much with Trump as their president.

 

[Independent thinker]

You obviously don't know your ass from a hot rock, as to the construction of the Constitution and the American republic.

Awwwwwwwwwwwww, give him a break. He's for socialism so your words are totally foreign to him.

 

[Independent thinker]

I guess you're probably too young to remember the third worst, Jimmie Carter. You might have been too young to remember the second, "W" and you voted for the worst--the dementia-addled Joe Biden. Glad I could help you with that--you're welcome.

I still give the top award to Jimmy Carter. Double digit inflation and double digit interest rates, not to mention he let Iran make a total fool of him.

 

[Independent thinker]

I'm fine with popular or electoral.

I'm afraid my Democrat friends will be mighty disappointed if they think a popular vote will help them win the White House. If any party, the EC advantages the Democrats who currently have two to three large Elector states while Repubs have two that are smaller, Texas and Florida.

But that doesn't matter, really. Republicans run electoral campaigns because that is the system, while Democrats run as if the EC were not a thing. If the change is made, the next Repub will run a popular campaign and still win.

That was very obvious in 2016. Trump campaigned to win electoral votes, larglely ignoring big blue unwinnable states while Hillary tried to rack up all the votes she could in states like California and New York, states she was going to win anyway, while ignoring states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and a couple of other swing states. If the election were about the popular vote, Trump would have camaigned very differently.

 

[Concerned American]

I still give the top award to Jimmy Carter. Double digit inflation and double digit interest rates, not to mention he let Iran make a total fool of him.

I give Carter a pass on the inflation--he inherited it from Ford and Nixon before him. I agree with your take on his incompetence in handling Iran, but that seems to have been a hallmark of every potus after him as well in varying degrees. I still think that hands down, Joe Biden was the worst excuse for a potus in the history of the country. He has absolutely NO redeeming qualities. Everything he touched turned to excrement.

 

[Independent thinker]

the compact says they will ignore the vote dumbass.

Yeah, if you think about it, theoretically, a state such as Virginia where democrats have a slight advantage and are in control of the government, could pass a law stating that in presidential elections, the winner of the popular vote in California would then receive all of Virginia's electoral votes, regardless of how Virginians actually voted. If they can do the NPV interstate Compact then they could also do this.

 

[Independent thinker]

Except if it goes against the blue States they will immediately try to revoke the law before the votes are certified.

If you want the President to be directly elected, amend the Constitution, stop trying to use end runs.

Exactly! You can darn well bet that if Trump was to win at this, they would be doing some fast fancy footwork to work around the very law they created. We've already seen them try to get electors to be unfaithful and that wouldn't be very hard if the electors swung left in the first place.

 

[Independent thinker]

Actually, this is the entire point of the NPV.

All the electoral votes of the rural states get negated, and subsequently their voters disenfranchised, by those of the heavily urbanized states.

This is exactly the centralization of electoral power to the cities that the EC was designed to obviate.

Exactly. The party that keeps on crying vote suppression finds a scheme to suppress votes.

 

[Independent thinker]

Look dumbass if the vote total in a state is for a person and the State then changes who they send electors for to another person that negates the voters in that state. And that is unconstitutional. A state that allows a vote must honor that vote.

Yeah, this would probably make it to the Supreme Court and how does WW think that would turn out?

 

[Independent thinker]

What judges? The same liberal hacks who are overturned all the time? I'll take my chances that the Supreme Court will get it right.

Spot on prediction. Yes, you know damned well democrats would shop this to friendly courts and win, only to be overturned somewhere on up the line, probably the SCOTUS.

 

[Independent thinker]

Having six is great.

What's sick is that 3 of them might find some stupid twisted argument for it.

You know Jackson doesn't give a shit about the law or the Constitution.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No it’s not.

It’s the state legislature determining the allocation.

WW

Nope if they allow a vote for President, they have to honor that vote there is no way to write a law so that if the majority votes for something then the loser wins.

 

[Concerned American]

Nope if they allow a vote for President, they have to honor that vote there is no way to write a law so that if the majority votes for something then the loser wins.

I have to disagree, Gunny. There have been a few times in our history that the EC has overruled the popular vote.

There have been five U.S. presidential elections where the winner of the Electoral College lost the popular vote: John Quincy Adams in 1824, Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876, Benjamin Harrison in 1888, George W. Bush in 2000, and Donald Trump in 2016.
Mental Floss Ballotpedia

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I have to disagree, Gunny. There have been a few times in our history that the EC has overruled the popular vote.

There have been five U.S. presidential elections where the winner of the Electoral College lost the popular vote: John Quincy Adams in 1824, Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876, Benjamin Harrison in 1888, George W. Bush in 2000, and Donald Trump in 2016.
Mental Floss Ballotpedia

the president is not elected by the popular vote never has been it is not a single election it is 50 elections that when done the electors are chosen by the vote of the states voters. Not the same at all. it does not matter if every person in California votes for one person if states with 270 worth of electors vote otherwise.

And it is not allowed for the state in question to award their electors to someone that lost in their state. with the exception of 2 states that do it by districts.

 

[WorldWatcher]

it basically removes the vote of a majority of citizens from State X and replaces it with people out of State.

And we all know if a Blue State ends up getting screwed by this law, it would be repealed before they certify their vote.

And in winner take all states, it basically removes the vote of a majority of citizens and replaces it with people from a different district.

I agree. If the results are not what the want then state legislatures will abandon it.

Which is why I don’t support the NPV. But the legality and my desires are two different things.

WW

 

[Concerned American]

the president is not elected by the popular vote never has been it is not a single election it is 50 elections that when done the electors are chosen by the vote of the states voters. Not the same at all. it does not matter if every person in California votes for one person if states with 270 worth of electors vote otherwise.

And it is not allowed for the state in question to award their electors to someone that lost in their state. with the exception of 2 states that do it by districts.

I am aware of how the EC works. I was responding to your post--

Nope if they allow a vote for President, they have to honor that vote there is no way to write a law so that if the majority votes for something then the loser wins.

If you were not saying that the EC does not overrule the popular vote, then I apologize.