Uuummm,what’s NPV?
.
Would have been a much better article if you explained what NPV is....
Nobody has a clue about what you are trying to say.
What the heck is NPV? The only NPV I’m aware of is Net Present Value, and I’m pretty sure that was not what you were writing about.
The Democrats want NPV so bad they can taste it!.
Once it is done, the POTUS will be chosen by California and NY and a handful of other populous states. The rest of the country will essentially be disenfranchised...............
Assuming what you say is accurate, it appears to circumvent the Constitution and is therefore unconstitutional.
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.
Excellent questions.
It’s instructive for all of us to know, that we do not have a constitutional right to vote in a presidential election.
States are allowed to choose electors to the electoral college at their discretion. They are not required to choose electors via a popular vote.
If a state votes Republican in the popular vote in a state, but a Democrat wins the nationwide popular vote, and that state had decided to award electoral votes that way, I’m not sure legally there is anything anyone can do to change that.
Since states are empowered to choose electors, and are not required to even hold a popular vote election, it’s hard to see how state voters in a state could claim to be disenfranchised, when there is no constitutional right to vote for president in the first place.
So I take it you prefer the IRR (Individual Rate of Return) measure for capital budgeting?
Instead of using the acronym “NPV” which NO ONE is obligated to know what it means, the author could have used the actual words meant by “NPV” before going on to talk about it.
Listen dummy, you ALWAYS spell-out the acronym the first time it is used.
good lord.
The “National Popular Vote” agenda will not pass constitutional muster, as it is clearly identified as an attempt to go around the Constitution’s electoral college provisions and side-step what they truly mean, replacing it with a so-called “national popular vote”.
If it were possible it’s advocates should burn in a “Constitutional hell”; if only there were such a place.
A “nation” is not the mere counting of “how many people”, and is not even “clearly” represented in a mere counting of a “majority” of people spread all over a nation.
We are a republic (res publica - the public whose government is NOT by direct democracy, but by “representatives”. We have federal elections not for “national” congress persons, or “national” senators, nor even ‘directly’ for the chief executive, but in each case by electing “representatives” (of districts, or of states [as with the senate and the electoral college]).
A “nation” is if it is anything at all a collection of places much more than a national counting of persons. A nation is its villages, towns, cities, counties, regions and states way more than it is any mere counting of people “nationally”.
If anyone examines well the electoral college votes from any election, they will find the winner has “won” more of “the nation” than their opponent(s), as they have won majorities in far more counties of the country than their opponent. Their victory is always spread over more of “the nation” than a mere national popular “majority” ever could be.
The NPV is fraud, pure and simple fraud, and an attempt to bypass what it’s backers know they can never achieve - formally changing the Constitution. That is why they have tries this legislative slight of hand.
So they want four or five states to determine who’ll be president and the rest of the 4546 states no longer will have a say.
NPV. One man’s mnemonics are the other man’s hieroglyphics.
Net present value?
Defining your acronyms helps.
The dirty little secret is that the states, not the people, cast votes in the presidential election - which is not conducted on the first Tuesday in November but a later date, when the votes are counted by the House of Representatives and the winner announced.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 CongressThus in principle, at least, a state legislature could simply elect the state’s slate of electors itself, without reference to any popular vote. So there’s that.The Electors shall meet in their respective States and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same State with themselves Twelfth Amendment
It seems to me that the state legislatures of purple states would serve their own interests best by not giving added influence to large populations in other states. Why would such a state’s constitutents prefer that?
Net Present Value? LOL!