Posted on 12/25/2008 7:28:40 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
To eliminate the purpose of the Electoral College in one’s own state is sort of diminishing the significance of one’s state in the national vote. The other states who still keep the same Electoral College voting procedure intact — they end up gaining more *significance* overall.
So, if California split their Electoral College vote to make it like the popular vote — this would *open the door* bigtime to the Republicans in that state. That means California would *dilute* its significance on election day by doing this.
That’s why I don’t expect this to go very far with those big states. And furthermore, if the smaller states do it, then they eliminate themselves form candidates campaigning there, because it won’t be a “winner take all” situation.
The only way it works “okay” for the Democrats is if they get *all the states* to do it — at once — before the next election.
I believe it takes a congressman and a senator to object. I think in 2000 one of the congressmen did file an objection but it died as no senator went along....I’m afraid we don’t have any senators that will go along and force the issue this time. We are doomed!
suspicious fire at Jackson 5’s house today
(according to drudge)
birth certificate and all leverage the Jackson 5 family had is now gone...
dark-face make-up?
Big if.
So far SCOTUS hasn’t shown the interest or stomach for taking on such a case.
I hope they do, but I’m not holding my breath.
I concur, however with the mindset that the majority of voters are illegitimate by reason of insanity for voting for him in the first place.
Don’t be so quick to write it off. As I read it here in Michigan it creates coalitions of states that combine their electoral votes and require ALL electors to vote for the popular winner overall.
If we vote overwhelmingly republican in Michigan, but say Indiana and Ohio vote democrat, our electors go to the winner of all 3 states combined.
It passed here in the house before anyone even knew about it. 4 states have already made it law, 4 more have passed it in both houses, and 6 have already passed it in one house.
The following came from http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2154017/posts
But sources inside the White House say that Bush has mentioned several scenarios which could ultimately postpone the swearing in of President-elect Obama. (emphasis added)
This has never been explained any further.
Ohhh..., I’ll have to go back and look at that one again. I didn’t realize this very strange method that they are using. That doesn’t sound good at all.
Thanks for calling it to my attention. I haven’t seen any threads specifically about this. Have they been posted before?
too late. Plus they don’t have standing.
You are right.
The electors voted already. The only way that this could be challenged is through one Senator and one Congressman.
Oblowma is hoping that he’ll get away with being illegal—and as soon as this blows up and finally has hard evidence my friends won’t have a leg to stand on with their “you’re crazy there’s no proof” bulls@%t.
It would make more of an impact if all shades, races and genders showed up to claim to be him.
You asked — “If US citizens do not have standing, WHO does ???????? “
In practice..., no one knows and no one has been able to find out in a legal case yet...
The federal courts will not touch this because they men have NO standing.
“Man, can’t I just eat my waffel?”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.