Skip to comments.
Still bruised from Clinton loss, left takes aim at Electoral College in court
Foxnews.com ^
| 10/19/17
| By Fred Lucas, Fox News
Posted on 10/19/2017 9:57:17 AM PDT by blueyon
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-77 next last
To: blueyon
There is a 230 year old apparatus in place to change it.
Go for it.
21
posted on
10/19/2017 10:14:24 AM PDT
by
Radix
(Natural Born Citizens have Citizen parents)
To: blueyon
If the American people allow the communists to pull this off, We the People, will be the BIG losers.
22
posted on
10/19/2017 10:15:57 AM PDT
by
FlingWingFlyer
(Has Sheila JACKSON LEE changed her name yet?)
To: blueyon
Why doesn’t the Left just come out and say they want the Constitution burned and anyone who disagrees put up the against the wall and shot? And do they have the power to do so?
23
posted on
10/19/2017 10:16:32 AM PDT
by
backwoods-engineer
(Trump won; we got Gorsuch and a bit of MAGA. Likely have a civil war before we get more.)
To: Fai Mao
They need to read the Constitution.
So do most of the justices on SCOTUS
To: hanamizu
‘I know I saw results from the 2000 election that said that counting EC votes by congressional district + 2 for the winner of the states total vote still had Bush winning.’
such a configuration would have tremendous impact on a state like Pennsylvania, or as they say, Alabama in between Philly and Pittsburg...18 CD’s 13 controlled by Pubs, 5 by Dems; instead of 20 EV’s for the Dems, they’d get 7 if they win the state...
To: blueyon
In a nation built on INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, blocking a “tyranny of the majority” is a priority.
26
posted on
10/19/2017 10:22:45 AM PDT
by
ctdonath2
(It's not "white privilege", it's "Puritan work ethic". Behavior begets consequences.)
To: ssaftler
Washington DC should not have electoral votes, not being a state. The 23rd amendment gave them the number of EVs of the smallest state, but that is the opposite of what the Founders wanted. DC was supposed to be a capital district, not a state.
27
posted on
10/19/2017 10:22:52 AM PDT
by
backwoods-engineer
(Trump won; we got Gorsuch and a bit of MAGA. Likely have a civil war before we get more.)
To: blueyon
The only thing that will come out of this is the enrichment of scumbag lawyers.
28
posted on
10/19/2017 10:23:46 AM PDT
by
RooRoobird20
("Democrats haven't been this angry since Republicans freed the slaves.")
To: Bubba_Leroy
Constitution?
Leftists don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution.
To: blueyon
The states make their own rules how to determine the winner. It’s a state matter.
30
posted on
10/19/2017 10:28:36 AM PDT
by
Hotlanta Mike
("You can avoid reality, but you can't avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.")
To: blueyon
Lessig contends other proposals, such as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, could take decades to fully implement. By contrast, a court ruling could force states to move to a proportional system by 2020. No court ruling is possible. The text of the Constitution is supreme law. The states cannot be forced to choose one way only to select electors.
-PJ
31
posted on
10/19/2017 10:29:23 AM PDT
by
Political Junkie Too
(The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
To: blueyon
She didn’t have a problem with any part of the system when her perv husband became president.
32
posted on
10/19/2017 10:32:36 AM PDT
by
MayflowerMadam
(A person's greatest strength is his greatest weakness.)
To: 17th Miss Regt
That means that the EVs in California and New York might be split Thank you for stating my thoughts.
33
posted on
10/19/2017 10:37:11 AM PDT
by
Jeff Chandler
(From now on refer to them as the Weinstein Democrats and the Weinstein media.)
To: blueyon
Democrats are fools - they ARE the minority party and will be for decades... they should be thankful they have the electoral college - cause without it we would steamroll them...
“Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report used to be a big progressive.
He even had a show with The Young Turks! But now he's not a progressive. He has left the left. Why? Dave Rubin shares his story.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiVQ8vrGA_8
34
posted on
10/19/2017 10:37:56 AM PDT
by
GOPJ
("NFL: Now Far Left" - - freeper Lazamataz)
To: blueyon
With a winner-take-all, most of America is ignored, professor Lawrence Lessig said in previewing his legal case which, like any challenge to the Electoral College, faces a steep uphill climb. Lessig, though, argues the system violates the 14th Amendments one-man-one-vote principle.
The flaw in this "professor's" argument is that electing the President is done by the states, not by the people.
-PJ
35
posted on
10/19/2017 10:38:03 AM PDT
by
Political Junkie Too
(The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
To: blueyon
They want popular vote without voter I.D.
36
posted on
10/19/2017 10:41:46 AM PDT
by
just me
(God bless President Trump and the USA)
To: DuncanWaring
"Math Against Tyranny"
Discover Magazine
What an outstanding article. I've bookmarked it on my desktop computer and sent a link to my laptop for later bookmarking.
Reminded me of Hari Seldon's Psychohistory theories
(Isaac Asimov - Foundation series)
37
posted on
10/19/2017 10:45:55 AM PDT
by
BlueLancer
(ANTIFA - The new and improved SturmAbteilung)
To: Bubba_Leroy
The objective is to have the states vote their delegates in relation to the popular vote within that state rather than all of the delegates going to the overall winner of the state. It would have the states divide the delegates proportionately rather than en-bloc.
They recognize that changing the constitution to effect the popular vote is hard so they hope to have the individual states move towards this goal by splitting the delegates in a manner that more closely follows the popular vote count.
38
posted on
10/19/2017 10:46:57 AM PDT
by
outofsalt
( If history teaches us anything it's that history rarely teaches us anything)
To: blueyon
A smart candidate campaigns to achieve the most electoral votes. Stupid and/or arrogant ones.....ones who are preordained by sheer godlike power, like her heinous, Hitlery, dont find that necessary....and frankly, beneath them.
39
posted on
10/19/2017 10:47:44 AM PDT
by
Vaquero
(Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
To: outofsalt
Any state that wants to can do so. It is entirely up to the state legislatures how to appoint their electors and even whether to have any sort of election to do it.
40
posted on
10/19/2017 10:48:56 AM PDT
by
Bubba_Leroy
(The Obamanation has ended!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-77 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson