Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Hope to find out how these plaintiffs want to allocate EVs.

By Congressional district and bonus to winner of the state? Might work in a small state but chaos in larger states , districts closely divided.

1 posted on 02/21/2018 2:40:45 PM PST by SMGFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
To: SMGFan

The Left never quit folks. If anything, the EC should be strengthened. Whoever wins the most counties in a state wins that state.


2 posted on 02/21/2018 2:43:26 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (If the illegal immigration issue were Social Security, it'd be privatized by now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

I’d like to see EV proportionally allocated.

It would mean the losing candidate picks up some EV in a state they wouldn’t otherwise win.

Watch liberal heads explode at the thought of a GOP candidate picking up EV in NY and CA.

A district EV vote system would accomplish the same thing.


3 posted on 02/21/2018 2:45:56 PM PST by goldstategop ((In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Forever))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan
The Constitution is quite clear. State legislatures have plenary power to determine how presidential electors are allocated. Period. Full stop.

Trying to use Reynolds v. Sims to overrule hard coded language in the Constitution won't pass muster.

4 posted on 02/21/2018 2:45:58 PM PST by Publius ("Who is John Galt?" by Billthedrill and Publius available at Amazon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

The Constitution says the states can give their EVs to a duck if they wish..................


5 posted on 02/21/2018 2:46:39 PM PST by Red Badger (Wanna surprise? Google your own name. Wanna have fun? Google your friends names......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

Boies: “This is a clear violation of the principle of one person, one vote.”

One man one vote is a social justice scotus construct from the early 1960s. It has done incalculable damage.


6 posted on 02/21/2018 2:47:34 PM PST by Jacquerie (ArticleVBlog.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

California in 2016, the Presidential ballot provided proof positive that the Electoral College is needed.

California would have flipped the election against the outcome of the other 49 states.

One state, no matter how misguided it is, should be able to flip and election against the outcome in the other 49 states.

Without California, Trump would have won the popular vote. At least the last I looked he would have.


7 posted on 02/21/2018 2:47:59 PM PST by DoughtyOne (01/26/18 DJIA 30 stocks $26,616.71 48.794% > open 11/07/16 215.71 from 50% increase 1.2183 yrs..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

Why would our Judicial System even allow a licensed “Officer of the Court” to get away with filing nonsense like this?? Every Lawyer involved should be Remanded for Contempt for 30 Days and receive a $10,000 Sanction for crap like this, then Permanent Disbarment

The Stupid will Stop if we hold these people accountable.


11 posted on 02/21/2018 2:52:41 PM PST by eyeamok (Tolerance: The virtue of having a belief in Nothing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

This is judge-shopping for liberal federal judges. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them file in Hawaii also.


12 posted on 02/21/2018 2:53:42 PM PST by kaehurowing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan
Getting rid of the Electoral College was part of Hitlary's plan if she made it to the White House, probably through an Executive Order.

But, she didn't win.

HA!

15 posted on 02/21/2018 2:54:03 PM PST by Slyfox (Not my circus, not my monkeys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

I prefer the district system where the majority winner receives that district’s electoral vote. If no majority winner, the district has a run off in 30 days with only the top two candidates allowed in the run off.

The two state electoral votes are given as, one to the winner of the most districts within the state and the second is given to the one who wins the majority of votes within the state. If either of those two conditions are not met, then the governor decides which candidate, of the ones on the ballot, receives the electoral vote.

Now having said all of that, this is the WRONG way to affect the change to the electoral college. To change the constitution, you need a constitutional amendment - period.


18 posted on 02/21/2018 2:54:42 PM PST by taxcontrol (Stupid should hurt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: KC_Lion

Ping.


20 posted on 02/21/2018 2:55:24 PM PST by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan
The Electoral College process was established in the Constitution as a compromise between electing a president by a vote in Congress and by popular vote of citizens.

Pure bravo sierra!! James Wilson of PA was among the very few who trusted the people to elect a President. The purpose of the EC was to elevate a man of honor, proven ability, and someone unattached to a factional political party to the Presidency.

26 posted on 02/21/2018 2:59:45 PM PST by Jacquerie (ArticleVBlog.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan
“Under the winner-take-all system, U.S. citizens have been denied their constitutional right to an equal vote in Presidential elections,” Boies said in a statement.

Their constitutional right? If that were true, you should be able to find a clause in the actual Constitution to support Bois' claim. I have never seen such a clause.

In fact, the constitution doesn't even have a clause requiring the Electors to vote according to the vote results in their State. Any such requirement would be found in State legislation, so it would not be a constitution right.

It seems Dims have a fantasy dream and then write it up as lawsuit.

27 posted on 02/21/2018 3:03:13 PM PST by savedbygrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan
Article II : "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors..."

This is a nonjusticeable political question.

29 posted on 02/21/2018 3:04:55 PM PST by Jim Noble (Single payer is coming. Which kind do you like?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors...”

Not much room for interpretation there. Did the Legislature for the state pick this method? Yes? Case dismissed!


36 posted on 02/21/2018 3:16:10 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan
The lawsuits contend that system denies citizens their constitutional right to an equal vote by discarding votes for candidates who lose in a state and magnifying the votes of those who win there.

When has that ever been a Constitutional right?

The annoying thing is that these lawsuits are headed up by David Boies, who knows better.

-PJ

40 posted on 02/21/2018 3:23:10 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

The EC vote is needed otherwise Hillary would be President.
Hillary won the Popular vote by about 2.9 million votes of
which about 1.7 million votes came from one county.

Los Angles County, CA.


41 posted on 02/21/2018 3:23:45 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

Hey, lets let CA decide all elections. Saves money and time.


42 posted on 02/21/2018 3:24:36 PM PST by bgill (CDC site, "We don't know how people are infected with Ebola.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan
"Under the winner-take-all system, U.S. citizens have been denied their constitutional right to an equal vote in Presidential elections," Boies said in a statement. "This is a clear violation of the principle of one person, one vote."

States are free to do what they wish with their electors

43 posted on 02/21/2018 3:27:44 PM PST by frogjerk (We are conservatives. Not libertarians, not "fiscal conservatives", not moderates)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SMGFan

The Democrats lost PLAYING BY THE RULES. But instead of regrouping, they’re now calling in their judges to CHANGE THE RULES.

How about one of their judges simply rule the Republican Party to be Unconstitutional, once and for all, and just be done with it?


44 posted on 02/21/2018 3:28:38 PM PST by BobL (I shop at Walmart and eat at McDonald's...I just don't tell anyone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson