[greeneyes]

By passing the Electoral College is not Constitutional-is it? I wouldn’t think so.

I always find it fascinating that people shilling for the popular vote cite the need to expand the states that get visited-clearly NY and California would be about all that was needed-especially with California’s illegals voting and ballot harvesting.

I think more than 2/3 of the states would object to having NY and California always picking the President.

[little jeremiah]

Since the Electoral College is from the Constitution, I seriously doubt these pissant governors can just do this on their own.

“The United States Electoral College is a body of electors established by the United States Constitution, constituted every four years for the sole purpose of electing the president and vice president of the United States.”

They can’t do it.

[KitJ]

"By passing the Electoral College is not Constitutional-is it? I wouldn’t think so."

This is the end-game. Pure democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on dinner.

Treason

[little jeremiah]

“Following the national presidential election day in the first week of November, each state counts its popular votes pursuant to that state’s laws to designate presidential electors.”

Electors can’t just wait to see the total US numbers. They have to go by the votes in their own states.

[Publius]

What they are proposing may be perfectly constitutional. The two hurdles ahead:

• Congress must ratify the arrangement because it's an interstate pact.
• The Supreme Court will be asked to decide if this arrangement is a violation of the Guarantee Clause in Article IV of the Constitution.