Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

I live in Massachusetts, and I know our legislature passed a similar law. When I complained to my representative and the governor's office about this; I was told that somehow by not allowing our electors to vote for the candidate our citizens choose in favor of the "majority" of the country, we are being better represented. It seems there are twelve other states on board; the most appalling aspect is, they can decide to vote this way after the results of the popular vote and electoral college are compiled. It is evident they are planning on stealing the next election.
1 posted on 09/06/2008 4:46:22 AM PDT by Billg64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last
To: Billg64

Oh sure, join MD in its not mere stupidity, but blatant asininnity (excuse the non-word).

These assholes are essentially curtailing all our votes, and stupidly getting us in a circular situation when everyone adopts this asinine stupidity. When all states do this, then how do you send your EVs?


40 posted on 09/06/2008 6:02:54 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Billg64
I guess I would be in favor of each state deciding to split the votes by Congressional district with the two extra votes going to the winner of the state. Such an approach would create something of a firewall against the nightmare of a national recount (think 2000), but still persuade candidates to campaign more than just in the battleground states. The fact that the smaller states still carry proportionally more weight will help the concept of federalism.

I don't think it is healthy for either party to ignore the out of play states. I think part of the national balkanization is due to this fact.

The problem is that this approach would either have to be formalized in the Constitution or all 50 states would have to adopt the approach (very unlikely unless you get traditionally red and blue states to do it together).

I think that I would prefer a Constitutional amendment that would also get away from the concept of electors (some day a faithless elector is going to make a difference and then watch out). The amendment could also formalize succession issues (such as if the President and/or the Vice President elect getting killed before swearing in).

57 posted on 09/06/2008 7:06:27 AM PDT by exhaustguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Billg64

East Coast & West Coast cities would elect all presidents from now on if this law ever passes. The only way to recover would be for red states to secede and/or revolt.


72 posted on 09/06/2008 12:30:23 PM PDT by Mogollon ($5/gal Gas....Kick the Jacka$$es Out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Billg64

NJ Gov. Corzine signed a National Popular Vote Bill earlier this year.


101 posted on 09/10/2008 7:11:09 AM PDT by tropical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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