Replies

But this idea of hers cannot stand... it would increase the likely event of endless court battles. How could you recount only state-by-state? We'd have to have recounts in every state to ensure there aren't another half million votes out there... And since those "faithless electors" are picked because of their party loyalty who's fault is it that a few voted for someone else?

If she really wanted to do something she could work inside California to have us moved to a proportional electoral vote. That is, if she was really concerned about disenfranchising those who vote for the loser and candidates ignoring a state as large as CA because it's seen as a given.

But this idea of hers cannot stand... it would increase the likely event of endless court battles. How could you recount only state-by-state? We'd have to have recounts in every state to ensure there aren't another half million votes out there... And since those "faithless electors" are picked because of their party loyalty who's fault is it that a few voted for someone else?

I can't see a flaw in what you say. But just because that stuff would happen doesn't mean it would be rejected. Look at prohibition, income tax, and direct election of Senators. All of which generated bad stuff and changed the nation for the worse but were approved anyway because they "were fair".

It is a recipe for contested elections, opposing sectional parties, and people hitting each other with canes in the Senate. But that doesn't mean the Jaywalk All-Stars won't ever get it through.