Posted on 05/31/2006 3:09:09 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
"Kerry lost the popular vote very badly"
Yes he did - by over FOUR MILLION votes.
Plus it was calculated that Bush received 10-12 million more votes in 2004 than he did in 2000. It would appear that a lot more repubs (and some closet dems) made sure we didn't have a repeat of 2000.
Explain how you figure that. I didn't think we could change the Electoral College voting system without an amendment to the Consitution .. so why do you think this would end up benefitting the repubs more than the dems ..??
Ah, as usual, the SCOTUS twisted a fairly simple clause into a complex mess.
What I find interesting is that most of those cases are about minor issues - bridges, water issues, etc. I think the Court, especially Justice Kennedy, might very well distinguish those from an issue such as voting where the Court has enunciated some important principles.
Oh, and if that analysis of the court's decisions is correct, and I am hestitant to say it is, because that paper is obviously biased, then the Court has gutted that clause as much as it has the interstate commerce clause. Shame, once again, on the Supreme Court.
The man on the street name for this idea is: How to Start a Civil War With One Law
That's exactly what I was thinking. All a republican candidate would have to do is win the popular vote, and they get all of California's electoral votes. If they were doing this in 2004, Bush wouldn't have even needed Ohio. He could have also lost a couple of other smaller states and still won.
Exactly! Can't imagine why the Kings of Voter Fraud would want to change the rules, again.
Yup, we live in a constitutional Republic, not a pure Democracy. The red/blue-state divide should make it as clear as ever why we don't have the popular vote.
With antics such as the bill in the article is the reason why we bcan't stay home and let the RATS win.
It figures. Subverting the constitution is all the liberals want to do.
They will need 60 votes in the Senate and a majority in the House to put together a Compact. Case law is pretty clear that bridges are okie dokie but an increase in the states political power at the expense of the federales brings Article 1, Section 10 into play and Congress has to give the okie dokie.
Of course that post is totally dependent on the 'political' makeup of the SCOTUS when it gets litigated. :-}
Ooops. /blushing/ Sorry.
The point still stands though.
Did you see this?
Bingo. I did something similar in 1996 -- I would have done anything to keep Clinton from getting re-elected, but I was unhappy with Dole for a number of reasons. Still, I would have held my nose and voted for Dole if it might have helped defeat Clinton.
However, I knew that Dole was already a shoe-in in my state, with or without my vote, and thus he'd get all the electoral votes from my state anyway. So I voted Libertarian just to send a (tiny) message that Dole-style Republicans weren't the kind I like to see on the ballot.
Seems to me there's a Constitutional question that could be challenged, by the state GOP. The electoral college is the present system, and must be undone by Constitutional Amendment?
Bear in mind, given the leftist fickleness of the present California legislature, I believe if legalizing "bestiality" were put before them, it would pass hands by the Democrats.
"Yes he did - by over FOUR MILLION votes."
No, Bush had 3,012,171 more 'popular' nation-wide votes than did Kerry - not four "million"...
Source: Presidential Election - 2004
dvwjr
Well, if they tried something like that, PITA would come to the defense of animals. But it's okay that human babies are murdered by the millions.
Well .. the media quotes it as 4 million.
Another screwing by the LEFT.
The looney judges and lefty ACLU will give this country to the DARK AGES for sure.
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.