Skip to comments.Movement to Bypass Constitution in Presidential Elections
Posted on 07/27/2010 10:38:41 PM PDT by chatter4
The Massachusetts Legislature has approved a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system, set forth in the Constitution. The system set up in the Constitution, requires that each state's electors, cast votes for the President and Vice President and present those votes to the President of the Senate for a final tally. What fouled this system up was that 48 States passed "winner-take-all " rules, meaning that if candidate X got 51% of the vote in the state, he is awarded all of that states electoral votes. This is why Al Gore lost the election to Bush in 2000. Only 2 states, Maine and Nebraska, do not follow the winner-takes-all rule, dividing the votes, between the candidates, as required by the Constitution. It was not the electoral system that was at fault, it was the winner-take-all rules. Now, state by state, the Liberals are passing a national winner-take-all scheme.
Illinois, New Jersey, Hawaii, Maryland, and Washington have approved this new system, which could nullify your vote. This movement must be stopped. More details in video.
At some point, whether we want to accept the fact or not, its going to come down to a few hard men. And we are going to have to undertake extraordinary measures to restore our country and the constitution.
The only “men” left today are merely hard for each other.
And I quote... “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
Note the tagline ...
The founding fathers were men of wealth, power, current office holders and military leaders. These men pledged their lives as well as their families lives.Many lost vast fortunes akin to the billionaires of today.
They were most of all people who understood that there is a power far greater then ourselves. and rewards far greater then we accumulate here on earth.
God bless America yesterday and today.
Also, conservatism must, finally, win in all major U.S. cities, and for the long-term, if non-leftists really want to successfully survive for the far future.
This is how the election won’t happen. You could be right about that.
This needs to go to SCOTUS.
If any city Freepers resent my posting this, sorry 'bout that! You need to get out and stop supporting the decay with your productivity.
Let them rot!
"I view great cities as pestilential to the morals, the health and the liberties of man. True, they nourish some of the elegant arts; but the useful ones can thrive elsewhere; and less perfection in the others, with more health, virtue and freedom, would be my choice."
Yes, just let NY and CA elect our Presidents in the future. That would be fair right? Why bother counting or even considering what other peon states want for leadership. They don’t have enough sense anyhow right?!
The Constitution gives every state the power to determine for itself how it will choose its voters in the electoral college. Article II Sec.1 says:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
It is an illogical decision from the point of view of preserving state sovereignty and it undermines the best interests of the citizens of Massachusetts...whose voice would effectively mean nothing in under such a system. This law would effectively mean that the legislature has chosen to elect whichever candidate everyone else wants, regardless of whether that person is good for Massachusetts. This plan circumvents the intent of instituting the electoral college, it undermines federalism, and runs counter to the spirit of the Constitution, but it is a perfectly legal and constitutional way of doing it. Massachusetts will likely quickly abandon the system as soon as it backfires on them. (Especially, if no other states adopt the system)
“The only men left today are merely hard for each other.”
Maybe that’s why so many conservative women are winning primaries this year? :-))
“God bless America yesterday and today.”
Four other states, I believe, have already adopted this legislation -- New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland and Washington (all blue). This particular movement is clear evidence of how unhinged the liberals were (and are) over the 2000 election.
As you note, it could just as easily come back to bite them on the behind. At which time, they will be shrieking for a do-over...
I’m very confused. If it’s winner-take-all now, what exactly are they trying to change? To what?
“Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats.”...
I know that there was a law being pushed somewhere that stated the PERCEIVED winner of the popular vote would get all the electors.
Either way, this is UnConstitutional.
“Massachusetts will likely quickly abandon the system as soon as it backfires on them.”
So, in 1972, MA’s electoral vote would have gone to Nixon?
And in 1984, it would have gone to Reagan?
You people in MA are really, really dumb (I cite Rep. Barney, Senators Kennedy and Kerry as proof of dumbness).
In 2012, your electors will all vote for President Palin! Hah!
How dumb can you be to want a minority of overpopulated states running the entire country?
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.