Posted on 02/25/2019 1:13:19 PM PST by bgill
Colorado is the latest state to pass a bill which would change the way presidential candidates win office. The state joins 11 others after passing a bill to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Under the compact, the candidate who receives the most popular votes nationwide would be be awarded the electoral college votes from participating states, even if the candidate lost in that state. In order for the bills in states which have passed laws recognizing the agreement, a total of 270 electoral votes from participating states is needed. Colorado has joined California, Connecticut, D.C., Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. That brings the compact to 181 electoral votes of the 270 needed.
(Excerpt) Read more at fox17.com ...
This is nothing more than mob rule. The Electoral College was wisely created to prevent mob rule. If the popular vote takes over our electoral system, our country will be ruled by a handful of counties across the USA, and increase the number of ignored and forgotten men and women by the millions.
Democrats and communists have too much in common.
Actually that is not true. If you add up all the rural small and mid sized towns and cities and compare it to the top 20 metro urban areas its about 50-50.
States currently have a lot of compacts with each other over a whole range of issues. Not sure where SCOTUS would be willing to draw the line.
It's no different than today.
The state legislature appoints electors who say they'll vote a certain way. In most cases for the winner of that state's popular vote.
Electors aren't required to vote any particular way, they just won't get appointed unless they agree to do the legislature's bidding.
If this flies, then anyone campaigning only has to campaign in, I think, 80 counties and a dozen cities, the rest won’t matter. Low population states won’t count at all so no need to campaign their or cater to their needs.
The mistake the left is making is applying the new rules to the “old” way of doing things- if it was the popular vote then HRC would have won! But, with new rules, every campaign would now be run differently, with different demographics and goals. Anyone campaigning in a state with only two or three House members would be wasting time and money. New Hampshire comes to mind, and Idaho.
If this thing ever becomes legit, SCOTUS will strike it down quickly.
Well that is why the left wants open borders, so Republicans can NEVER win the popular vote
even if the candidate lost in that state
The Dems will to win even when they lose ,why have elections at all
With the media as it is, maybe it will come down to a “trusted leftist” sneaking in rogue freedom policies under the noses of socialists.
since the chances of such nonsense ever occurring is ZERO!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That’s what I thought the chances were of us having an ineligible usurper who was a marxist and a muslim in the Oval Office.
Seven short years after 9/11, Barack Hussein Obama usurped the office in violation of the Constitution with the cooperation of both parties.
This is the real voter suppression....
OK, so now there’s a big motivation for people in blue states who are conservative to get out and vote. Beat them over the head with their own stupidity, make sure the popular vote as well as the electoral victory goes Trump in 2020. You just know it’s going to happen, the world has been very weird that way for several years now.
Is this how they rigged it for Hillary and screwed Bernie ? LOL
Of course they do.
The state legislatures appoint electors who agree that they will vote the way the legislators want - in most cases for the winner of that state's popular vote.
It isn't binding and you could conceivably have a 'faithless' elector, but only reliable electors are going to get appointed.
2/3 t propose for ratification.
3/4 to ratify.
38 states needed to ratify. The leftist progressives will never get there so they are trying to do an end run around the Constitution.
Yep! That's what everyone thought and said 50-years ago about 90% of today's laws, regulations, school curricular, religions, the continuing loss of Constitutionally- guaranteed individual freedom & liberty, etc...etc..
But nothing significant was successfully done to stop any of it...
Which will be during the actual election. I wonder if SCOTUS will put their decision off until what, the following June?
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.