Posted on 07/14/2023 8:21:14 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
WASHINGTON — Traumatized by the results of 2000 and 2016, when Republicans George W. Bush and Donald Trump won the presidency despite getting fewer votes than their Democratic opponents, many on the left and center-left have developed a deep aversion to the state-by-state counting of electoral votes, regarding it as both anti-democratic and anti-Democratic. A Gallup poll taken in 2020, for example, found that roughly 9 in 10 Democrats favored abolishing the electoral college and choosing the president solely on the basis of who gets support from the most voters. Just 2 in 10 Republicans agreed.
Responding to that sentiment, lawmakers in 25 states — most of them with Democratic majorities — have voted for an interstate agreement designed to bypass the electoral college and choose the president by popular vote. It won’t be in effect for 2024, but could be by 2028.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Regardless of party, it amazes me that any state would willingly give away the leverage of having their own EC result. The money will only flow to the states with the biggest populations.
Americans have been on a long, slow journey towards a powerful (tyrannical?) central government controlling every facet of life in America since Lincoln and the Civil War. Its been speeding up the past few decades.
Very typical of Democrats to prefer mob rule over a constitutional process
when the LEFT loses
they immediately try to change the rules
in their favor
Regardless of party, it amazes me that any state would willingly give away the leverage of having their own EC result. The money will only flow to the states with the biggest populations.
in that context
it seems even more amazing that the 16th and 17th were approved
Now we know why the Democrats are calling for more “democracy.”
The Constitution only means something to Democrats when they agree with it.
> an interstate agreement designed to bypass the electoral college and choose the president by popular vote <
States have a wide leeway in choosing how to assign their electoral votes. But this seems unconstitutional to me. Suppose the majority of the state’s voters chooses the candidate from Party A. But the candidate from Party B wins the nationwide vote.
Then majority rule does not apply in that state. The majority voted for A, but B gets all the electoral votes.
States can't enact an interstate compact without Congressional approval, but no state (with or without Congressional approval) can give away their Constitutional plenary power. The Supremacy clause of the Constitution says that anything IN the Constitution is supreme over any law.
That means that a state like Michigan can renege on the National Vote Scheme any time they want because they never really give up their Constitutional plenary power. Congress cannot take that power away from a state even if the state joins an interstate compact.
In fact, states may argue that any compact that involves giving up a Constitutional plenary power is not subject to interstate compacts. Those compacts were reserved for interstate commerce agreements, water rights, mineral rights, border issues, etc. Congress can approve "treaties" between states, but they cannot force a state to stay in a compact that involves a Constititional power.
-PJ
The hijos of Jose y Maria will not have to put up with Democratic Party tyranny.
Thing of the power a swing state gives up. The amount of money that they could get in earmarks. I am not advocating for such spending, but it is a reality. Really stupid to give that away. Being a swing state loses all value in a national popular vote paradigm.
I don’t recall their complaining about the EC when Bill Clinton was elected with only 43% of the popular vote in 1992, and was re-elected in 1996 with 49%. If they are concerned about popular vote majorities (not pluralities), Mrs. Clinton didn’t win a majority either — only 48%. Her problem was that she way overperformed in California. Take away the California vote from both her and Trump, and Trump wins both the national popular vote by a majority, and the EC.
Think (not Thing)
If we win the popular vote convincingly perhaps MTG should propose eliminating it. See how the rats react.
Communications and technology. Bringing the world closer together. There may not be a need for state governments. Counties perhaps with evolving borders. Red or blue.
We don’t look for underhanded ways to get our way. Think stacking the court. Vote by mail, no ID. Perhaps we should play the same game.
Forgive college loans? How about a $100k IRA withdrawl tax-free? No SSI tax. Give Hawaii back to the Hawaiians and thereby eliminate 2 senators. We just won’t fight.
No electoral college means no reason to stay in this union.
Neither do I! That is NOT fair to the rest of the country!
The effective loss of representation in D.C. is what brought about the Confederacy.
CWS:
LSU Florida
4 .. 3
4 .. 24
18 .. 4
Who won?
Let me know when the democrat party decides their primary with a popular vote, instead of a state by state delegate & super delegate process.
“I won’t hold my breath.”
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.