Posted on 04/26/2009 5:22:03 AM PDT by rellimpank
On a party-line vote, the Democrat-dominated Nevada Assembly on Tuesday backed a bill designed to neuter the 538-member Electoral College, guaranteeing the presidential candidate who wins the national popular plurality will always be declared president.
The purpose of Assembly Bill 413 is to see to it that Nevada's five electoral votes go to the presidential candidate who wins the most popular votes nationwide, regardless of which candidates carries the majority of Nevadans.
The scheme, being promoted by an outfit called the National Popular Vote, offers a way for states to circumvent the constitutionally required Electoral College, without going to the trouble of actually amending the Constitution.
National Popular Vote contends their plan would not go into effect until states with more than half the national electoral votes approve its provisions. So far, four states with 23 percent of the 270 electors needed to select the president have adopted the scheme.
What this is really all about, of course, is Democratic anger over the fact that, in 2000, George W. Bush won the presidency by capturing the majority of Electoral College votes, which are awarded state by state, even though Democrat Al Gore won more popular votes by sweeping the mendicant classes of inner-city New York, Washington, Chicago and Los Angeles.
(Excerpt) Read more at lvrj.com ...
This should be titled the “Why bother to vote at all?” bill. That way the Democrats wouldn’t have to waste money setting up polling places in casinos.
There really is a simple answer to this.
Each congressional district gets one vote. Win the district, win the vote.
watch this backfire on the Dhimms the very next election as they are forced to throw their Dhimm vote to the republican who just eeeeks out popular vote but the Dhimm has potentially the electoral vote....
..... it would serve them right....
Simple question "do you support the Constitution of the United States, you say yes, but you vote against it, why is that (name of cretin here)"
Maine and Nebraska already use this method. The overall winner for the state gets the two votes used to represent the Senate equivalents. That actually makes smaller states more valuable.
These idiots don’t understand the math. They’ve just taken voting power away from their state’s voters and given it to others. What do I mean? Take Texas as an example: Only voters in Texas affect how their electors will vote. Texas voters now also affect how Nevada’s electors vote. Therefore, votes in Texas are now worth more than votes in Nevada. (You can replace Texas with any other state the uses the Constitutional system.)
These states are telling their people that they are holding an election but it will not decide their electors. Their people's votes will simply be added to the mythical "popular vote" which will determine their electors.
Each congressional district gets one vote. Win the district, win the vote.
As is done in Maine and Nebraska now. One vote for winning a congressional disrict, and two more Electoral votes for most overall votes in the state.
A study done in 2001 showed that Bush would still have won over Gore had this system been adopted nationwide.
This sounds fair to me, I have always thought that this was the ultimate way to elect a president. This way, no one state dominates, as each district in the country is equal to every other. Should have been done a long time ago.
You really need to quit smoking that stuff!
Your brain has been squeezed down to the size of a Liberal.
then according to this insanely stupid law, all the other states voting later in the Western time zones will go to the Democrat, even if the Republican wins all those remaining states. Simply because the early lead in the popular vote was established in the most populated states.
Mob Rule Socialism is all this is. Say goodbye to your Moderate Amerika. And the Republic!
We are not a simple democracy, The United States is a Constitutional Republic.
Look, even our legislative branch doesn't work like that. Little states get their two senators just like the largest states. How is that fair under your system?
If you went by your system (majority rule), Wyoming should probably only get about 1/8 on one senator and California should get additional 10-15! Thank God hat is not the case and we are not a simple democracy
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.