Posted on 11/13/2016 12:05:45 PM PST by mdittmar
And put us all at the mercy of the urban “cheat” islands? I don’t think so.
This is not even a conversation worth starting.
It would require a Constitutional amendment. That requires approval by 2/3 of both houses of congress, and approval by 3/4 of state legislatures (3/4 of 50 is 37.5 so probably 38). So if 12 states say no, the amendment fails.
ND, SD, NB, AK, MT, WY, NH, ME, UT, NV, NM, WV, VT, DE, RI all have 5 or fewer EVs. That’s 15 states that would not want their power reduced. Larger states that are conservative in nature would also vote no.
It will never happen. Not worth discussion.
the even more brilliant point of the Founding Father’s electorial college is they were dealing then with 13 states but had the foresight to see ahead to many many more.
Take it even further.
No ID, No vote.
Owe back taxes, No vote.
Outstanding warrant/warrants, No vote.
our Founding Fathers devised a very careful balanced system
as our Republic
they deliberately and very firmly did NOT establish or want a “democracy”
not in a million years. Our founders recognized that both monarchy/dictatorship and democracy are horrible and dangerous forms of government. The people suffer and lose their liberties (and often lose their very lives) under both.
QUOTE:
““I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either. … Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty. When clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation. Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large bodies of men, never.” John Adams, one of our Founding Fathers and US President
-—no necessity to count absentee ballots oi it can’t affect the outcome-—
—http://www.proudcons.com/no-liberals-hillary-did-not-win-the-popular-vote-stop-with-the-petitions/
No, no, a thousand times, NO!
‘Proud Conservative’ is absolutely wrong. Ask any election official in your state or local area.
Count the absentee votes, especially the military votes.
I wish President-Elect Trump would demand it.
No way. I have had to educate some people on FB who wanted to do away with it. What are they being taught in school? We learned about that in the good ole days. Bless their hearts.
We are a republic, made up of states. Nothing has changed in that respect since 1788 when the Constitution was ratified, so therefore the system can not be called archaic, outdated, an anachronism, or any other such thing. The only thing that has changed is that we have rabid left-wing communists who must destroy every aspect of what makes the US great.
If the blue states want to split their electoral votes based on popular vote, that is their prerogative. Forcing the smaller states to be disenfranchised from the vote is unacceptable.
They’d be praising it to the highest heaven if Trump had won the popular vote and Hillary had one the Electoral College.
It would have been proof that the system worked as designed.
Nope
So if we get rid of the electoral college, why would ANYBODY campaign or care about anything other than the major population centers?
NOBODY would go or care about NH, Maine, Ohio, Indiana, Montana, Utah, etc etc.
FACE IT. The founders KNEW what they were doing.
The electoral college is here to stay, 38 states would have to vote against it which is not happening. So arguing to abolish it is like arguing to stop the sun from rising in the morning, all the whining and complaining won’t change the reality that it is.
Well, I guess they should abolish the U.S. Senate first then.
Tagline...
States can indeed award their electoral votes as they see fit. This is stated directly in the Constitution.
There is a movement underway to award a decisive 270 electoral votes based upon the nationwide popular vote. As of now, states comprising 165 EVs have agreed that if they can increase the membership to cover 270 EVs, they will all award EVs based on the popular vote.
This goes against the spirit of the Constitution, which sought to disperse power among branches and levels of government. If the original intention was to award EVs based on the results in a given state, that should be maintained. For instance, the electoral votes allotted to North Carolina should be awarded based on the vote outcome in that state, not depending upon what happens in the nation as a whole, which these days is severely influenced by the vote patterns in California and New York.
Just brilliant there professor. In 2013, half of the population was clustered in 146 counties out of 3000 counties in the us. We may not be college educated, but we sure can figure out you want 5% of the field is. While you are at it, you might as well say the other 95% of the counties should not have any say in making new laws. After all, we don’t represent the majority. Please try telling that to the mighty fine people of my state they have no right to representation in Washington. See how far that gets you.
No.
The Goosesteppers want it their way. mob rule. These educated morons need to get a life!!
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.