Posted on 12/23/2016 12:33:48 PM PST by mdittmar
Frustrated after seeing another candidate secure the presidency without winning the national popular vote, mostly Democratic lawmakers in several capitols want their states to join a 10-year-old movement to work around the Electoral College.
In states including Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Mexico, legislators have said they plan to introduce legislation that would require their state's Electoral College voters cast ballots for the presidential candidate who earns the most votes nationwide, regardless of the statewide results.
"Every vote in this country should have equal weight. The Electoral College is a relic of a bygone era, and we need to change this system," said Connecticut state Sen. Mae Flexer, who filed a bill with several fellow Democrats requiring Connecticut to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
I said voter fraud and the MSM are two of the biggest reasons to the downfall of this country, but I have to add the unthinking American public who choose or trust without thinking — and who are legal voters. Sigh.
Actually I would stop them. I would send the US Military into everyone one of the states.. take every legislator that voted for it and have them hung for treason as a reminder to the people of that state if they vote for scumbags like that again it will just happen again.
Except that secession is not treason. It is a mere parting of ways.
Why not? You need to provide more specifics on the alleged contested military ballots that were not included in the certified tally.
"All ballots submitted according to state laws are counted in every election," the Department of Defense's Federal Voting Assistance Program explains on its website. "The media often will report the projected outcome of the election before all of the ballots are counted. In a close election, the media may report that the outcome cannot be announced until after the absentee ballots are counted. However, all ballots, including absentee ballots, are counted in the final totals for every election — and every vote (absentee or in-person) counts the same."
They weren’t counted because despite all of the recounts (with different tallies) and the action to approved the military absentee ballots, Ms. Harris held to her ORIGINAL total.
The offices do NOT have to wait despite what you say.
You do the research on Florida, it was my detail merely that I had to prove your assertion WRONG. Stop with the fake news already.
You have to love the way this headline doesn’t comport with the story. A few elected Democrat state legislators in the few Democrat states remaining want to work around the Electoral Collage.
We don’t want just the big cities to choose the president. The rest of us need a voice too.
Obviously, the ballots did not meet the state legal requirements. Harris was a Rep as was the governor, Jeb Bush. They knew that military ballots favored Bush 43. Still, they upheld the law.
You have no specifics on numbers or the reasons why these alleged specific military ballots were not included. Many thousands of other military ballots were counted. You should take a look at this article, EXAMINING THE VOTE; How Bush Took Florida: Mining the Overseas Absentee Vote, to get better informed.
You do the research on Florida, it was my detail merely that I had to prove your assertion WRONG. Stop with the fake news already.
You are the one making wrong assertions. You said in post #106, Usually if the number of outstanding ballots does not affect the outcome of a race, they aren’t tallied. Laws in some areas have changed in the past 20 years but others still hold to that.
Your assertion is pure nonsense. I called you on it and you responded with the FL distraction to change the subject. All legal votes are counted, period.
This is so absurd. First of all, this is clearly unconstitutional as states cannot enter into this kind of a compact. Second of all, the narrative is absurd as every vote in this country does have equal weight within the elections they take place in. It's embarrassing someone who holds public office doesn't understand basic civics and know their presidential race is not a national election within their individual states. Moreover, this legislator is proposing to take away from her own people their right to vote for their own electors and have their state's electors decided by voters from outside of their state - how absurd is that?
Yes, but this is a “compact” only making it binding if a certain number of states agree - that is very questionable in its constitutionality.
Of course there is also the fact that there is no official “national popular vote” that is certified for anything.
It would be interesting if they did this and the result one election was that they caused a Republican to win against the wishes of their own state when otherwise they would have lost had the voters of their state gotten to choose their own state’s Electors. It would make it worthwhile to invest resources to run up the margins in states like Alabama, Mississippi, etc. in order to win the electoral votes of a state like Connecticut if they were to enact this absurd policy.
Exactly. It’s mind boggling the levels of absurdity in the statements made by these leftist legislators.
That’ll make their citizens happy....effectively disenfranchises the State.
You make the claim “all roses are red”.
I point out an example of a white rose.
You follow up with more questions “why was it white”, “how many white roses are there”, “what other colors have there been”, blah blah blah.
YOU do the research. I disproved your blanket assertion.
Nice. Put all the power with the state’s that have the highest vote fraud and let Ca and NY control every presidential election from here on out.
So will the PA Republican legislature.
Not really. The constitution is clear, the legislature can assign and instruct their voter as they choose. There’s nothing about them making conditional rules based on the behavior of other states, or any other limitation.
Individual state votes are certified, everything after than is math. And remember they don’t even have to have voting. The legislature can just decide who to send and who to tell them to vote for.
That’s basically what will happen. Each party will focus on their stronghold state to run that margin up as far as possible. It won’t last long though, once a Dem stronghold state “goes” GOP because of the national vote they’ll go back.
Hillary Clinton flunked out of Electoral College. The founding fathers really knew what they were doing. The USA has been saved once again.
I understand that HRC’s plurality in the recent election is the number of votes by which she won California; if California is successful in its efforts to secede from the Union, CA will not participate in a national election, and the Dems will have to campaign in “fly-over country”, to try to get votes; faced with that daunting prospect, the DNC may reverse course, and say, “well, the Electoral College is a pretty good idea, after all”.
You didn't bring up a "white rose," you inserted a poinsettia. Your logic is faulty.
First, you make the patently false assertion that, Usually if the number of outstanding ballots does not affect the outcome of a race, they aren’t tallied.
Then you bring up the example of FL where an alleged 3,000 valid military votes were not counted despite being in a Republican-controlled state and an election that was decided by a few hundred votes. Obviously, the reason they were supposedly not counted had nothing do with the fact that the "number of outstanding ballots does not affect the outcome of a race." You fail to say why they were not counted. The only assumption that can be made is that they did not meet the state's legal requirements for a valid vote.
I have no idea why you continue to defend the indefensible. As much as you try, your assertion that legal votes are not counted if they don't affect the outcome of a race is nonsense. Every legal vote is counted regardless of whether it affects the outcome of the race or not.
Merry Christmas.
How many more electors would Bush have had with those 3,000 ballots?
And that rose is a rose and smells of a rose.
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.