Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sans-Culotte

Yes, but the important part that you didn’t include when you quoted me is that they give no instructions to the states on HOW to select electors. In fact it specifically says they can do it however they want: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct. So if the Legislature directs to leave it up to the national popular vote they can do that.


49 posted on 12/23/2016 1:17:02 PM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]


To: discostu

I guess I should have included the rest of your post. Yes, I meant that to me it appears that the electors do have that much leeway. I was agreeing that it is constitutional.


53 posted on 12/23/2016 1:20:27 PM PST by Sans-Culotte (Time to get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

To: discostu

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.


130 posted on 12/24/2016 2:33:46 AM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson