[lowbridge]

Full title: Connecticut lawmakers pass measure to give electoral votes to presidential candidate who wins popular vote

[SMGFan]

State Senate vote needed and yet no meaning until tally 270 ev.
Meanwhile why not award as Maine and Nebraska?

[goldstategop]

All Blue States have joined the compact.

Meaningless because they would never award their EV to a Republican candidate who won the popular vote and in the unlikely that ever happened, they would swiftly withdraw from the compact.

CT is not going to go the GOP in our lifetime anyway.

[jacknhoo]

Do states have the right to rewrite electoral college rules?

[SkyDancer]

Woe the Republic.

[Lurkinanloomin]

CT lawmakers(breakers) reject the Constitution of the USA.

[Pearls Before Swine]

This popular vote initiative is so constitutionally abusive, I don’t know how anyone can take it seriously.

But, then, sometimes I think that our laws have gotten so complicated that there is rarely a clear answer to anything. I think about it in the Godel sense of, within a complex enough system, statements can come up which can neither be proved nor disproved. Of course, the law, despite its physics envy which enshrines precedent as settled law, is much more capricious than a rigorous mathematical system.

But, I am still left with the feeling that the law is so ornate that there are many pockets that are unpredictable, perhaps deliberately so. That’s why, for example, CNN can go on for hours about the happy possibility that something Trump or someone he knows can be construed as a technical violation of some law, any law. No one knows.

[I want the USA back]

Not liking the Constitution doesn’t give the right to circumvent it.

[Jacquerie]

Democracy stinks. History is littered with short-live democracies that cratered between the bloodlettings of factions going at each other’s throats. Our Framers were well aware of their shortcomings from the lessons of history and their personal experiences since 1776.

The National Popular Vote - Vicious Democracy.

http://articlevblog.com/2016/08/the-national-popular-vote-vicious-democracy/

[dontreadthis]

I remember reading that Soros is behind this.
Surprise

[dead]

If the legislature of any state really gives the state's electoral votes away against the will of the people of their state, they will find out what the pointy end of pitchforks are for.

It makes snowflakes feel fuzzy and safer though.

[unread]

"The Connecticut state House passed a measure Thursday that would give the state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who won the popular vote."

Wouldn't they be, in fact, ripping off the voters in their own State..?? I mean the people of say, West Virginia could vote 100% for some guy that supports coal, only to have their votes turned over to some pasty-faced faggot from California... I don't think that would go over too good...

[E. Pluribus Unum]

So they want majority rules when it would give the Democrat the win and electoral college rules when that way would give the Democrat the win.

[DarthFuzball]

I still don't understand how any of this is legal and/or constitutional. I believe that the constitution clearly says that:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

To me, this means that each state must determine the method of appointing the electors independently from the other states and voters.

This would make Connecticut electors completely dependent on the actions of the legislators and voters in other states.

Or did I miss something.....

[Vermont Lt]

The state has the right to do that. And we will end up with 2000 every four years.

It’s a good thing the founding fathers were morons. //sarc

[BradyLS]

So...the will of Connecticut voters can be countermanded and their Electoral College votes go to whoever won the most votes (however those are determined) across the country?

[chuckee]

The age old problem with direct participatory democracy is that it gives birth to Democrats who then manipulate it into
the tyranny of a makeshift majority.

[butlerweave]

If the Dems can’t win it they’ll rig it

[Fido969]

So they are going to ignore the will and votes of their own citizens?

[CodeToad]

I think red states need to change their laws: The Democrat must win by 100% to receive any electoral votes.

[Amendment10]

The states prohibited themselves from establishing such winner-take-all electoral vote laws imo when they ratified the 12th Amendment.

Excerpted from 12th Amendment: "The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; …"

Corrections, insights welcome.