Posted on 03/30/2019 10:26:48 AM PDT by drpix
But that's not going to work.
The next step in this process, and I guarantee it's coming if this is allowed, is that California and New York will not allow Donald Trump on their 2020 election ballots.
Since there is no "voting" in the Constitution for President and Vice President, if New York and California pass enabling legislation saying that voters for Electors for President and Vice President must choose from political parties registered with the State Social Justice Board, I cannot see how that could be subject to a legal challenge.
Why is it illegal or unconstitutional?
It may be unconstitutional if they call it a compact.
But that is not necessary to accomplish their purpose.
The Legislatures of New York and California can appoint their Electors using whatever methods or procedures they choose. They can describe a mythical "national popular vote" in their legislation, and they can further define how it is to be ascertained.
Most importantly, though, they can bar any conservative or moderate candidates from their ballots. That is neither illegal nor unconstitutional, as long as we are talking only about ballots to designate Presidential electors.
Donald Trump received 7.2 million votes in NY and California. Delete those totals from a "national popular vote" and all states who have passed these laws will be casting their EVs for the Democrat.
And just who do you think has the authority to order such a thing, and to enforce it?
There is no body in existence that could do this, and Congress has no authority to create one.
Where does it say that?
States, or are properly State Legislatures, don't have to allow voting at all in order to appoint their Electors. And, if they do, they can split the appointments among candidates, as Maine and Nebraska do already.
This has got to be challenged before the Supreme Court. It is completely unconstitutional.
It would not increase the individual state’s power: in fact, it would nullify it altogether. So they’d don’t have a legal leg to stand on.
History of partisan control
From 1992 to 2016, the Delaware Senate was controlled by Democrats, often by significant margins. However, by 2016 the chamber had reached levels of competition between the parties not seen since the 1970s.
Delaware State Senate Party Control: 2008-2016
xxxxxxxx. 08 10 12 14 16 18
Democrats 16 14 13 12 11 12
Republicans 5 7 8 9 10 9
The Delaware State Senate was on the verge of becoming Republican until the 2018 election when one seat was lost. Some hard work in that state could do wonders for the Republican Party.
Okay Jim, then what good is the Electoral College?
Obviously it works, because Hillary isn’t president.
Trump won the majority of 49 states, but California was so lopsided that it tossed the result in the other 49 states out the window.
That’s exactly why we have it. Small states should have some say in things. Without it, they have nothing.
It was meant to avoid disenfranchisement.
This is an unconstitutional, ridiculous and desperate scheme.
That said, I see it entirely backfiring on the Dims if they actually pull it off, as voters in these states will feel disenfranchised and not bother to vote, depressing the national vote numbers for the Rat candidate.
Thank you. I hope it gets some mileage and is used to knock this crazy Democrat idea down.
That’s the point. Until this can be done we stick with the Electoral College.
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.