[[[A U.S. appeals court in Denver said Electoral College members can vote for the presidential candidate of their choice and aren’t bound by the popular vote in their states.]]]
And this isn’t disenfranchisement how?
In the presidential election, one does not vote for a president. the vote is for electoral college electors pledged to vote for a specific candidate
At least that is the way ballots read here
It is the way the system was designed to work.
Generally speaking Electors are voted in as a panel. Each party nominates its choice for that panel. Those nominees are ALMOST always loyal to the party.
So the wishes of the majority (plurality) of the state’s citizens (IN ADDITION TO THE NON-CITIZEN VOTERS WHO MANAGED TO GAME THE SYSTEM) are reflected...as it was intended to be by the Originators
Actually, it’s constitutional. The Founders put up checks and balances all over the place and for good reason.
Or are you with Hillary et al, and are pushing for the elimination of the EC?
Perhaps, because the US is not a democracy. It’s a Constitutional Republic.
States can pass laws, individually or in an illegal coalition, about their Electoral College voting, but the States’ laws don’t have precedence over the Constitution.