[Clemenza]

More idiotic "populism" from the retard "activists" in California, who never learned that we are a representative Republic, NOT a mobocracy.

I can't wait until the descendants of the illegals become a majority and vote via "ballot initiative" to nationalize all of Orange and San Diego Counties. Then finally the Cali "activists" will get some sense about the dangers of mobocracy.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

Well, the Democrats were all for this when it applied to “Red State” Colorado, so I’m at least curious at how they are gonna frame their opposition to it in this instance.

Especially since it was Left Coast libs pushing this thing in Colorado in the first place.

Ought to be amusing....

Not that it matters much. Even if passed, it would be overturned in the courts.

[Dilbert San Diego]

There’s a good chance of this being challenged in court. The constitution says that state legislatures will decide how to allocate electoral votes. It may not be legal for voters to decide instead of the legislature.

[Bogeygolfer]

‘More idiotic “populism” from the retard “activists” in California, who never learned that we are a representative Republic, NOT a mobocracy.”

Not sure about this but I dont think a state allocating their vote changes the Republic v Democracy issue. This is not the same as a popular vote and has precedence going back aways. I also think it’s allowed under the constitution or at least not disallowed and supported by supreme court decisions. Again I’m not sure about any of that with any degree of certainty. What I do know is this is not a Democracy issue and it doesn’t have a snowballs chance of passing.

[TASMANIANRED]

I’m not so sure about this...

As it currently stands...Los Angeles governs where all the electoral votes go.. Nobody else in the state even needs to vote.

[hinckley buzzard]

This plan is consistent with the intent of the Founders. They never imagined the presidential selection process as a winner-take-all primary. Obviously it is a knife which threatens to cut both ways, but if the State legislature wants to appoint electors this way it is thoroughly legal and constitutional.

[Paleo Conservative]

I can't wait until the descendants of the illegals become a majority and vote via "ballot initiative" to nationalize all of Orange and San Diego Counties. Then finally the Cali "activists" will get some sense about the dangers of mobocracy.

Clemenza as a lawyer, what do you think of the constitutionality of this proposed referendum? Unlike some Freepers like goldstategop, I don't think the US constitution allows a referendum to determine the method of allocation of electors. The California contitutional amendment authorizing initiative and referenda did not change anything in the Article 2, section 1 of the US Contitution.

In Bush v Gore the US Supreme Court ruled that the state of Florida's judiciary could not change the laws about how votes are counted or order recounts not specified by laws passed by the legislature. The state legislatures' powers with regards to determining the method of selecting electors are plenary powers.

Article 2.

Section 1

.................

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.

.................