SCOTUS will slap this down.
No problem there. Otherwise it’s a guaranteed deep-blue state anyway. Might get an occasional extra electoral votes.
When the GOP candidate wins the popular vote in 2012 but Mass votes for the ‘rat this law will require Mass’ electoral votes to be cast for the GOP candidate.
Only if the Dem gets the popular vote.
Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
it’s called gaming the system
this combined with ammmnesty for illegals is the dems plan to remain in control, if they just add millions of new undocumented democrats in states that are already democrat there will be no need for the new voters,there would be no change in the lection results, but if those new voters can swing the popular vote total and the election is decided by popular vote, then you can begin to understand why the weasels are trying to change the rules
The stupid communists in control of the Massachusetts state government have just pledged their electors to Palin in 2012.
Mark Levin said yesterday that this was the only way the deep blue states could get away with it. Back in ‘08 there was talk of going to popular vote and it was slapped down. After 2 years of pre-occupation with damaging other aspects of our representative Republic, they’ve finally found the time to approach the electoral college again. It is indeed a decision by and for the states to vote in this manner from what I understand.
In their intellectual fashion, the idiots of Massachusetts have abdicated a major state protection. God would I love to see this bite them in the ass.
The Supreme Court will not even hear the case.
This law will never ever ever deny a Republican the Massachussetts electoral votes he rightly earned by virtue of the state's voters. The scenario where a Republican loses the national popular vote but carries Massachussetts is absurd on it's face.
But, of course, there could be a scenario where a Democrat loses the popular vote, after winning Mass by a huge margin. It'll be hilarious to watch all the dipshit massholes howl when their votes are all tossed aside as irrelevant and their electoral votes are given to the Republican candidate, by virtue of his strong showing in the deep south!
Morons.
This is dumb. But coming from the peoples’ republic of Massachusets, no surprise.
Would anyone else find it hilarious if Palin was to win the popular vote and Mass had to give her their electoral votes under this new law?
(yes I know they would change the law before that ever happened)
So nevermind what all of the citizens of Mass decide ... just ignore them and go with LA, NY, Miami, etc. want. Whatever.
If a Republican wins in 2012, although MA will obviously NOT have to give its electoral votes to him/her [since the law will not be in effect], MA voters WILL DEMAND that MA change the law.
It will stick in their craw that, had the law been in effect, its electoral votes would go to the loser of their state ...
then why even put the presidential race on the ballot ?
It's like when the state legislature decreed that if Kerry were elected president, Mitt Romney couldn't pick his replacement in the Senate and then, when Ted Kennedy died they tried to allow Deval Patrick to handpick his successor. The difference was that Romney was a Republican and Patrick a Democrat.
As soon as it looks like this legislation could put a Republican in the White House you'll find the Boston Globe and the Democratic Party ordering that the law simply be disregarded.
From my reading of contemporary documents (18th century documents) the idea behind the electoral college was to ensure that the smaller sates, most of New England, would have some voice in national politics. You could never tell, when starting a national campaign, when a few electoral votes would mean the difference between victory and defeat.
The democrats of the people's republic are very happy to reduce the importance of Massachusetts from minor to totally ineffective. But then, isn't this the same state that rewrote how they were going to replace Teddy Kennedy in the senate upon his death twice in less than a decade?
The Massachusetts legislature is 90% RAT (and I mean *filthy* RAT) and our Governor...who’s on his way to winning reelection with 38% of the vote (he’s got a straw man in the race)...is the filthiest RAT you can imagine (a good pal of Hussein’s).Just as they did with our system of filling vacant Senate seats I’m sure their attitude is “hey,we’ll see how things are going as an election approaches and legislate accordingly”.