Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BelegStrongbow
... The Constitution says the states have to produce electors. I don’t think it says how they have to do that.

True. What if there is a clear winner in each state, but the popular vote comes out 50.01% vs. 49.99%? Recounts will be demanded everywhere, and we'll have more "hanging chad" fiascos than we can count. Does MA want to pay for all of the recounts?

It might be legal, but I can see future elections stretching out for months of recounts while the "Popular Vote" states decide where they're going.

42 posted on 07/28/2010 3:41:29 PM PDT by ken in texas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: ken in texas

Oh, I’m not suggesting what MA has done makes the least particle of sense. It is a bald and petty attempt to seem ‘democratic’ and to put all this ‘the US is a republic’ nonsense to bed permanently. All I was saying was that however foolhardy any particular state wants to be in this matter appears to be fully constitutional. The resulting train-wreck, when the proposal is both wrong-headed and foolish, would be most instructive. Here’s hoping the test is graded quickly. Sometimes progressives point to things done and recommend them elsewhere before the consequences have a chance to play out.


45 posted on 07/28/2010 4:32:30 PM PDT by BelegStrongbow (St. Joseph, patron of fathers, pray for us!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson