Aren't you Precious.
For those who support FR, click here to show it!
For the perpetually offended, click here instead.
Posted on 10/21/2011 11:46:20 AM PDT by unspun
For those who support FR, click here to show it!
bump.
If the libtards want it, it can’t be good, so I am agin it.
Have you seen Dark’s kittehs?
They has a familiar.
Washington, D.C.=Madrid, 1936.
Yup.
Did the text on Icanhazcheezburger, did the text and links in the previous Reepathon thread.
Decided to toss it out there today to seee if anyone complains to me about it.
Is this good information before I get all worked up? If this happens it IS that step too far.
Every State should have an equal vote.
No, it won't be noticed until it actually happens and then it will be immediately rescinded by the states burned by it.
For example, when a GOP candidate loses California by 14% but wins the popular vote by .05% - all California's electoral votes will go to the GOP candidate.
Only then, will the vast majority of dimwits out there realize that they are being disenfranchised and raise the sort of outrage that will knock the house of cards down.
In fact, I would imagine any state faced with this predicament would change the law back, between the actual vote and the meeting of the electoral college.
The US Constitution does not mandate how a state should determine its electoral votes, so these moves are all legal. But a state legislature that negates the majority vote of its constituents will have hell to pay if they don't correct it immediately.
Blah blah blah - They’d have to re-write the constitution to do this, which would require passing Congress first, then the states ratify it. Not going to happen, I’ll save my worries for real challenges.
I was about to post the same thought, and am glad I scrolled to the end.
All it will take to end this is for a conservative to win the popular vote and receive the electoral votes from a big liberal state. But, the state legislatures would probably call an emergency session to hastily change the law before it would actually happen.
This was also introduced in the most recent Oregon legislature, but didn’t go anywhere.
Doing it this way nullifies big-city vote fraud.
Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are considering this. Maine and Nebraska are already set up this way.
It means that the cities elect the president.
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.The manner of choosing who gets the state's electoral votes are entirely up to the legislature. They could entirely dispense with having people vote for president and have the state legislature pick who gets the votes, if they feel like it.
BUT, once they have made a rule on how to choose electors, they MAY NOT change the rule after electors are chosen. United States Code, Title 3 chapter 1
Determination of controversy as to appointment of electorsParagraph 2 of the above US Code also prescribes that if electors are not chosen by election by the deadline (say, because civil unrest has disrupted elections), then the legislature may choose who gets the electors.§ 5. If any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods or procedures, and such determination shall have been made at least six days before the time fixed for the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior to said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution, and as hereinafter regulated, so far as the ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned.
It will create a big enough backlash either way.
By definition, this plan is inacted by a state legislature, and will remain completely ignored until such a time when a state's majority differs from the national majority.
It doesn't matter whether its Dem or GOP, the law will have the effect of screwing the majority of the state's voters by nullifying their vote. And the screwers won't be in far off Washington. They'll be the politicians in the state with a newly enraged majority! The benefitting national party will try to demand the electoral votes, but all politics are local and the majority in the state will get their way.
The idea is so completely stupid, it is its own suicide pill.
I’m just finishing “The Battle for Spain” by Antony Beevor. I concur with your post.
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.