They need to read the Constitution.
Heads we win.
Tails you lose.
That’s how Leftists want the “law”.
I thought they were going to impeach Trump. Pence would take over & appoint Crooked Hillary VP, then Pence would resign & Crooked Hillary would be queen. Isn’t that the plan?
“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.”
U.S. Constitution, Art. II, Sec. 1
Seems pretty damned clear to me. Each state legislature is free to appoint their states’s electors in whatever manner they choose.
I know I saw results from the 2000 election that said that counting EC votes by congressional district + 2 for the winner of the state’s total vote still had Bush winning. Has anyone done something similar for 2016?
And, the Constitution gives the state legislatures absolute power to award electoral votes as they see fit, so I can’t see this going very far.
They should concentrate on making sure there is not one Illegal Vote Cast in our Elections.
If they can’t guarantee that, they have no business pushing the Popular Vote rhetoric.
I think that this is doomed to fail in court.
The Constitution indicates that states choose their electors. States are not required to choose electors by popular vote. Does everyone here realize that?
So since states are not required to choose electors by popular vote, or allocate them in any particular way among candidates, I don’t see how there is any legal case here.
Hmm. That means that the EVs in California and New York might be split instead of falling into the laps of the Dems automatically. Do they really want to contemplate this possibility?
Mathematical proof of the merits of the Electoral College - “Math Against Tyranny”.
http://discovermagazine.com/2004/sep/math-against-tyranny
All they need is a constitutional amendment.
:)
I think it would be hilarious if a judge actually let them prevail in nullifying what the constitution actually sez and then watch it go to the SCOTUS, which has motivation for keeping up at least a minimally positive reputation.
The “winner take all” is the most eminently fair way to resolve the Federal relationship between the states and the national government. What a pity that the Seventeenth Amendment took away the right of the various state legislatures to select the two Senators representing each state.
Proportional representation of each individual state has proved to be an instrument of mob rule. When polarization sets in, there is no way to resolve the differences.
Did they find a judge in Hawaii who would take the case?
I’m pro-divying EC by district and matching the results to Congress. Of course that increases the power of gerrymandering which is a problem, but in the long run it’s a better system than whole state blocks. Proportional could be OK. Of course going to court for it is dumb, state legislatures have the power to decide, and they’re not under any compulsion to even open it to a vote (and some didn’t way back when). That’s the place to change it.
There is a 230 year old apparatus in place to change it.
Go for it.
If the American people allow the communists to pull this off, We the People, will be the BIG losers.
Why doesn’t the Left just come out and say they want the Constitution burned and anyone who disagrees put up the against the wall and shot? And do they have the power to do so?
In a nation built on INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, blocking a “tyranny of the majority” is a priority.
The only thing that will come out of this is the enrichment of scumbag lawyers.