Skip to comments.Mass. Senate approves national popular vote bill
Posted on 07/21/2010 11:57:50 AM PDT by jessduntno
The Massachusetts Senate has passed a bill that would give the states Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote.
The bill approved by the Senate 28-10 last week is part of a nationwide effort to secure the agreement of enough states so the winner of the national popular vote would be guaranteed to win the presidency.
The bill will not go into effect until states possessing a majority of Electoral College votes pass similar legislation. Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, Hawaii and Washington state have approved the measure.
The House passed its version of the legislation in June.
The bill will now be sent to Gov. Deval Patrick.
(Excerpt) Read more at baystatebanner.com ...
That’ll last until Sarah Palin, 2012.
Critics say the current system is not broken. They also point to the disturbing scenario that Candidate X wins nationally, but Candidate Y has won in Massachusetts. In that case, all of the state’s 12 electoral votes would go to Candidate X, the candidate who was not supported by Massachusetts voters.
This maneuver will give the voting power to the socialist laden urban areas at the expense of the Conservative rural areas.
So why vote for President in D-Mass anyway then? So goes the national vote, so goes Massachusetts.
This is all part of the mass amnesty plan. Once that happens, they’ll always win popular vote. And the republic is cooked.
Watch, Maryland will be next.
So what’s to keep a state from just changing the law back and forth from election to election depending on the standing of their preferred candidate at the time.
>> until states possessing a majority of Electoral College votes pass similar legislation
If I were from Mass I would blow a gasket over this, as it might serve to make my vote irrelevant.
Dumb idea, New Englanders.
The people of Massachusetts no longer have a vote in the national election! Dumbasses!!! Can’t wait for the national vote goes to a Republican yet Massachusetts voted for a Democrat and Massachusetts HAS to give the vote to the Republican. Morons!!!
Pardon me, but doesn't that substantially dilute the value of the votes of the very Massachussetts voters who are supposed to be represented by the Electors?
I mean, if you're a Massachussetts citizen, why even vote? The state's electoral votes are going to the winner of the NATIONAL popular vote, no matter which way Massachussetts votes as a state.
>> Dumb idea, New Englanders.
so lemme see how this would work:
the state top vote getter doesn’t necessarily get the electoral votes. if the other candidate wins the national popular vote, then the mass electoral votes go to them even if mass popular vote goes to the other candidate.
no wonder they call ‘em “Massholes”
Great, that means the rest of New England becomes a colony to Boston. Sweet how that works. Too bad, NH, ME, VT, RI won’t go along with the Boston hustle.
Ummmm the electors’ freedom to vote for whoever they damn well please is enshrined in the US Constitution.
The first time this happens there will be a court battle that will make Bush vs. Gore look like a walk in the park.
Is a plurality good enough? So 34% of the popular vote can take all the marbles?
I’m glad that we have all of these modern genii who are SO much better equipped to architect an electoral system than those dead white slave-owning men.
If I were from Mass I would blow a gasket over this, as it might serve to make my vote irrelevant.”
If I were a betting person I would bet that almost no one in the news covers this and discusses its ramifications. I would also bet that less than a haldful of our so called educational institutions discuss it in any classroom.
This is already what the crooks in the Bay state do to keep Democrats in office. Recall the changes to filling vacancies back and forth.