This is outrageous usurpation of my vote.
So if 100% of Nevadans vote for Trump it doesn’t matter if 60% of Californians for vote for the Democrats. It’s Bernie /Hillary redux. People wanted Bernie but the electors wanted Hillary.
The U.S. Constitution defines the criteria for federal offices. States cannot add to, or subtract from these criteria.
“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 Constitution does not establish how Electors may vote as a criteria. Rather, parties nominate persons whom they trust. Of course, from time to time, we wind up with “faithless electors,” but no contest has ever been affected by them.
Obviously, if Nevada appoints Republican electors subsequent to the Republicans winning the popular vote of that state, those electors could vote their conscious and undermine the unconstitutional state law.
Alternately, the legislature of Nevada could appoint electors based on the party that wins the nationwide popular vote. To me, this means that if the nationwide popular vote isn’t certified - and who does that? - the state of Nevada cannot appoint any electors. Does the Nevada Secretary of State certify the nationwide popular vote? I doubt it. Furthermore, such an appointment, contrary to the in-state vote, would seem to be a violation of the right to vote. That is, the majority within the state would be disenfranchised by voters outside the state.
In any judicial determination of an election the outcome of which hinged on the difference between the national popular vote, and the electoral college, it would seem to me that the possibility of amending the Constitution would be informative. Why didn’t those seeking to shift to the nationwide popular vote change the Constitution? The obvious reason is that they couldn’t.
Therefore, an end run around the Constitution would seem unfair to the states that joined into the Constitution based on their powers, and the checks and balances within the Constitution. A mere majority of the voters should not be enough to upset the Constitutional order.
Finally, I will note that until 10 PM on election night, 2016, Democrats loved the electoral college. They thought they had an impregnable “blue wall.” Then, the irresistible force met the immovable object, and we know what happened.
Democrat Thug Party invalidating the vote.
Vile scum.
Lets say Trump wins Nevada and yet if he loses the popular vote those Electoral College votes are awarded to whoever.
Now the Electors regardless could still vote for Trump and I guess that will set up a huge Legal Challenge. Precedent though would be on the side of the Electoral College and the Electors I would think. Probably would set up a huge USSC case and ruling.
This certainly is not in the spirit of the Constitution and what the founders intention was.
I’m going to laugh my ass off when Trump wins the pop vote.
We are witnessing the end of the Republic, folks.
Bookmark
Could the Supreme Court rule on a case forthcoming from this, that by forcing electors to vote for the winner of the national popular vote, it violates the intent of the Constitution??
I think electors do vote the way of the popular vote of their State.
But the national popular vote, I don’t think SCOTUS will buy it.
Trump spent half as much money on hos campaign as as Clinton spent on her's. He spent about $0 in California and New York. If he had dumped the other half in California and New York, he surely would have run up the scoreboard, past Clinton's total. The reason he didn't was because it was a waste of money to accomplish the job he needed to do.
...which will get rid of the Electoral College.
False. No need to read further.
They’ll look awful foolish when the Smurf who won the Dem nomination carries Nevada but loses the popular vote.
Why Maine or Colorado wants to be governed by New York or California(where many of the Coloradian escaped from) is beyond me.
So in 2020 all California has to do is stuff that ballot box with all of the phony ballots that can muster up as they did in 2016, and all these stupid people just gave up their voting rights. Smart.
Their voice would only be their reps and senators who have no say in the matter. Lets suppose a tornado ripped through the State devastating it. No federal relief funds would be routed if no emergency is declared by the President. The Governor could do it all day long but it would not help.
This is just what I heard and not sure. Welcomed to comments.
IN THEIR RESPECTIVE STATES - not at the national level. This shouldn't be that hard to figure out.
this is unconstiutional isn’t it?....I’m sure our pub representatives will fight this tooth and nail...... :(
Can we charge these states with treason, i.e. overthrowing the Constitution of the United States?
I’d love to see DOJ start with one weak Democrat state and destroy them.
Clinton won the popular vote in Nevada and all of state’s 6 electoral college votes were assigned to Clinton. Had this law been in effect in 2016, it would not have changed the outcome one iota.
All this will do is give President Trump a heads up about how to focus his campaign.