Posted on 03/03/2019 5:38:03 PM PST by yesthatjallen
You are Right. I guess we should contact Mr Ramirez and tell him of the omission. He’d probably like to know about that oversight.
Click-bait headline. Read the article.
‘Even if it does take effect will it really matter if all the red states continue to vote by electors?’
since the compact takes effect upon an aggregation of 270 electoral votes, the red state electors have no effect whatsoever...
States wanting to preserve the EC need to pass counter laws stating that their state’s EC votes always go to who the EC winner would have been if the national popular vote was not a factor used by any other state.
This way even if 270 EC votes can be corralled by the Anti-EC states, it only takes one pro-EC purple state to undo that if their state went for the original EC loser but popular vote winner.
This Rat knows damn well what this endeavor is all about...it is the graphic of posted by Fiddlstix at #16:
And as cableguymn says at post #19, yeah, it would be funny when Trump wins the popular vote in 2020, but the point is, as worth it as it would be to see their heads explode when that happens... 
...I don't want to do that for the worthwhile laughs it would provide. This is violating the well founded spirit of what the Electoral College was put in place to prevent.
But Indiana (IN) is listed twice.
> The Left-controlled states would escalate their vote fraud. California alone would easily manufacture millions of extra votes. <
That’s exactly right. If this scheme ever takes hold in a majority of the states, the Democrat primary will determine who the president will be.
Say hello to one-party rule.
Ramirez is a darn good cartoonist.
Good conservative cartoonist.
Reminds me a lot like Jeff MacNelly
It is weak in that the description of what it is like to be caught inside a house on fire is weak unless you happen to be the one caught inside the house on fire.
The states may craft their own laws that require their electoral college voters to vote a certain way. See above, and below for more info.
Are there restrictions on who the Electors can vote for?
There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states. Some states, however, require Electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—Electors bound by state law and those bound by pledges to political parties.
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that Electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties' nominees. Some state laws provide that so-called "faithless Electors" may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No Elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.
Today, it is rare for Electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party's candidate. Electors generally hold a leadership position in their party or were chosen to recognize years of loyal service to the party. Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of Electors have voted as pledged.
The National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) has compiled a brief summary of state laws about the various procedures, which vary from state to state, for selecting slates of potential electors and for conducting the meeting of the electors. The document, Summary: State Laws Regarding Presidential Electors, can be downloaded from the resources/elections menu on the NASS website.
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html#restrictions
I wonder what would happen if a state passed a law stating that the vote in their state shall be certified only for the purpose of choosing that state's Electoral College delegation, and may not be used for any national purpose.
This would invalidate the counting of that state's so-called popular vote for use outside the state, and render a national popular vote an inaccurate measure for selecting a President.
-PJ
Somebody else the press and media made fun of his hair.
So true. I talked to a guy not long ago that moved to Austin, Texas from Los Angeles. He moved because of stupid laws, high taxes, illegals and a crazy Governor. Now he’s fallen in with the Nut Job Liberals that infest Austin and will vote alongside Beto types and any other Rat that comes along. He will help make Texas just like what he ran from in California. 2018 was the last time we’ll have two Republican Senators, although a semi-trained monkey might be an improvement over Cornyn who will lose in 2020 to a Cortez look alike. 2024 will be bye-bye to Cruz. Texas will be a blue State.
I LOVE this.... Dems cannot benefit from this Pact at all... either the Blue states give their EVs to the Dem candidate that unsurprisingly earned them... or else they give their EVs to the GOP candidate who didn’t earn them. Not one EV will be taken from the GOP candidate in this system, but the Dem candidate stands to lose hundreds of EVs.
IF they ever do away with the EC then our Republic is lost!
The left wants the Hunger Games. Large elite cities ruling over the rural and suburban areas.
Yeah, Indiana is. Probably the lower one meant to be TN but an error, obviously.
‘My opposition is based on the fact that my vote will now be the equivalent of having to jump off a bridge because a large number of stupid people jumped off a bridge.’
this happens now to every voter whose state allots winner take all electors to that voter’s opposing party...in a typical presidential election, 80% of the counties in PA vote republican, and Philly and Pittsburgh override the votes of those red counties...
“It’ll be interesting if Trump wins the popular vote and they have to give their states votes to him!”
Wouldn’t happen. They’d ignore the pact and refuse to cast their votes for Trump anyway.
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.