Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:40 AM
 
25,849 posts, read 16,543,687 times
Reputation: 16028

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by normstad View Post
SCOTUS can't step in. This entirely States rights.
The President will sign an EO before the election I would guess and in his 2nd term get a law passed to preserve the EC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:42 AM
 
10,800 posts, read 3,600,126 times
Reputation: 5951
I like the idea that some States are passing laws that a candidate can not be on the ballot unless they release their tax returns.

The vast majority of candidates have no problem complying anyways. Except one. Anyone want to guess who that may be? And more importantly, why?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:42 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
16,911 posts, read 10,600,924 times
Reputation: 16439
This won’t pass the constitutional mustard. Even if it did, war.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:43 AM
 
Location: NY
16,093 posts, read 6,863,630 times
Reputation: 12350
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoodTheBadTheUgly View Post
This is nothing more than an attempt to stop Trump from winning in 2020. Its irresponsible, dangerous and It will eventually lead to succession. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing “leave it alone”.




https://www.rgj.com/story/news/polit...sh/3760601002/




The likelihood of that is slim too none. Hillary has a better chance of becoming president................NOT!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:45 AM
 
8,059 posts, read 3,949,135 times
Reputation: 5356
Quote:
Originally Posted by normstad View Post
SCOTUS can't step in. This entirely States rights.
No it's not. States don't have the right to enter into compacts without Congressional approval.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:45 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
31,340 posts, read 14,285,966 times
Reputation: 27863
Quote:
Originally Posted by normstad View Post
SCOTUS can't step in. This entirely States rights.
Says you.


People said that the Supreme Court would not step in to decide the 2000 election either because it was a 'states issue'. Ask President Gore about that one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:46 AM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,635,782 times
Reputation: 22232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post
This won’t pass the constitutional mustard. Even if it did, war.
Why not?

Nevada is still casting their EC votes; they'll just be allowing California voters decide whete they go.

Nevada should be free to cast their EC votes however they choose, regardless of how stupid they are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:48 AM
 
3,637 posts, read 1,700,733 times
Reputation: 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoodTheBadTheUgly View Post
This is nothing more than an attempt to stop Trump from winning in 2020. Its irresponsible, dangerous and It will eventually lead to succession. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing “leave it alone”.




https://www.rgj.com/story/news/polit...sh/3760601002/

Oh, please, stop the drama. I realize the Right loves the electoral college because it stacks the deck in your favor, but think about this...……...why would not the fairest way to vote be "one person, one vote" ? How is it fair that a certain percentage of ACTUAL VOTERS have their votes cancelled out because of some imaginary line drawn through their State ?

Any other election is run on the basis that if 10,000 actual people vote for one person, and 9,900 actual people vote for another guy, the one who got 10,000 wins. How is that so hard to accept and understand ?

The Right loves the flawed system of counting votes for obvious reasons, and , with Trump declining in popularity, he needs all the help he can get. But the day is coming when this antiquated, unfair system of counting votes will go away, it is inevitable.

Oh, and there won't be this mass succession you are worried about, this isn't 1776 any longer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:53 AM
 
Location: Morrison, CO
34,240 posts, read 18,599,254 times
Reputation: 25810
Quote:
Originally Posted by WMak70 View Post
Oh, please, stop the drama. I realize the Right loves the electoral college because it stacks the deck in your favor, but think about this...……...why would not the fairest way to vote be "one person, one vote" ? How is it fair that a certain percentage of ACTUAL VOTERS have their votes cancelled out because of some imaginary line drawn through their State ?

Any other election is run on the basis that if 10,000 actual people vote for one person, and 9,900 actual people vote for another guy, the one who got 10,000 wins. How is that so hard to accept and understand ?

The Right loves the flawed system of counting votes for obvious reasons, and , with Trump declining in popularity, he needs all the help he can get. But the day is coming when this antiquated, unfair system of counting votes will go away, it is inevitable.

Oh, and there won't be this mass succession you are worried about, this isn't 1776 any longer.
No it doesn't stack the deck in our favor. It creates the ability for lesser populated states to have a say in electing Presidents. The STATES elect Presidents not people. Remember the intent was that your STATE government was to be your PRIMARY government, not the Feds which have usurped power since the Civil War. The theory was that your state capital and thus politicians were closer and you could have more influence over them.

You just don't want the Electoral College because then L.A. and NYC would rule the entire country and we'd never have another Republican President again. Democrats want ONE PARTY DEMOCRAT RULE. That is what abolishing the EC is all about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2019, 06:54 AM
 
2,830 posts, read 2,505,278 times
Reputation: 2737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
The idea is Constitutional, and no, such thing would not lead to the country to break apart. As a matter of fact, the country is now more broken and divided than it has ever been thanks to the media.
^ Fixed it for ya.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:43 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top