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 Today, 01:20 PM
 
1,874 posts, read 375,001 times
Reputation: 1648

Advertisements

Glad to see the left's underhanded tricks aren't going to succeed.


Liberals should try good ideas and good government for a change if they want to win. All they seem to do is try to change the rules when they lose, whether by importing massive amounts of new voters or trying to undermine the electoral college and the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 01:27 PM
 
40,254 posts, read 24,546,204 times
Reputation: 12739
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacus713 View Post
The state law required their electors to cast their votes based on the "national" popular vote. So if Colorado narrowly voted for Trump, but the national vote had been won by Hillary, then the electors would have been required to vote for Hillary.

The ruling here said no.

Now it is the responsibility of the state legislatures to regulate this process. But surely it is not within their authority to corrupt this process in a partisan or biased way that is contrary to the intent for how this process was designed to function.
The state law required their electors to cast their votes based on who won the state's popular vote. The national popular vote laws don't go into effect until more states pass such laws. The law in Arizona wasn't really any different than the law in Alaska or Alabama, regarding electors and winner-take-all rules.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:28 PM
 
40,254 posts, read 24,546,204 times
Reputation: 12739
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacus713 View Post
The ultimate question is how are the electors selected? For the most part right now, they are picked by the state parties. So if a state voted for Trump in 2016, then the electors picked by the Republican party in that state would be the electors that participate in the electoral college voting for that state. Alternatively, if Hillary won the state, then the electors that the Democrats chose would participate in the electoral college voting for that state.

This is obviously fair and reasonable. It is consistent with the requirements of the US Constitution. It is a system that has worked well and with almost no controversy to speak of.

But now the Democrats are trying to circumvent the electoral college process, obviously because it does on occasion result in candidates winning who are not their own.
You seem to think that the national popular vote laws have gone into effect. They haven't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
15,439 posts, read 13,491,325 times
Reputation: 4690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacus713 View Post
So as a result of this ruling, states cannot pass laws directing the votes of electoral college electors. This will effectively void numerous laws recently passed in Democrat led states that allocate all electoral votes from their state to whoever the national winner of the popular vote is.

Just so everyone knows, state parties select the electors for their candidate and if their candidate wins, so do their hand-picked electors.

The US Constitution is a sublimely beautiful and magnificent document. What a great ruling. The US Constitution wins again.

And the Democrats are thankfully blocked in their effort to improperly interfere and try to rig our presidential election process.
The Electoral College is a rigged process. People in congressional districts that don't go along with the rest of the state are not represented. People largely in rural districts will increasingly lose their voice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:31 PM
 
11,149 posts, read 4,149,392 times
Reputation: 5363
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
You seem to think that the national popular vote laws have gone into effect. They haven't.
And they are not going to, as a result of this ruling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
15,439 posts, read 13,491,325 times
Reputation: 4690
Quote:
Originally Posted by andywire View Post
America wins again! The founding fathers were wise, unlike democrats who would prefer to do away with the constitution in favor of mob rule. Democrats want mob rule because their mob (which includes an invading army of millions of illegals) is larger than our mob. Democrats are dangerous, and refuse to play fair. They are always looking for a way to cheat the system. If they can't get away with breaking the rules, than they will work to eliminate the rules that cause them such a high degree of butt hurt.
Give it a few more presidential terms and the tables will be turned. Democrats win the Electoral College and lose the popular vote. And then they will shut up about a need to abolish or reform the Electoral College.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:34 PM
 
11,149 posts, read 4,149,392 times
Reputation: 5363
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
The Electoral College is a rigged process. People in congressional districts that don't go along with the rest of the state are not represented. People largely in rural districts will increasingly lose their voice.
This is an arguable point. The state of Nebraska, for example, has a law that allocates electoral votes by congressional districts. So if two districts vote for the Republican candidate and one district votes for the Democrat candidate, then 2/3 of the electors are from the Republican party list, and 1/3 from the Democrat party list.

This appears to be a legally permissible option. I have not seen any significant push-back against this approach.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:36 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
15,439 posts, read 13,491,325 times
Reputation: 4690
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladybug07 View Post
Sorry I don't want LA, NY City, Seattle or other big cities that support democrats electing a president for the whole country.
How do you expect that not to happen as the rural population in every state moves to the big cities of their states?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:38 PM
 
11,149 posts, read 4,149,392 times
Reputation: 5363
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
How do you expect that not to happen as the rural population in every state moves to the big cities of their states?
By respecting the requirements of the electoral college process as described in the US Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:41 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
15,439 posts, read 13,491,325 times
Reputation: 4690
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR_C View Post
But it's OK for rural people that support republicans to elect a president for the whole country?
Rural people have been slowly becoming extinct for a long time.
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

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top