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.
If this compact ever does take hold, I see a Supreme Court challenge given it effectively disenfranchises the voters of any given State where the majority voted for the other candidate.
If this compact ever does take hold, I see a Supreme Court challenge given it effectively disenfranchises the voters of any given State where the majority voted for the other candidate.
I posted the relevant information earlier. Would someone file a lawsuit? Sure but there is nothing illegal here. States can divvy out their delegates any way they want to.
While the 538 electors of the Electoral College collectively determine who wins U.S. Presidential and Vice Presidential elections, each state legislature has the ability to determine how its constitutionally-mandated electoral votes (equal to its total Congressional representation) are assigned to specific candidates.
yet won the popular vote. I dont care about your trustworthy argument, its based on perception, not reality.
Right! More VOTERS liked her than Trump. Even still, Individual 1 can't hold a 50% approval rating with a good economy. Trump had Russian interference assistance yet still only won by 77k votes in key demo states.
Right! More VOTERS liked her than Trump. Even still, Individual 1 can't hold a 50% approval rating with a good economy. Trump had Russian interference assistance yet still only won by 77k votes in key demo states.
States he shouldn't have been even close in. Sanders beat Hillary in Michigan and Wisconsin. When that happened someone getting paid really good money should have been yelling and screaming daily to do something about that.
I noted before the election that I thought Trump could win Michigan and Pennsylvania. I don't think anyone saw Wisconsin.
As has been noted many times, she won California by 4 million. She lost the rest of the country by 1 million. To a totally inept candidate.
It would be totally different if it had been anyone other than Trump.
As has been noted many times, California is 12% of the population, you cant just remove it from an argument.
But if you want to make that Argument, I will remind you that Trump won 7 states more lopsidedly than Clinton did in California.
His margin in Alabama alone was 600,000. So dont pick and choose which states to remove, because it would take me 15 seconds to find a population equal to California, remove it, and give Clinton back the lead. In fact, Alabama+ Texas(which would only be 10% of the population, would throw Clinton back into the lead.
As has been noted many times, California is 12% of the population, you cant just remove it from an argument.
You can make the argument I did.
Quote:
But if you want to make that Argument, I will remind you that Trump won 7 states more lopsidedly than Clinton did in California.
His margin in Alabama alone was 600,000. So dont pick and choose which states to remove, because it would take me 15 seconds to find a population equal to California, remove it, and give Clinton back the lead. In fact, Alabama+ Texas(which would only be 10% of the population, would throw Clinton back into the lead.
But your argument notes one thing.......it was Trump. No one should have lost to Trump.
States he shouldn't have been even close in. Sanders beat Hillary in Michigan and Wisconsin. When that happened someone getting paid really good money should have been yelling and screaming daily to do something about that.
I noted before the election that I thought Trump could win Michigan and Pennsylvania. I don't think anyone saw Wisconsin.
And Hillary beat Bernie in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and Iowa, and Virginia, and Florida, and Nevada, and North Carolina and so on and so forth.
If you created an electoral college using the primary map, I think Clinton wins 422-116
Why do you think winning a state in the primary translates to winning it in the general ????? My god, the logic in that, LOL.
I posted the relevant information earlier. Would someone file a lawsuit? Sure but there is nothing illegal here. States can divvy out their delegates any way they want to.
While the 538 electors of the Electoral College collectively determine who wins U.S. Presidential and Vice Presidential elections, each state legislature has the ability to determine how its constitutionally-mandated electoral votes (equal to its total Congressional representation) are assigned to specific candidates.
States have the authority to pass all sorts of laws, and sometimes they get overturned by the Supreme Court. In the past State attempts to disenfranchise classes of voters have been ruled unconstitutional. That is what this compact is attempting to do. The authors of this legislation expect Democrats to win the national popular vote and are putting this compact in place as a safeguard in case the Republicans carry the popular vote in their State. They are attempting to disenfranchise Republicans, and let's not pretend otherwise. It will not stand a Supreme Court challenge. If by some strange chance it did and States that voted Republican have their electoral votes stolen, you will see a true constitutional crisis and perhaps Civil War II. The majority voters of States are not going to quietly accept being disenfranchised. The Dems are fools if they think so.
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.
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.
