Electoral College Opponents Attempt to Have It Both Ways
Advertise with us Click for Rates
Results 1 to 6 of 6
Like Tree4Likes
  • 2 Post By Yosemite Sam
  • 1 Post By Mad Scientist
  • 1 Post By Popeye

Thread: Electoral College Opponents Attempt to Have It Both Ways

  1. #1
    Senior Member NGF Addict! Fitasc Shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    4,866

    Default Electoral College Opponents Attempt to Have It Both Ways

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

    Electoral College foes have been trying to get their way in Nevada for a decade. Have they finally succeeded?
    Nevada’s state Senate approved National Popular Vote [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] on Tuesday. The measure is now awaiting approval from Gov. Steve Sisolak, a Democrat.
    The governor’s signature will add Nevada to a growing movement to ditch the Electoral College. Worse, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] and [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] could be close behind: National Popular Vote’s plan has already been approved by both states’ senates.
    After years of stagnating, National Popular Vote has obtained support from four states in just one short year—or five states, if you count Nevada.
    If Hillary Clinton had won the Electoral College in 2016, would this be happening? So far, National Popular Vote has been approved by blue states—and only blue states. Many Democratic state senators seem driven by Clinton’s loss: Democrats couldn’t win the Electoral College. Now the system must go.
    Straightforward change has proven difficult, so they resort to dishonest tricks: In Minnesota, National Popular Vote’s compact was [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]. That didn’t work, so it was hidden, again, in an [Only registered and activated users can see links. ].
    In many states, committee hearings are scheduled at the last minute, making it difficult for Electoral College defenders to testify. In Maine, National Popular Vote supporters resurrected a bill, despite the [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] vote it earned in a legislative committee. Other state legislators and journalists have been invited to junkets in [Only registered and activated users can see links. ].
    Somehow, Electoral College defenders are never invited to these “educational” sessions. In fact, the fight over America’s presidential election process is beginning to more closely resemble kindergartners bickering on a playground—and the process has about as much integrity.
    “That’s not faaaaiiir! I don’t like those rules. I’m better than you. I’m taking my ball and going home.”
    Even the structure of the National Popular Vote legislation is dishonest.
    The Constitution provides that America’s state-by-state presidential election system cannot be changed without the consent of three-quarters of the states (38).
    Nevertheless, National Popular Vote seeks an end run around this process. It wants states to sign a simple interstate compact instead.
    By the terms of that agreement, states agree to give their presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of the outcome within a state’s borders. The compact goes into effect when states holding 270 electors (enough to win the presidency) have signed on.
    To date, 14 states plus the District of Columbia have agreed to the compact’s terms. Taken together, these states hold 189 electors. Nevada adds six more, bringing the total to 195—just 75 electors short of 270. If Maine (four electors) and Oregon (seven electors) join the cause in the next few weeks, National Popular Vote will be only 64 electors short of its goal.
    National Popular Vote’s compact would radically change the presidential election system, even as it pretends to leave America’s current state-based Electoral College untouched.
    National Popular Vote must be laughing all the way to the bank. It relies on the state-based aspects of the system when convenient, but then switches to reliance on a national tally when that’s convenient.
    Consider what is happening on another front: California legislators are working to prevent President Donald Trump from appearing on their state ballot in 2020.
    Assuming Trump is the Republican nominee, how could he possibly win the national popular vote when he will be unable to win even a single vote from the largest state in the Union? With the National Popular Vote Compact in effect, the election will be over before it begins.
    California is entitled to omit candidates from its own ballot in America’s state-by-state election process. Indeed, many presidential candidates have been omitted from state ballots in the past, including Abraham Lincoln, Harry S. Truman, and Grover Cleveland. But it’s dishonest, at best, to seize the rights of state sovereignty for one purpose but then to pretend that a national tally can work for another.
    Don’t worry. Red states such as Texas are likely to omit the Democratic candidate from their own ballots in self-defense.
    And so the race to the bottom begins.
    Everything I need to know, I learned in kindergarten. One important rule? You don’t change the rules of the game just because you lost. Instead, you work on your weaknesses, improving so you can win next time.
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience", George Carlin

    FITASC: Fédération Internationale de Tir aux Armes Sportives de Chasse.

  2. #2
    Senior Member NGF Addict! Yosemite Sam's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    11,054

    Default

    So if you live in one of those states, just stay home, NY and LA will cast your vote for you.
    Viper123 and friendof2nd like this.
    "I am fatigued Captain." Khan

  3. #3
    Senior Member NGF Addict! Stamps6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Northern NJ.
    Posts
    2,523

    Default

    So now the electoral college is getting much closer to being abolished. They’re up to 15 states that want the popular vote to be deciding voters. They now have 200 votes and would need the 270 vote majority just like in an election to abolish the electoral college. This would mean as stated in the earlier post if you don’t live in New York or California your vote means nothing it’s just strictly the most populated areas in the country that make the decision for you. This is really nothing more than sour grapes for the Democrats and all the left-leaning democratic strongholds. This is not fair to the rest of the country and there’s a reason we have this system and personally I don’t think it’s anything we should mess around with.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    NationalGunForum.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Grand Imperial Poobah NGF Addict! Mad Scientist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    17,008

    Default

    So what happens when President Trump wins the popular vote in 2020? Do all these liberal states cast their electoral votes for Trump? That would be fun to watch!
    underdog likes this.
    Hidden Content



    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington, the first President of the United States (1789-1797)

  6. #5
    Senior Member NGF Addict! Stamps6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Northern NJ.
    Posts
    2,523

    Default

    They have to do what they are charged to do. Anything else and you have anarchy. Form there we go to civil actions and nobody wants that. The law and mandates are that they have to do the right thing and be representatives.

  7. #6
    Ancient Gaseous Emanation Popeye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sacramento area, CA
    Posts
    50,152

    Default

    Its funny how the Elkectoral College worked just fine until democrats started losing Presidential elections (Gore & Hillary).
    Stevejet likes this.
    The difference between a Socialist and a Communist is that the Socialist doesn't have all the guns yet.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)