independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sun 20th May 2018 10:22pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Laws in some states could be changing how the president is elected
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 05/07/18 9:55am

benni

Laws in some states could be changing how the president is elected

https://www.msn.com/en-us...spartandhp

The following states have already signed and agreed to the National Popular Vote Intersate Compact, and Connecticut is getting ready to sign it:


California, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia have already signed the accord.


The compact requires its members to cast their Electoral College ballots for the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote. The agreement goes into effect once states representing at least 270 electoral votes — the number needed for a candidate to win the presidency — signs the compact.

Once Connecticut signs it, they will be 172 electoral votes. They will be the first state to sign the accord since Trump became president. Other states may follow...maybe? What do you all think about this idea?

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 05/07/18 9:59am

poppys

DAMN. Good news benni! I heart this. States rights way of getting around the Patrician Electoral College.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 05/07/18 10:11am

benni

poppys said:

DAMN. Good news benni! I heart this. States rights way of getting around the Patrician Electoral College.


I know, right!? I think this is the way it should occur. And I loved what the Connecticut mayor said:

“With the exception of the presidency, every elected office in the country, from city council, to United States senator, to governor, is awarded the candidate who receives the most votes,” the governor said, according to the Connecticut Mirror. “The vote of every American citizen should count equally, yet under the current system, voters from sparsely populated states are awarded significantly more power than those from states like Connecticut.”

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 05/07/18 10:48am

poppys

dancing jig another step towards one person, one vote!

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 05/08/18 6:55am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

Yeah, we've talked about this over the last 10 or so years. It is interesting. And seems to be constitutional as the states can use pretty much any method to select its electors.

One thing that other states could do to muck this up is simply to not released their vote totals or just not hold popular elections.

But I doubt it will have the impact some think it would. I think it would change how people voted. And it would actually do more harm to 3rd party candidates than anything.

I do see one possible challenge to this move. Oh and this would be the single biggest attempt at gerrymandering and voter suppression in the history of the US... to deny that just means you THINK it will help your side win. (It will not).


Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 05/08/18 6:57am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

I also do not believe it will pass in enough states... and even if it did some that had might back out of it.

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Laws in some states could be changing how the president is elected