One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Disposing of the Electoral College or Removing Bulkheads to Sink the Ship
Page <prev 2 of 2
Aug 20, 2019 11:51:44   #
karpenter Loc: Headin' Fer Da Hills !!
 
zombinis3 wrote:
Sorry color me embarrassed should have gone a little further back into the records. The contest used by the article was Gore vs Bush;
George W. Bush popular 50,456,002 electoral 271
AL Gores popular 50,999,987 electoral 266 [2]

This changes the view, but still has the same possible outcome of a handful of people picking the winner, If it treads out. Still that particular contest was pretty much in contention.

These Are National Popular Votes
Which Is Not How We Elect Our Presidents
No One Threw Their Electoral Votes, Either
Although Gore Wanted To Change The Rules After The Election

STATES Elect Presidents
The Electoral Votes Of The State
Goes To Who Carried The STATE In The Election

As I Keep Pointing Out
Hillary's 3.2 Million Votes
Came From ONLY ONE State....California
And She Needed 4.5 Million Votes In California To Get It

It Wouldn't Matter If EVERY Vote In California
Had Been Cast For Hillary
Or If She Had Carried California By Only ONE Vote
California Has 58 Electoral Votes,
Regardless Of How Many, OR FEW, People Vote
California Still Gets The SAME Amount Of Electoral Votes
Because The Electoral Votes
Are Based On Congressional Representation
And EVERYONE Has Congressional Representation
Whether They Vote Or Are Too Young To Vote

It's The States That Elect The President

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
Is High-Jacking The Election Away From The Will Of Their Own Constituents

Reply
Aug 20, 2019 22:21:09   #
zombinis3 Loc: Southwest
 
karpenter wrote:
These Are National Popular Votes
Which Is Not How We Elect Our Presidents
No One Threw Their Electoral Votes, Either
Although Gore Wanted To Change The Rules After The Election

STATES Elect Presidents
The Electoral Votes Of The State
Goes To Who Carried The STATE In The Election

As I Keep Pointing Out
Hillary's 3.2 Million Votes
Came From ONLY ONE State....California
And She Needed 4.5 Million Votes In California To Get It

It Wouldn't Matter If EVERY Vote In California
Had Been Cast For Hillary
Or If She Had Carried California By Only ONE Vote
California Has 58 Electoral Votes,
Regardless Of How Many, OR FEW, People Vote
California Still Gets The SAME Amount Of Electoral Votes
Because The Electoral Votes
Are Based On Congressional Representation
And EVERYONE Has Congressional Representation
Whether They Vote Or Are Too Young To Vote

It's The States That Elect The President

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
Is High-Jacking The Election Away From The Will Of Their Own Constituents
These Are National Popular Votes br Which Is Not H... (show quote)


U. S. Electoral College: Who Are the Electors? How Do They Vote?
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html#restrictions

Yes we do not elect the President by popular vote but

Most states require that all electoral votes go to the candidate who receives the plurality in that state. After state election officials certify the popular vote of each state, the winning slate of electors meet in the state capital and cast two ballots—one for Vice President and one for President. Electors cannot vote for a Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate who both hail from an elector’s home state.

Are there restrictions on who the Electors can vote for?

There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states. Some states, however, require Electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—Electors bound by state law and those bound by pledges to political parties.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that Electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties' nominees. Some state laws provide that so-called "faithless Electors" may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No Elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.

Today, it is rare for Electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party's candidate. Electors generally hold a leadership position in their party or were chosen to recognize years of loyal service to the party. Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of Electors have voted as pledged.

Like I pointed out with Gore and Bush the electoral vote didn't follow on what the state required them to do. The exception of Maine and Nebraska most state's have a winner take all policy. The winner is normally the states results of the popular vote. My point being if enough of the Electors decide to vote against what the states requires you can run into the problem of the winner being elected by a handful of people.

Reply
Aug 21, 2019 18:29:28   #
karpenter Loc: Headin' Fer Da Hills !!
 
We'll See If This Goes Through Appeals

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/aug/21/electoral-college-members-not-bound-popular-vote-c/

Reply
 
 
Aug 21, 2019 23:35:50   #
zombinis3 Loc: Southwest
 


Just what this thread is about , the states want to change
to ensure that the vote go the way the college was expected to be , and now the courts want to define what was meant by what the founders wanted. So changes are always to be expected. Like you mentioned it may change or may not time will tell.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.