Radiance3

===============
Democrats want to cheat the constitution, Let them try that this 2020 election. They are desperate to win the WH. But that won't prevail at the end. It is null and void process.

Radiance3

================
I just emailed the President's office to question about the move of Virginia legislator. I think the desperate democrats will find all means to steal the election.

I think SCOTUS must move to straighten this out.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

Neither branch of government has a say about how the states select electors. The national compact doesn't take effect until enough states pass the legislation to give 270 electoral votes to the popular vote winner.

You can say it's wrong, cheating or stealing the election all you want....doesn't make it so. The winner of the presidential election will have 270 electoral votes at least, and the popular vote.

What's the problem?

Radiance3

=============

The constitution has the guidelines how to use the electoral college votes. We will have the SC to fix the radical dems violations. My valuable time is very short, and I don't waste with non-sense radical democrats. Not worth it. I just emailed the president's office of the Virginia's violations.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

You are right, the constitution has the guidelines. From the Constitution:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Article 2, section 1.

he Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;

12th Amendment.

Too bad your valuable time will not allow you to see that I'm the one using the constitution to make my case. It does have the guidelines....you just don't like them. I had no idea that citing the constitution makes me a non-sense radical democrat.

It's all a matter of perspective....perhaps it's you who are the radical. You have cited no part of the constitution to make you case, shown no violation, etc.

Having won, I won't waste any more of your (or my) time.

Radiance3

=============
I rest my case. The SCOTUS will resolve the matter.

maryjane

"Except to those who think a miniority should rule a majority." Are you kidding!!!?? In our country today, that is exactly the way everything operates. The majority of American citizens voice is heard no more. Four million muslims are catered to against the interests and wishes of 300 million plus Americans. 50,000 plus illegal aliens are entering our country every month, AGAINST the wishes and 8nteresrs of 300 plus million Americans. All foreign noncitizens in our country, regardless of legal status, have total access to almost ALL the rights and benefits of actual American citizens, the majority of whom do NOT agree with this. The majority of both legal and illegal foreign noncitizens, as well as all the other immigration categories, get more freebies than actual Americans, BUT actual American taxpayers are FORCED to foot the bill for these millions and millions of foreigners and most Americans do not agree with this. Transgenders, a very small miniority are being allowed to push their view, their special "rights", their ideology onto the rest of America, even though the majority of actual Americans do not want this. Transgenders with lots of help from Democrats and other crazies demand that we citizen taxpayers pay all the bills for their sex change surgeries but most American taxpayers are against this. Most Americans want legal immigration cut way back and restricted to those with knowledge/skills beneficial to the USA but their voices are ignored in favor of the others. We already are living in a nation where the majority is immaterial, only the wishes of the individual, small group, or miniority and nonwhite matters.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

We were talking about the electoral college.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Guess we’ll have to wait and see how the SCOTUS rules~~

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases challenging state attempts to penalize Electoral College delegates who fail to vote for the presidential candidate they were pledged to support.

Electoral College delegates are selected by each party, and under state laws, they are pledged to cast their ballots for the candidate who carries the popular vote. But from 1796 to 2016, over 20 presidential elections, 150 electors have not abided by that pledge, according to FairVote, a nonpartisan voting rights advocacy group.

In fact, 2016 marked the largest number of faithless voters — a total of seven who cast votes for candidates they were not pledged to support.

States have tried to prevent such "faithless elector" votes by enacting laws to remove them or fine them or both.

Now, just as the presidential campaign is heating up, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear challenges to such state laws in Washington and Colorado.

"This court should resolve this conflict now, before it arises within the context of a contested election," Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard law professor who is the attorney for the Washington state electors, said. "As the demographics of the United States indicate that contests will become even closer, there is a significant probability that such swings could force this court to resolve the question of electoral freedom within the context of an ongoing contest."
<snip>

https://www.npr.org/2020/01/17/797472072/supreme-court-to-hear-faithless-electors-case

Radiance3

[quote=Wonttakeitanymore][quote=Radiance3]===================
There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States, so the States may decide to use something other than their State's popular vote results to direct how their electors vote.
https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/faq

State alone could not decide to transfer their electoral college even when they win the popular votes. This electoral college is a federal level and not done in any individual states decision. If Virginia moves their electoral to the popular vote winner. That is null and void. [/quote the electoral is the popular if done properly! They are supposed to speak people’s choice! Fairly! And help the smaller states be recognized![/quote]
================
That was the very purpose of the Founders why the electoral college was used.
The 50 member states need to participate in this process.