Supreme Court will hear case that could change how presidents are chosen

This one is WAY MORE ACCURATE!

 

I accept your surrender

 

Really, those people in the population centers got the $22 billion in relief from Trumps Tariffs ?

And since when did land mass count as a vote. PEOPLE get the vote. So now explain why populations should get less vote ?

 

You guys are like arguing with the dude looking at a clock from the backside and claiming it's turning counter clockwise. You're about 250 years to late on your brilliance of forming a fair government. Can't help but hope Global warming is real and 3/4's of Cali actually does slide off into the big blue pond after reading some of the ignorance in this thread.

 

And this is exactly what the liberal NDP want to happen, as they have, literally invested billions into trying to figure out how to only represent the elite in their bicoastal party...

 

Does it ever bother you that your posts are so obviously wrong?

 

If the individual state on it's own does so. If there is an agreement between states to do so it must have Congressional approval. And without that agreement written in stone what do you think the voters in California will do if they vote for. Sanders but their electoral votes have to go to Trump and it gives him the win?

 

No President has ever been ELECTED by the "will of We the People". Civics 101. They are all elected by the States. And he is as much my President as yours.

 

Ahhh they are elected by their respective states. And the great compromise was about balancing power between the States not the People.

 

How did you miss that is not for what he was impeached?

 

Trump has brought this country up from the pits of hell the last two administrations left it in, he did nothing worth an impeachable offense. Both parties should be more than happy with the state of this country. Now tell me, WHY would anyone want to impeach him?

 

There doesn't need to be any agreement between states. One state can make its legislation conditional - and only give the winner of the NPV all their electoral votes if that condition is fulfilled.

 

What? ND gets 3 electoral college votes. THREE.

CA gets 55.

How would you like to see it? CA get 255 and ND get 1?

 

There's nothing to pretend about. 215,000 people voted in ND and got 3 electoral college votes for it.

I can't believe the f'ing democrats have successfully brainwashed y'all into believing such a farce that the EC is unfair. But I guess when they got y'all to believe in AGW they knew y'all would fall for anything they told you.

 

There's a reason democrats prey on young people and people who can't think independently.

 

Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. Geez man, why even bother if you didn't even know that much...

 

Ok, let's go down this road because when it came to adding the Dakota territory as a state it was deliberately split into TWO so as to DOUBLE the number of Senators.

Obviously you had no problem with something like that so let's take a hypothetical scenario that could occur sometime in the future when the Dems control both houses of Congress.

The current population of DC is 630 thousand and Congress could decide to arbitrarily shrink the size to just the area encompassing the Capitol and the Mall. Given that the FF enacted the Land Ordinance Act of 1784 any area with a population of 20,000 can form a government and request admission to the Union. Splitting up the population of the former DC territory into 31 states would add mean an additional 62 Senators and 31 representatives in the House ALL of whom would vote Democratic.

The Dems would now have the votes to OVERRIDE any veto and could pass Constitutional Amendments abolishing the EC and allowing for the POTUS to be directly elected by a majority of the popular vote nationwide. These additional states would be enough to ratify these Amendments immediately.

A second Amendment would remove the arbitrary cap on House Members and ensure equal representation nationwide.

Another Amendment would relegate the Senate to a purely advisory role and fourth would require that a 75% MAJORITY of the electorate, not states, would need to agree to agree to any further Amendments to the Constitution

Since all of these changes are both LEGAL and CONSTITUTIONAL there would be nothing that the courts could do to stop them being passed by the WILL of We the People.

So how would it feel to have your INDIVIDUAL VOTE to be EXACTLY EQUAL to every other individual vote nationwide?

 

I don't think it bothers said poster...

"The original purpose of the Electoral College was to reconcile differing state and federal interests, provide a degree of popular participation in the election, give the less populous states some additional leverage in the process by providing “senatorial” electors, preserve the presidency as independent of Congress and generally insulate the election process from political manipulation."

The part in bold is the biggest part democrats want to get rid of.

 

I still think it's stupid. I still think it's no coincidence that this didn't become a problem until Trump won. The same guy who was impeached because democrats hated him. The same reason they now want to get rid of the EC. Maybe you'll get it in the future.

 

WRONG again!

It was a problem when the Bush/Cheney regime was IMPOSED on the nation AGAINST the WILL of We the People and it happened AGAIN with your criminal IMPOTUS.

The EC is an anachronism that enables a shrinking MINORITY of white nationalists to subvert the WILL of We the People and it needs to be ABOLISHED and replaced with EQUAL voting rights for ALL Americans.

 

Supreme court two sentence, uncomplicated supporting opinion:

This country has long had the standard of one citizen person one vote. Anything that infringes upon one citizen person one vote in the presidential elections is illegal, and this includes the electoral college voting faithlessly being illegal.

 

In other words, the Electoral College is a problem when Republican President wins?

Of course it is!

 

Feel better now?

 

Look at these blue Liberal enclaves! Thank G*d for the Electoral College!

 

If a majority of Americans don't want to have the Electoral College anymore, then the Constitution must be amended to remove it, change it, or whatever a majority of Americans want (or don't want). It's no more complicated than that -- THINK -- the Constitution of the United States has already been amended, successfully, TWENTY-SEVEN TIMES!

The Supreme Court has no role in determining what 'should be done' or not done -- it's NOT up to nine highly-divided, partisan 'judges' to decide anything about the Electoral College when there's a clear course for any needed or desired action already prescribed IN the Constitution already....

AMEND THE CONSTITUTION, OR LEAVE IT ALONE!

. Does anybody want the creep who rewrote Obamacare to be legal "handling" the E.C.?