Democrats Introduce Bill To Eliminate Electoral College (speech, abortion, claims)

[vacoder]

Originally Posted by workingclasshero

Changing the winner take all is not eliminating the EC

The point is each party wants to change the rules to favor itself. Besides the second link does show republicans wanting to eliminate the EC.

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by vacoder

The point is each party wants to change the rules to favor itself. Besides the second link does show republicans wanting to eliminate the EC.

it shows both parties back in 68 wanting to because of 3rd party

[Chowhound]

I'm kind of torn on this issue. I see both sides of this argument. I have a co-worker and we've discussed this a few times and I don't know, I get the one vote for one thing but i also get the other side. If we get rid of it the whole country would be dictated by CA and NY pretty much. A lot of fly over country won't get their voices heard. Again, not sure what the right answer is here.

[Taiko]

Originally Posted by ARaider08

Going by popular vote for the presidency doesn't disenfranchise rural folk.

It just makes them the serfs to the lords ruling the city states. We have 50% + 1 of your population thus you will do as we say.

[vacoder]

Originally Posted by workingclasshero

it shows both parties back in 68 wanting to because of 3rd party

Why does the exact reason matter? They wanted to stop another party from winning. How is that different?

Also changing winner takes all on the state level (and only in democratic states) is even more egregious then eliminating the EC

[Katzpur]

If ever anything needed to happen, this is it. I'm 70 years old and I first learned about the Electoral College while in junior high. I've been fuming about it every since.

[Catgirl64]

Originally Posted by Chowhound

I'm kind of torn on this issue. I see both sides of this argument. I have a co-worker and we've discussed this a few times and I don't know, I get the one vote for one thing but i also get the other side. If we get rid of it the whole country would be dictated by CA and NY pretty much. A lot of fly over country won't get their voices heard. Again, not sure what the right answer is here.

There's a problem with this thinking, though. For one thing, the combined number of voters in New York and California would have to be larger than the rest of the states together for that to even be a possibility, and that is never going to happen. Also, it's based on the assumption that all New Yorkers and Californians vote the same way. They don't. The EC makes it appear as if they do, but there are conservatives in those two states, just as there are liberals in even the reddest states. There are states that are primarily red or primarily blue in terms of who wins or loses, but if you look at actual votes, they're really all just varying shades of purple.

I honestly believe election by popular vote would increase interest and turnout, which I view as a good thing. That it would automatically favor one party over the other is far from guaranteed, which is why I don't understand people who consider this a partisan issue. It isn't.

There is another potential problem with the EC. Are you familiar with the term "faithless elector"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector

In United States presidential elections, a faithless elector is a member of the United States Electoral College who does not vote for the presidential or vice-presidential candidate for whom they had pledged to vote. That is, they break faith with the candidate they were pledged to and vote for another candidate, or fail to vote.

This is not an imaginary thing. It happens. There were 10 such electors in 2016. They did not influence the final outcome, but in a sufficiently tight electoral race, they could have, either changing the result outright, or throwing the whole thing to the House if no one got to 270. I doubt most people want that.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by Gungnir

How your state apportion it's Number of Electors is entirely at the discretion of your state, it will be in its law books.

If you feel that voters are disenfranchised by how the Electors are apportioned then lobby your State Congress to change how they are apportioned. You can lobby to remove winner takes all, if your state has such a apportionment.

I understand how it works, but I also know that in a state that is largely ruled by one party, i.e. California or Alabama, most voters would not be anxious to see the electoral votes decided on a proportional basis unless ALL states did it. This would only work if ALL states did it the same way.

And there are other alternatives, there is something called "The National Popular Vote Interstate Pact" which calls for a state to give all electoral votes to the national popular vote winner. Twelve states have signed on to it and when there are enough states to constitute 270 electoral votes they will put it into action
https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

[BeerGeek40]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

If ever anything needed to happen, this is it. I'm 70 years old and I first learned about the Electoral College while in junior high. I've been fuming about it every since.

55+ years of fuming. That's a long time to be angry about something.

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

I understand how it works, but I also know that in a state that is largely ruled by one party, i.e. California or Alabama, most voters would not be anxious to see the electoral votes decided on a proportional basis unless ALL states did it. This would only work if ALL states did it the same way.

And there are other alternatives, there is something called "The National Popular Vote Interstate Pact" which calls for a state to give all electoral votes to the national popular vote winner. Twelve states have signed on to it and when there are enough states to constitute 270 electoral votes they will put it into action
https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

that pact is sponsored (paid for) by........ George Soros, who hates our republic and wants us to be a socialist nation




of course the fascist lefties are for it....its funded by Soro's

the national popular vote scheme, is a scheme from soros and the marxists/fascists

the 501(c) organization National Popular Vote Inc., a George Soros funded who’s who of the progressive left. ...billionaire George Soros fund sand supports the movement via his myriad 502(c) outfits, such as the Progressive States Network and Common Cause.




Under a National Popular Vote, 100% of the citizens in a state could vote for candidate A and all of the state’s electoral college votes go to candidate B, rending small states powerless and the will of the people in the state irrelevant.


the electoral college is there for a reason
..to protect the little guy from the big guys





Plan for Permanent White House control by progressives happening now
Called the “National Popular Vote Compact” this movement has been in the works nationwide – without public attention – on a state-by-state level since at least 2008.

Like other surreptitious actions against the U.S. Constitution, the NPVC “movement” has several promotional websites claiming to represent “true democracy.”

Why would progressives want to switch to a National Popular Vote POTUS?

Do the math: The electoral vote system protects voting rights by giving every individual state a number of electoral votes representing the level of population. In this way, all states in the Union have a proportionate and representative say in who becomes President. It doesn’t matter if the state has more land mass than populace, or if more of the people live in rural areas, etc.



Who is behind the National Popular Vote Compact?
George Soros ...and Vikram Amar & Akhil Reed Amar

Akhil Amar has also “recently proposed that every American should be required to undergo a DNA test so that a national DNA database can be created.”

The National Public Vote Compact bill, promoted nationwide, came from this source in 2001. Since then, the same bill based on their strategy has been filed in states nationwide!

Digging into the background of the National Public Vote Compact – as a means to radically and permanently shift the basis of the Presidency, here’s what we found: highly credentialed attorneys (and brothers) who devised this “state bill” compact, as a strategy to get around the normal requirements for constitutional amendment – and, instead, undermine the Electoral College by bypassing both Congress and the voters!



plan for Permanent White House control by progressives happening now
Called the “National Popular Vote Compact” this movement has been in the works nationwide – without public attention – on a state-by-state level since at least 2008.

Like other surreptitious actions against the U.S. Constitution, the NPVC “movement” has several promotional websites claiming to represent “true democracy.”

The NPVC is a bill now moving state-by-state to make the popular vote winner President by bypassing normal requirements to amend the Constitution. Tts outcome would ensure the Presidency would be declared by giving all the required 270 Electoral Votes needed for a “winner” to the candidate who wins the largest number of popular votes nationally – no matter how small the win margin and no difference how many states voted to oppose him. Here’s[/quote] how it works:

Once enough states have passed the NPVC bill into law to reach the requisite 270 Electoral Votes (by totaling the EV’s of those states which pass this bill) the NPVC goes into immediate effect in the next – and all subsequent – Presidential elections. It doesn’t matter how strongly other states oppose this. We’d all have to go along, if even a minority of states pass it! • Currently, this bill has passed enough state houses to reach more than 160 EV’s – so they are well over half way to their goal right now.
According to most up-to-date information this National Popular Vote Pact has already passed 1 of the 2 required chambers in more than 30 other states- without public attention.
If their magic number of 270 EV totaling states is reached, it won’t matter how the rest of the states vote on this; nor whether other states never take up the bill; not even if other states vehemently object and oppose this action. It would be the Law of the Land!
This sneaky scheme to upend Constitutional rights and protections of all states and their residents in selecting the nation’s leader is underway as an explicit attempt to defeat the careful Constitutional amendment process with no public knowledge, no voter input, no public referendums and no input from states which object to this measure. All NPVC takes is a portion of current state houses to make it law for all of us – always!

Why would progressives want to switch to a National Popular Vote POTUS?
Do the math: The electoral vote system protects voting rights by giving every individual state a number of electoral votes representing the level of population. In this way, all states in the Union have a proportionate and representative say in who becomes President. It doesn’t matter if the state has more land mass than populace, or if more of the people live in rural areas, etc.