Reply With Quote
Id like to see this as a ballot initiative in other states as well. Arizona, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, and Maine for starters. I think all of those states allow ballot initiatives.
That is the ULTIMATE in following like sheep and having no say/voice.
Id like to see this as a ballot initiative in other states as well. Arizona, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, and Maine for starters. I think all of those states allow ballot initiatives.
Because you're not in California? Who cares what a re ed Floridian thinks about California? This isn't about what you want.
Quite frankly it’s an epic fail by the Dems that they haven’t sought NPVI ballot initiatives as well as independent nonpartisan redistricting ballot initiatives in a state like Ohio, one of If not the most gerrymandered state in the union. That goes a long way towards solving both problems mentioned by the OP.
What are you talking about? People from Colorado are giving up their say/voice and giving it to the popular vote.
USAA imported a load of them. The HEB at Wurzbach and I10 is like a third world market.
No they're not. They're simply stipulating as a State how they will allocate their electors. They still vote and participate in the electoral process like anybody else.
They also have their local races to deal with local issues, and they're not giving that up either.
it only takes effect when enough states representing a majority of the electoral votes are part of the compact
And this gets them closer - I bet it'll be North Carolina that gets them to the majority. People buy a bunch of BS - oh, it sounds so fine and wonderful - when in reality, you are giving up your OWN voice for other people's voices.
It's like this ALL voters in FL voting in any (party's) primary - so silly - don't people think that each party should choose its own nominee - not having the other party interfere with who your nominee is? But it sounds so nice - ALL voters get to vote - this terrible amendment got a majority of the votes but thankfully did not meet the 60% threshold.
Last edited by rmt; 11-10-2020 at 04:34 PM.
Oh, so understated - it's a wolf in sheep's clothing (boy, 2 references to sheep today :-) Sounds so innocuous - it's giving up your state's voice for the voice of others.
And that vote is meaningless if they are going to allocate their electors to whoever wins the popular vote - that's someone else's voice. If Colorado votes for a Democrat and by some (remote) chance, the popular vote goes to a Republican, Colorado's electors would be forced to vote for that Republican, correct?
Why bother voting then - if the popular vote is going to determine who Colorado's electors are going to vote for?
Why is it meaningless? They're part of the sum that makes up the popular vote.
the only people who give up their own voice are the ones who agree to the electoral college... unless you are fortunate enough to live in a state that is currently purple
that would require Mitch to say yes and he won't.
So, you mean instead of having 100% of what your state voted for (3.33% of 270 electoral votes) - you'd settle for the 1,753,416/76,443,314 (2.29%) and WISHING that your state voted with the popular vote. If my calculations are correct, this is shortchanging your state by 45.4%.
NC voted red for both presidential and senate, it was close. GA was slightly blue. Atlanta is going to become like Chicago where a few blue counties dominate a high ECV state full of pretty much red counties for the rest of the state.
What? Is someone FORCING you to live in a state that is red or blue?
Repubs must run the field for the rest of the Senate seats to retain control. I don't believe NC has been called yet, and Repubs winning the 2 Senate seats in GA is far from a sure thing (see how close the election was).
you shouldnt have to move to a specific state for your vote to count in a federal election
NC was called a few hours ago.
Cal Cunningham just resigned/conceded a few hours ago. That's 50-48 if you count Alaska for the GOP (99.99% chance)
GOP should win both of the GA runoff seats, but even if they split it's 51-49 and Kamala doesn't get a vote unless a Collins or Sasse type jumps ship.
A Federal election per se indicates a federal choice, not a State choice. Arguably, citizens in non-swing States already have their voices curtailed (Republican voting in California, Democrat voting in Tennessee, etc) due to the electoral college, so what you're arguing against already happens, whether it's popular vote or not.
This is a bit melodramatic. Most of if not all the states the GOP has full redistricting power over are states that are already gerrymandered from full GOP control 10 years ago. I’m not sure what the GOP will be able to do in a state like Ohio or Georgia to make it more gerrymandered.
Michigan, Missouri, Wisconsin, Virginia and Pennsylvania are all states that had full GOP control over redistricting 10 years ago and now have either split control or independent commission control. The Democrats are still going to get screwed in some states but the control is actually less lopsided than 10 years ago.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
