Page 24 of 28 FirstFirst ... 142223242526 ... LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 277

Thread: New York does away with Electoral College

  1. #231
    Student
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    01-25-16 @ 03:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    277

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by AliHajiSheik View Post

    There are 52 elections for president. 51 to decide electors and then the vote of the Electoral College. If there is a tie, the House decides. Imagine the outrage that would ensue should there be the need for a recount as a result of the initiative. You can't force every state to do a recount because they are state elections, but are we going to do a recount in California even though the D won 60% of the vote because the national D candidate needed it to be 61% to win the national election?
    With National Popular Vote there would still be state controlled elections. Electors would still vote to elect the President. There could never be a tie or no candidate receiving the needed majority of Electoral College votes. An election would never be thrown into Congress (with 10% approval rating now?) to decide, regardless of the votes of the public.

    With both the current system and the National Popular Vote approach, all counting, recounting, and judicial proceedings must be conducted so as to reach a "final determination" prior to the common nationwide date for the meeting of the Electoral College. In particular, the U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that the states are expected to make their "final determination" six days before the Electoral College meets.

    Existing federal law (the "safe harbor" provision in section 5 of title 3 of the United States Code) specifies that a state's "final determination" of its presidential election returns is "conclusive"(if done in a timely manner and in accordance with laws that existed prior to Election Day).

    The National Popular Vote compact is patterned directly after existing federal law and requires each state to treat as "conclusive" each other state's "final determination" of its vote for President. No state has any power to examine or judge the presidential election returns of any other state under the National Popular Vote compact.

  2. #232
    Sage
    AliHajiSheik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,385

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by mvymvy View Post
    National Popular VOte is not an electoral suicide pact.

    National Popular Vote allows individual states to use their unqualified and absolute right to have the Electoral College accomplish a goal that more than two-thirds of Americans, throughout the country, have consistently supported since polling on this began in 1944.

    States enacting National Popular Vote replace their state or district winner-take-all laws to guarantee every vote, everywhere, in every election matters to the candidates, is equal and counts, and the candidate with the most votes in the country wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

    National Popular Vote did not invent popular elections. Having election results determined by the candidate getting the most individual votes is not some scary, untested idea loaded with unintended consequences.

    “The bottom line is that the electors from those states who cast their ballot for the nationwide vote winner are completely accountable (to the extent that independent agents are ever accountable to anyone) to the people of those states. The NPV states aren’t delegating their Electoral College votes to voters outside the state; they have made a policy choice about the substantive intelligible criteria (i.e., national popularity) that they want to use to make their selection of electors. There is nothing in Article II (or elsewhere in the Constitution) that prevents them from making the decision that, in the Twenty-First Century, national voter popularity is a (or perhaps the) crucial factor in worthiness for the office of the President.” - Vikram David Amar

    In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

    Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls
    in recent or past closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA --75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%;
    in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%;
    in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and
    in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%.

    In state polls of voters each with a second question that specifically emphasized that their state's electoral votes would be awarded to the winner of the national popular vote in all 50 states, not necessarily their state's winner, there was only a 4-8% decrease of support.

    Question 1: "How do you think we should elect the President: Should it be the candidate who gets the most votes in all 50 states, or the current Electoral College system?"

    Question 2: "Do you think it more important that a state's electoral votes be cast for the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in that state, or is it more important to guarantee that the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states becomes president?"

    Support for a National Popular Vote
    South Dakota -- 75% for Question 1, 67% for Question 2.
    Connecticut -- 74% for Question 1, 68% for Question 2,
    Utah -- 70% for Question 1, 66% for Question 2
    Please don't cherry pick one point and then reply with a spammy answer. I'm not interested in engaging you when you do that. Deal with my question about recounts or a tie and I may respond again.

  3. #233
    Student
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    01-25-16 @ 03:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    277

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by BobbyO View Post
    Under the Electoral College, the candidate with the most votes wins. If Bush carries Florida, he gets the votes of Florida, if Gore wins California, he gets the votes of California. And onward and onward.

    It does not preserve state control of elections (I realize you are talking here about the actual mechanics of the polls). They lose control of elections, because , as you mentioned elsewhere, nobody would have cared about a 537 vote discrepency in Florida.
    Except the voters of Florida...

    That is why it will not last.
    The Electoral College is now the set of 538 dedicated party activists, who vote as rubberstamps for presidential candidates. In the current presidential election system, 48 states award all of their electors to the winners of their state. This is not what the Founding Fathers intended.

    The state-by-state winner-take-all electoral votes laws (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in each state) in 48 states are not in the U.S. Constitution. In 1789, only 3 states used the "winner-take-all" system based on the statewide popular vote. Similar laws in other states only became prevalent decades after the deaths of the Founding Fathers. 2 states do not use the system.

    “The bottom line is that the electors from those states who cast their ballot for the nationwide vote winner are completely accountable (to the extent that independent agents are ever accountable to anyone) to the people of those states. The NPV states aren’t delegating their Electoral College votes to voters outside the state; they have made a policy choice about the substantive intelligible criteria (i.e., national popularity) that they want to use to make their selection of electors. There is nothing in Article II (or elsewhere in the Constitution) that prevents them from making the decision that, in the Twenty-First Century, national voter popularity is a (or perhaps the) crucial factor in worthiness for the office of the President.” - Vikram David Amar

    A survey of Florida voters showed 78% overall support for a national popular vote for President.

    By political affiliation, support for a national popular vote was 88% among Democrats, 68% among Republicans, and 76% among others.

    By gender, support for a national popular vote was 88% among women and 69% among men.

    By age, support for a national popular vote was 79% among 18-29 year olds, 78% among 30-45 year olds, 76% among 46-65 year olds, and 80% for those older than 65.

    Current federal law (Title 3, chapter 1, section 6 of the United States Code) requires the states to report the November popular vote numbers (the "canvas") in what is called a "Certificate of Ascertainment." Floridians and others will be able to see the Certificates of Ascertainment for all 50 states and the District of Columbia containing the official count of the popular vote at the NARA web site.

    NationalPopularVote

  4. #234
    Guru
    soot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    04-25-17 @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,308

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Ahhh, still spewing I see. Cry me a river.
    iLOL
    You have a pleasant weekend now, you hear?
    “Now it is not good for the Christian’s health to hustle the Aryan brown,
    For the Christian riles, and the Aryan smiles and he weareth the Christian down;
    And the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased,
    And the epitaph drear: “A Fool lies here who tried to hustle the East.”

  5. #235
    Student
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    01-25-16 @ 03:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    277

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by BobbyO View Post
    It doesn't matter-- states can change the law and opt out
    The National Popular Vote bill says: "Any member state may withdraw from this agreement, except that a withdrawal occurring six months or less before the end of a President’s term shall not become effective until a President or Vice President shall have been qualified to serve the next term."

    An interstate compact is not a mere “handshake” agreement. If a state wants to rely on the goodwill and graciousness of other states to follow certain policies, it can simply enact its own state law and hope that other states decide to act in an identical manner. If a state wants a legally binding and enforceable mechanism by which it agrees to undertake certain specified actions only if other states agree to take other specified actions, it enters into an interstate compact.

    Interstate compacts are supported by over two centuries of settled law guaranteeing enforceability. Interstate compacts exist because the states are sovereign. If there were no Compacts Clause in the U.S. Constitution, a state would have no way to enter into a legally binding contract with another state. The Compacts Clause, supported by the Impairments Clause, provides a way for a state to enter into a contract with other states and be assured of the enforceability of the obligations undertaken by its sister states. The enforceability of interstate compacts under the Impairments Clause is precisely the reason why sovereign states enter into interstate compacts. Without the Compacts Clause and the Impairments Clause, any contractual agreement among the states would be, in fact, no more than a handshake.

  6. #236
    Student
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    01-25-16 @ 03:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    277

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyhunter View Post
    Any state not given equal representation will succeed from the union.
    States don't have equal representation in the Electoral College.
    Wyoming has 3 votes. California 55

  7. #237
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius46 View Post
    You're right about the Comitia Centuirata, but those were assemblies of citizens - not active members of the army. All citizens who met the requisite property qualifications were members of the Comitia Centuriata. The confusion with soldiers I think comes from the fact that the Centuriata was organized along military lines (a century was the basic Roman army organizational unit) and citizens acting in the centuriata were considered soldiers and as such could not act within the city walls - hence the fact that voting took place on the Campus Martius which was outside the city. But they weren't active duty. The Romans also considered all comita to be democratic organizations that represented the will of the Roman people regardless of whether all citizens were members or not.

    Looking at it closer I realize I am wrong about the "popular election" comment. Each century had one vote and that vote was cast based on the majority of votes within century - superficially similar to the electoral college.

    Comitia Tributa was open to all citizens - there were no property qualifications as far as I know.


    I have to think more about the rest of your post. I had started drafting a response disagreeing with you about the nature of democratically elected bodies - like the House of Representatives - but realized there were some serious inconsistencies in my position so I have to go back to the drawing board.

    since you seem to like history like myself i will give you a story about democracy, and how the people can be seduced, beguiled and lead to do things which are not in their interest.

    during the Peloponnesian War between the Athenians and Spartans which had be going on for years, neither side had been able to defeat the other, the Athenian statesman, orator, and general Alcibiades proposed a plan to invade the the island of Sicily, ...why?

    because he was looking for glory, conquest, and the admiration of women.

    because he was a very smooth talking statesman "orator" he pursued the people of Athens to accept his plan, even though the Athenians were already locked into a war with Sparta.

    the Athenians with there powerful navy set sail for Sicily, were they fought with Sicilians, even though they have posed no threat to the Athens, the Athenians were defeated, losing most of their navy, which had been used to fight the Spartans, this left the Athenians weak and the Spartans attacked and defeated what was left of Athens military, ..the Spartans entered the city bringing down democracy in Athens, and Sparta the masters of Greece for the next 25 years.

    the people are gullible, and can be seduced by smooth talking people...IE Hitler, so to prevent this from happening in America their are checks and balances in the constitution, one i stated his the dividing of power, between the states and the people ....another is the classification of senators..class 1-2-3

    this checks the people from throwing every politicians of the senate out at the same time, by say a sudden passion......senators are staggered and only a 1/3 is elected every 2 years.....to prevent any kaos, or the taking over of government by an outside political body...because the people did not think .......before they acted.
    Last edited by Master PO; 04-25-14 at 01:52 PM.

  8. #238
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by soot View Post
    You have a pleasant weekend now, you hear?
    Like I said; "It will be great without your bs."
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  9. #239
    Student
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    05-15-16 @ 11:22 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    279

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by mvymvy View Post
    The National Popular Vote bill says: "Any member state may withdraw from this agreement, except that a withdrawal occurring six months or less before the end of a President’s term shall not become effective until a President or Vice President shall have been qualified to serve the next term."

    An interstate compact is not a mere “handshake” agreement. If a state wants to rely on the goodwill and graciousness of other states to follow certain policies, it can simply enact its own state law and hope that other states decide to act in an identical manner. If a state wants a legally binding and enforceable mechanism by which it agrees to undertake certain specified actions only if other states agree to take other specified actions, it enters into an interstate compact.

    Interstate compacts are supported by over two centuries of settled law guaranteeing enforceability. Interstate compacts exist because the states are sovereign. If there were no Compacts Clause in the U.S. Constitution, a state would have no way to enter into a legally binding contract with another state. The Compacts Clause, supported by the Impairments Clause, provides a way for a state to enter into a contract with other states and be assured of the enforceability of the obligations undertaken by its sister states. The enforceability of interstate compacts under the Impairments Clause is precisely the reason why sovereign states enter into interstate compacts. Without the Compacts Clause and the Impairments Clause, any contractual agreement among the states would be, in fact, no more than a handshake.
    Except, as you have agreed, the Constution gives the state legislatures over choosing electors. A compact cannot super cede that right.

    Constitutionally, you are creating a problem.

  10. #240
    Guru
    soot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    04-25-17 @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,308

    Re: New York does away with Electoral College

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Like I said; "It will be great without your bs."
    Awesome!!!

    You enjoy it now.
    “Now it is not good for the Christian’s health to hustle the Aryan brown,
    For the Christian riles, and the Aryan smiles and he weareth the Christian down;
    And the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased,
    And the epitaph drear: “A Fool lies here who tried to hustle the East.”

Page 24 of 28 FirstFirst ... 142223242526 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •