the electoral college act- dont fix it, dump it.

[mopinko]

listening to lawrence tribe on joy reid, talking about how sloppy the electoral count act is, and how it needs to be fixed.
fuck that. dump it.

i'm trying to imagine american elections w/o it. it would be soooo different.
would there even be a rural/urban divide w/o it? i dont think so.
could the thugs divide us, state by state, if all our votes went in the same pot?
would there be ANY room to manipulate the results w/o that stupid device?
i really dont think so.

one person, one vote. period. amen. close quote.

[brooklynite]

1. Explain how to dump the Electoral College

You won't even get it passed by the House and Senate, much less approved by 3/5 of the States.

[Takket]

3. well, there maybe is a way. But Dems won't like it

Basically we need Biden, and maybe a Dem again in 2028, to get crushed in the popular vote but win the electoral college. In other words the rethugs need a taste of their own bitter medicine to decide they don't want this anymore. But would that then make Democrats go "I guess this isn't so bad. Let's keep it?" I don't know

[brooklynite]

4. And that won't happen either...

Democrats rack up their EVs with large States; Republicans with lots of small ones. It's much easier for Republicans to lose based on high Democratic turnout in NY, CA etc. but still win the Electoral Vote.

[Polybius]

14. But then we'll start liking it

We need both sides to hate it.

[TwilightZone]

2. You'll need about 10 red states to agree.

Which 10 do you suppose would approve?

That's assuming it would get through Congress, which it wouldn't.

[bucolic_frolic]

5. It would leave the GOP with one number to focus on, instead of 50

And that number is total nationwide vote count. So they'd try to erase tens of thousands here, add a few there. It would really be the same game as EC totals. Of course ending EC would reducing the chance of the EC trumping the national vote totals. But they'd still try to tinker with the counts, and unless there are paper trails and rules are followed, you know they'll try to cheat paperless states.

Would we ever get a true, fair total from Florida? Arizona? It's the integrity and backups of the tabulation we should focus on. Bipartisan, transparent tabulation. I think there's always room for cheating. A crooked or paid-off software engineer, a programmer, a state election official.

[MineralMan]

6. I cannot imagine such a Constitutional Amendment happening.

Nope. It would be a fundamental change in the core of the Constitution. I don't see any way for such a thing to occur.

[Demsrule86]

7. You would need an amendment and the states would then vote...it won't happen.

So we need to use the electoral college for our benefit and stop actually pretending that without a constitutional amendment it could be changed...waste of time.

[Martin Eden]

8. There is a potential way to circumvent the Electoral College

It's called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

State legislatures pass legislation stating that when enough states join the compact to comprise a majority of E.C. votes, theirs will go to the candidate who wins the popular vote.

Not enough states have joined the pact yet, but this has a better chance than a Constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College.

[mopinko]

10. either way it's a tough sell. but adding a layer of mickey mouse crap isnt the answer, either.

i dont think one is one bit more likely to succeed than the other, but 'abolish it' is a lot easier to explain to the rubes.

[Martin Eden]

11. Though still a long shot, the Interstate Compact has much greater odds

Of success than a Constitutional amendment.

Why?

Because fewer small states (which want to keep the EC) would have to sign on.

[tritsofme]

16. There is no way to enforce it, the regime would fall quickly apart.

More than likely, the compact would dissolve the first time it was tested.

If the compact was in place, and the national popular vote and the traditional electoral college result were again in conflict, it would necessarily mean that at least one state in the compact would be compelled to cast their electoral votes against their state voters.

So let's say in 2028, the Democratic candidate would have won the traditional electoral college count, but narrowly loses the popular vote. And this is definitely something everyone in the media would be discussing. If a state like California is in the compact, I have a hard time believing they would stand back and cast all of the state's electoral votes for the Republican, even as the Democratic candidate got nearly 60% of their vote. More than likely, if CA could renege on the pact and allow the Democrat to become president, they would. Without wide-wide adoption, the exit of a state like CA would likely deprive the compact of it's electoral majority. This sort of conflict is inevitable in such an unstable and unenforceable compact, real change on the electoral college requires an amendment

[Calista241]

12. The NPVIC is likely to be interpreted by the SC as unconstitutional should a case ever make it there

Especially the SC constituted as it is now.

[Polybius]

15. There's a good chance it gets struck down by the Supreme Court

Maybe it won't, but there's certainly a good chance.

[Poiuyt]

9. Nothing will happen until the Republicans win the popular vote but lose

by the Electoral College. Unfortunately, it's not set up that way.

[USALiberal]

13. Does your capital shift key not work?

[mopinko]

17. rly?

bye