Join TexasGunTalk

Virginia House Bill 177

Discussion in 'Politics' started by JColumbus, Feb 13, 2020.

  1. JColumbus

    JColumbus Well-Known

    2,231
    332
    83
    Jun 28, 2012
    Please correct me if I am misunderstanding this. If it means what I think it means, essentially the electoral college is all but done away with, not only would I condone but I would hope and pray we have another civil war. IF this is indeed what I think it is, it is a far bigger spark than the gun rights issue. The media and movie/pop stars would all promote leftists and we would never see another conservative and or republican president again.

    So yea, please someone clarify this and tell me it’s not what I think it is.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wr...o-national-popular-vote-winner-for-potus/amp/
     


  2. toddnjoyce

    toddnjoyce TGT Addict

    5,637
    10,195
    113
    Sep 27, 2017
    Boerne
    The National Popular Vote effort (https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation) has been around since 2012, and it’s aimed at assigning all electoral votes in a state to the winner of the popular vote in that state.

    Some states have done winner take all elector assignment for a long time. The current effort is very shortsighted...D states are pushing for it as ‘payback’ for 2016.

    Karma can be a bitch though, as there are some strange permutations where the popular vote could be won, but due to the numbers of electors, the loser could still be elected.
     
    JColumbus, Southpaw and pronstar like this.
  3. oldag

    oldag TGT Addict

    6,665
    5,478
    113
    Feb 19, 2015
    If enough states adopted this approach, it would in effect negate the electoral college.

    I would not be surprised to see a lawsuit that goes all the way to SCOTUS on this.
     
    JColumbus, Southpaw and pronstar like this.
  4. pronstar

    pronstar TGT Addict TGT Supporter

    4,686
    9,870
    113
    Jul 2, 2017
    Dallas
    There are so many ways this can backfire in their faces...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
     
    JColumbus and toddnjoyce like this.
  5. toddnjoyce

    toddnjoyce TGT Addict

    5,637
    10,195
    113
    Sep 27, 2017
    Boerne
    It’s entirely constitutional; states have the right to assign their votes however they want. Then only other issue is that of a faithless elector, which Texas had a problem with in 2016.

    https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/faq#ecpopulardiffer
     
  6. BillFairbanks

    BillFairbanks Well-Known

    1,333
    2,619
    113
    May 8, 2017
    Johnson County, TX
    It’s going to be hilarious when Trump wins the popular vote


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  7. jrbfishn

    jrbfishn TGT Addict

    20,704
    3,771
    113
    Aug 9, 2013
    south of killeen
    This is a case of "be very careful what you wish for, you might get it".
    But if a State Congress full of Democrats is for it, it can't be good and I would not trust them in the least. Especially if it is tied in any way to the popular vote. Electing according to the popular vote would effectively nullify 2/3s of the Country. The east and west coast along with the Great Lakes region would effectively rule the rest of the Country.
    Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2020
    Southpaw and toddnjoyce like this.
  8. Renegade

    Renegade SuperOwner

    7,513
    3,290
    113
    Mar 5, 2008
    Texas
    This. It is only since the late 19th century did most states allow voters to decide. Before that the legislatures of the state decided who the electors were.
     
    toddnjoyce likes this.
  9. JColumbus

    JColumbus Well-Known

    2,231
    332
    83
    Jun 28, 2012
    This is exactly what I'm worried about and believe war would be appropriate over it.


    My question is, if we're a constitutional republic, and not a democracy, how the hell is it constitutional? Can't be "state's rights" because it's a federal issue...
     
  10. toddnjoyce

    toddnjoyce TGT Addict

    5,637
    10,195
    113
    Sep 27, 2017
    Boerne
    This is a good question...the EC system is what makes us a representative democracy, which is what a republic is.

    Article 2 of the Constitution is where the EC is birthed, and the 12th A makes some adjustments, they create the framework...there’s one rep for each congressional district and senate senate seat.

    The U.S. Constitution (Article II, Section 1) gives the states exclusive control over awarding their electoral votes: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors....”

    The National Popular Vote Compact (NPVC) does nothing to change that framework, which would be unconstitutional.

    Looking further in Article II, the Constitution is silent on how the states can control the individual electors. In the beginning, there were only 2 or 3 winner take all states: today, 48 states are winner take all in the EC.

    This (and the 12thA) was a reaction by the states to the several elections in the 1800s where the popular vote winner was not the EC choice.

    The NPVC is today’s response to the 2000 and 2016 election where the same thing happened. The problem is what happens when big states like CA lose EC seats (like there projected to) due to census counts reducing their proportion of seats and awards those seats somewhere else.

    Then, we’ll see another effort to try to ‘fix’ something that really can’t be fixed, because change happens.
     


    JColumbus likes this.

Share This Page