I am not a constitutional scholar. Explain to me what it would take to Eliminate the electoral college . On the flip side, how is the electoral college protected as designed by the founders of our federal republic?
It’s part of the Constitution, therefore it would take an Amendment to do away with it.
Certainly you aren’t advocating getting rid of it, are you? That prevents mob rule, keeps the big cities from running things for the rest of us in perpetuity.
The part that should worry us all is how close the Lefties are getting with their illegal “National Popular Vote Compact” to bypassing it.
2 Likes
It should, but in practice simple majority votes for laws, executive orders,and/or court decisions have always done the trick in the past.
You’re unlikely to get that many Politicans to Vote to change the Constitution to do away with the Electorial College.
In Effect Mandami and Newsome would then be our Potus and VicePotus without the Electroial College
Same thing will happen if NPVIC isn’t nuked into glass before 270 EV worth of states sign on.
I’m a big advocate of the electoral college. I grew up in a very red county where the state is controlled by blue urban centers. The electoral college is necessary for our republic. I fear the socialist getting rid of it by death of 1000 cuts.
This is how the Demonrats will get around the EC. And other states will start following VA in extreme gerrymandering. Interesting stats from that referendum in VA: 55% of Election Day votes against the redistricting and 73% of mail in votes were for. Cheating is alive and well and nothing will stop it.
Just remember that the next time you hear a Demoshit saying they have a “mandate” from the people.
You know, I’m getting more and more warm to the idea of nuking the filibuster and ramming through the most “extreme” form of the SAVE Act, the one that includes no general mail-in voting. Requiring ID and no mail-in voting would ruin the Demoshits. Oh sure, you’d still have hard-core libtard states (like MN, the only state to vote against Reagan in 1984) but they would be less than they are now.
1 Like
Problem is that the Repubes are gutless; Thune won’t even bring it up for a vote because the Dems threatened to filibuster. The Repubes like being losers, must be better for their wallets.
1 Like
Which is legally unenforceable, also imagine for a minute if Vance loses the EV but wins the PV in 2028, does anyone believe that Dem states would follow through and assign their EVs to Vance?? 
It’s literally a long con to convince Red or Purple states to give up their EVs to Blue states in the event a Rep wins like Trump did in 2016.
You know that and I know that.. but the Average Mouthbreather Voter makes the squirrel turds in my yard look like rocket scientists, and we’ve seen how Leftist judges will torture law to achieve preferred opinions and the Roberts Court refuses to rein them in.
They don’t even care that if NPVIC had been in effect in '24, assuming it fully binding, all the Blue States would have been obligated to designate their EV’s for Trump.
Is there another red state like Texas planning on adjusting their maps to fight the dems? The battle was lost yesterday, but plenty or war left.
Indiana was on the verge of doing it recently but the gutless Repubes changed their minds because “it wasn’t fair”. F the Repubes and the Demonrats ; neither have the best interests of the country at heart. The Right just happens to be the lesser of two evils and they know that.
I’m sorry man, you totally lost me. I thought that the “pact” entailed splitting electoral votes instead of all going to the winner, i.e. a state has 10 electoral votes and an R wins the state overall, but instead of giving him all 10 they give him a proportionate amount to the vote tally. If he won by 60/40 then he would get 6 and the D would get 4.
Nope, NPV sez “these states give their EV’s to the PV winner no matter who wins the state.”
WTF? You mean the state’s electors go to whomever wins the national popular vote? Who the hell came up with that tom-foolery?
Democrats looking to pull a fast one on the gullible masses, who else?
I still don’t understand how the NPVIC is Constitutional?
Me either. Technically electors don’t have to vote for the person who won their state. That may be the “out” they use. However, making a “Compact” kinda makes it obvious and hopefully puts it in murky waters legality-wise as well as constitutionally.
All that said, I thought the state’s Republican or Demoshit slate of electors were the ones who cast their votes for the guy from their party that won the state. I find it hard to believe that the Republican Party would allow Democrat electors to vote instead of them if a Republican won their state. If the state, by entering into this “Compact”, forces them to step aside and let the other party’s electors vote then I would think that would be big-time unconstitutional.