It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Colorado Senate Passes Bill Nixing Electoral College in Favor of Popular Vote

page: 2
35
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: schuyler


For the record Colorado cannot unilaterally change the Constitution of the United States..



The electoral college elects only the president and vice president. As admistrators, they are not legislators. They do not "represent" anyone. They are unique. Elected not by the people, but by the states.

The Constitution says nothing about the president being elected by the people or any requirements on how electors vote. There are, however, state laws about how electors are "expected" to vote. Nothing to do with the US Constitution.


True... so Democrats, recognizing that there will never be the political will to pass an actual Constitutional Amendment to repeal the electoral college, are doing what they do best and working around it.

Colorado is effectively taking away their own citizen's votes and allowing New York and California to speak for them.

Which is what the National Popular Vote movement is all about.

Taking away from States their citizen's rights.

By Any Means Necessary.



edit on 4-2-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:08 PM
link   
One person, one vote.

That's how it's already set up.

One resident of each state cast their vote, it's counted, and whomever wins the state get that states vote.

It's not rocket science.....or even gender studies. Its pretty simple.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:11 PM
link   
I agree with this.

We should do away with the Electoral College. People from areas of the country, like my own New York Metro, should have a greater say in what happens to the rest of the country...

There are in fact more people living here than else where; so it's only fair that our opinions and needs are seen as way more important than everyone elses.

Don't get me wrong; I'll feel sorry for you guys not living in a city on the east or west coast no one will ever take you seriously again; but I do promise to give your needs a mild thought when I elect our president.

One person one vote ... to bad you don't have enough persons to stay relevant.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Colorado cannot do one damn thing about the Electoral College. Not one damn thing. Colorado is not the US government and does not decide what the Constitution says. The most they can do is what the article says, elect their electoral representatives based on the popular vote in their state.

Whoopdadie do da. Alabama already does that. I don't think Colorado even knows how the Electoral College works. Do they think they get to tell other states to ignore the Constitution?

The only way anyone can change the electoral college to a popular vote is by ratification of a Constitutional Amendment by the states. Good luck with that.

TheRedneck



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

roflol sorry don't want Cal-if/or-nia or the New-York-Corks running the whole country.

Mob rule is what ruined Vene-zoo-elia 🤣


Rule by the one is the opposite end of the spectrum to rule by the many.

Mob rule and Democracy are as related to each other as dictatorship relates to tyranny.


Really? Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting what to have for lunch.


No it isn't.

Just like autocracy isn't one wolf selecting its meal from a number of penned lambs or Republicanism isn't a few wolves selecting their lamb dinners.


One person, one vote. That's what you said. Now you are waffling making no sense. The only reason you don't like the electoral college is because you lost last time. If the opposite had happened, a very easy thing to do, either we wouldn't be hearing a peep out of you or you'd be telling us how important the electoral college is.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

The Constitution is silent on how electors vote. That is up to state legislators.

Should enough states join the agreement the presidential election would become, in effect, a popular vote.


edit on 2/4/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut




Fairer, truer to the actual population of America, and harder to manipulate corruptly.


How?

Democracy encourages mob rule (corruption) and is the main reason why we have a representative republic.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

What I think they're doing is that they're trying to say that as a state they can decide how their electors vote and if they chose to have their electors vote based upon the national popular vote instead of the popular vote of their state, then that is their right to do so.

Jill Stein was pushing this a few years back.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: DanDanDat

There are in fact more people living here than else where; so it's only fair that our opinions and needs are seen as way more important than everyone elses.

Don't get me wrong; I'll feel sorry for you guys not living in a city on the east or west coast no one will ever take you seriously again; but I do promise to give your needs a mild thought when I elect our president.

One person one vote ... to bad you don't have enough persons to stay relevant.


And that is EXACTLY what is wrong with the country. Arrogant prigs who care about nothing other than themselves.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: chr0naut




Fairer, truer to the actual population of America, and harder to manipulate corruptly.


How?

Democracy encourages mob rule (corruption) and is the main reason why we have a representative republic.


The administrative branch does not represent.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: chr0naut




Fairer, truer to the actual population of America, and harder to manipulate corruptly.


How?

Democracy encourages mob rule (corruption) and is the main reason why we have a representative republic.


The administrative branch does not represent.


Neither does congress if we're going down the Phage technical route.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

You can always count on Democrats to cheat to win if things aren't going there way. With 5 million+ illegal voters this should be a great strategy for them.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Actually, it does.
Each state is represented by 2 Senators and various Representatives. All elected by popular vote.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:26 PM
link   
I guess I will state the obvious. Some people in Colorado just might be a little stoned at the moment.

But I will agree to an abolishment of the Electoral College provided votes from Sanctuary Cities are not counted.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: xuenchen

You can always count on Democrats to cheat to win if things aren't going there way. With 5 million+ illegal voters this should be a great strategy for them.


And if those 5M aren't enough, they'll pull the ace from their sleeve........another 5M more dead.......sorry, I mean living impaired....voters.


It's amusing to think that a lot of dem voters acknowledge what happened to bernie, but then some of those people will champion this popular vote crap, refusing to believe it could be "fixed".

It's a lot harder to rig 50 state elections than a popular vote.
edit on 4-2-2019 by MisterSpock because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

No that is not correct.

Under this new law; Colorado will now have their electors cast their Electoral votes to the winner of the National Popular vote.

It will be entirely possible for Colorado's Electoral votes to go to an individual who does not win the majority of the Colorado popular votes ... the majority of Colorado citizens could see their state vote for a person they do not want... so long as this person wins a majority in other states.

On its own face this seems like a bad idea for the people of Colorado; why give up what little power you have to us big guys; but to each their own. What I don't understand is how they square this systematically... since the rest of the country is not worried about the "popular vote" when they go to the polls; Colorado can't even make the argument that they are casting their vote for the popular vote winner.
edit on 4-2-2019 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

Colorado joins;

Maryland
New Jersey
Illinois
Hawaii
Washington
Massachusetts
Washington, D.C.
Vermont
California
Rhode Island
New York
Connecticut



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JinMI

Actually, it does.
Each state is represented by 2 Senators and various Representatives. All elected by popular vote.


So where is the representation for Independent/Const/Green/Rep in HI?



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

The pact does not take effect unless (and until) enough combined electoral votes are collectively in the majority.



posted on Feb, 4 2019 @ 08:34 PM
link   
One person one vote eh.

Remind me again how that worked out during the democratic primaries?

I am sure Sanders would have something to say.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join