Supreme Court rules states can force electors to abide by popular vote to

Sparagmos said:

Otherwise known as democracy...

Click to expand...

Here in the UK we have the First Past the Post system. If you live in a so-called 'safe seat', your individual vote will count for pretty much nothing much of the time.

In 2016 we had a referendum on membership of the European Union. Every single vote counted and had equal importance and weight. The 'wrong' side won. Most MPs initially pledged to honour the outcome. Following re-election, many of those MPs then did everything they could to keep us in some or all of the European Union's institutions. Many pressure groups and lobbying groups also formed to try and overturn the outcome, and the action included several high profile court cases. Over four years later we still have not left the European Union.

Why am I telling this story? Because some people laud democracy, but are simply incapable of accepting the democratic outcome when they think it is 'wrong'.

Sparagmos said:

Otherwise known as democracy...

Click to expand...

Many say that Jesus’s teachings are the foundations of democracy. But I honestly know nothing about politics. I don’t have a clue what the left and right represent in any of the political discussions. I commented on the thread title that seemed to demonstrate a new era.

~Cassia~ said:

Many say that Jesus’s teachings are the foundations of democracy. But I honestly know nothing about politics. I don’t have a clue what the left and right represent in any of the political discussions. I commented on the thread title that seemed to demonstrate a new era.

Click to expand...

Given that Jesus was a "King" and that his followers were part of the "Kingdom".... well, it's hard to make the argument. Now, if one wants to say that Jesus came for "all", and saw all as having equal opportunity to receive salvation and grace, then one might ask whether (Christian) Americans are on board with that?

cow451 said:

Given that Jesus was a "King" and that his followers were part of the "Kingdom".... well, it's hard to make the argument. Now, if one wants to say that Jesus came for "all", and saw all as having equal opportunity to receive salvation and grace, then one might ask whether (Christian) Americans are on board with that?

Click to expand...

Well at the risk of circumstantial evidence convicting me of being a follower anywhere but by His side, at which I plead th 5th Justification is for all and sanctification is a choice.

I suspect mail-in fraud from both sides. November is gonna be carnage!

So instead of the people of a particular state being able to decide who the state will vote for, they're completely silenced by the tyranny of the majority.

98cwitr said:

I suspect mail-in fraud from both sides. November is gonna be carnage!

So instead of the people of a particular state being able to decide who the state will vote for, they're completely silenced by the tyranny of the majority.

Click to expand...

Once more. The Court ruled that the Electoral College can continue to operate in the same way as it has since the beginning of the Republic and that states can back it up by requiring the Electors to vote for the candidate who won the popular vote in the state...exactly as the voters expect them to do.

Albion said:

Once more. The Court ruled that the Electoral College can continue to operate in the same way as it has since the beginning of the Republic and that states can back it up by requiring the Electors to vote for the candidate who won the popular vote in the state...exactly as the voters expect them to do.

Click to expand...

Does this stop the state government from, such as Virginia, from passing a popular vote bill?

I don't see anywhere in the ruling where it would.

98cwitr said:

Does this stop the state government from, such as Virginia, from passing a popular vote bill?

Click to expand...

No, but it takes a constitutional amendment to change the constitution, and that takes 3/4 of the states to concur before it becomes the new way for any state.

What Virginia can do is enact the so-called 'National Popular Vote Compact' proposal which requires the chosen Electors to cast their votes for the candidate who wins the majority of the popular vote, nationwide, regardless of which one carried the state.

But this proposal, which is intended to skirt the Constitutional requirement, would not go into effect until enough states adopt it and have, among themselves, 270 electoral votes. They are far from that at the present time. And then, it would have to be ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court as well.

~Cassia~ said:

Well at the risk of circumstantial evidence convicting me of being a follower anywhere but by His side, at which I plead th 5th Justification is for all and sanctification is a choice.

Click to expand...

All should have a choice in being sanctified by the government?

Albion said:

No, but it takes a constitutional amendment to change the constitution, and that takes 3/4 of the states to concur before it becomes the new way for any state.

What Virginia can do is enact the so-called 'National Popular Vote Compact' proposal which requires the chosen Electors to cast their votes for the candidate who wins the majority of the popular vote, nationwide, regardless of which one carried the state.

But this proposal, which is intended to skirt the Constitutional requirement, would not go into effect until enough states adopt it and have, among themselves, 270 electoral votes. They are far from that at the present time. And then, it would have to be ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court as well.

Click to expand...

196 EVs enacted thus far, not too far if Texas goes blue: National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

So, 74 more electoral votes to be accounted for?

I'd say that's a significant amount IF you consider that the states which have already come on board are the most obviously blue states.

It probably will be harder to reach 270 from the states that are left. But of course Texas could add a fairly big chunk. At present, the Republicans control both houses of the Texas legislature plus the governorship.

Gerrymandering is still available to precincts and states...why else would the precincts look as strange as they do?

It's a method of watering down votes and election results by concentrating and watering down collective opinions.

JohnDB said:

Gerrymandering is still available to precincts and states...why else would the precincts look as strange as they do?

It's a method of watering down votes and election results by concentrating and watering down collective opinions.

Click to expand...

...but has nothing to do with the functioning of the Electoral College.

dogs4thewin said:

Very rare

Click to expand...

No.
The court is unanimous 36% of the time.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-on-the-supreme-court-9-0-is-far-more-common/

cow451 said:

All should have a choice in being sanctified by the government?

Click to expand...

The thoughts on gvmnt issues from the last time I voted when I was 19, just because I could.

~Cassia~ said:

Many say that Jesus’s teachings are the foundations of democracy. But I honestly know nothing about politics. I don’t have a clue what the left and right represent in any of the political discussions. I commented on the thread title that seemed to demonstrate a new era.

Click to expand...

Interesting, could you tell us more about the new era you see in relation to the Supreme Court’s ruling?

Sparagmos said:

Interesting, could you tell us more about the new era you see in relation to the Supreme Court’s ruling?

Click to expand...

No sorry, I know nothing.