Maine moves to join Democratic-led pact to elect president by popular vote instead of Electoral College

dogs4thewin

dog lover
Christian Forums Staff
Hands-on Trainee
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Apr 19, 2012
30,400
5,624
32
Georgia U.S. State
✟898,180.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Because those votes would matter is people, rather then states, got to vote for president.
so the states would not count the votes? It would be sent to the federal level?
 
Upvote 0

Desk trauma

The pickles are up to something
Site Supporter
Dec 1, 2011
20,450
16,462
✟1,193,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
so the states would not count the votes? It would be sent to the federal level?
The states would run the elections but the winner of the presidency would be based on the popular vote count not the electoral votes. So the republican votes in California and democratic votes in Montana would count towards their candidates rather then being discarded.
 
Upvote 0

Nithavela

our world is happy and mundane
Apr 14, 2007
28,142
19,591
Comb. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell/Jamaica Avenue.
✟494,075.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
Why spend resources at places less likely to matter. Most states lean one way or the other anyway, so even with a popular vote system why would you spend a lot of money in a state where you KNOW most people do not support you. Like I said in many (if not most states state elections are the same way in tat the state is so red or blue that the opposing party (generally) has a hard time getting in office. Even with the house ( which is a federal or state office, but whose members are chosen on the local level VERY few districts tend to be competitive . There are 435 seats in the US house every two years all 435 of them are up for grabs yet there are MAYBE 20 districts that are competitive as far as whether a Republican or democrat will get the seat.
Which is why it will be a good thing when the popular votes decides on the president, because then every person matters as much as the next one. You might get democratic presidential candidates in huston, for example, or republican candidates in california.

You'd have to be extremely selfish to argue from a position of "I live in a battleground state, so I don't want anyone else to matter, because that would make me matter less".
 
Upvote 0

dogs4thewin

dog lover
Christian Forums Staff
Hands-on Trainee
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Apr 19, 2012
30,400
5,624
32
Georgia U.S. State
✟898,180.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Which is why it will be a good thing when the popular votes decides on the president, because then every person matters as much as the next one. You might get democratic presidential candidates in huston, for example, or republican candidates in california.

You'd have to be extremely selfish to argue from a position of "I live in a battleground state, so I don't want anyone else to matter, because that would make me matter less".
Instead I was saying that living in a battleground state may make make slightly less likely to get it at this point. I have lived in GA all my life and at 32 am old enough to remember when GA was NOT a battleground state but very red my particular area still is VERY red.
 
Upvote 0

Desk trauma

The pickles are up to something
Site Supporter
Dec 1, 2011
20,450
16,462
✟1,193,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Instead I was saying that living in a battleground state may make make slightly less likely to get it at this point. I have lived in GA all my life and at 32 am old enough to remember when GA was NOT a battleground state but very red my particular area still is VERY red.
Were there a popular vote the red state blue state nonsense could be knocked in the head.
 
Upvote 0