pipedreams Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 So they are willing to go for whomever NY & CA vote for, doubt it make it through. "DENVER — Colorado’s Senate has passed a bill to have the state award its presidential electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. SB-19 passed on party lines Tuesday in the Senate. Democratic Sen. Mike Foote’s bill would have Colorado join 11 states and the District of Columbia in what’s called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. It would require Colorado Electors to the Electoral College to cast their vote for the winner of the national popular vote. Currently, Colorado electors vote for the candidate who wins in Colorado. “This really is a victory for those who believe that every vote should be counted equally,” Foote (D-Lafayette) said." https://kdvr.com/2019/01/29/colorado-senate-passes-bill-to-essentially-eliminate-electoral-college/amp/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Historian Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) They're idiots. That means they will give anyone who wins the voice of the state regardless of how the election goes. Essentially giving their vote away. Edited January 30, 2019 by Historian 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tadbart Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) guess we better get busy breeding and importing the finest of the Aussies, the pissed-off Venezuelans, and other salvageable peoples. Edited January 30, 2019 by tadbart 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 This will only last until Republican wins the popular vote. then they will re-evaluate the practice and determine its fairness . 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Tiger Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 12 hours ago, Historian said: They're idiots. That means they will give anyone who wins the voice of the state regardless of how the election goes. Essentially giving their vote away. This. Colorado residents will no longer have a voice in the election. #feelsbadman 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Historian Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 35 minutes ago, SC Tiger said: This. Colorado residents will no longer have a voice in the election. #feelsbadman Right. The point of the electoral college is to give a state like Vermont or Hawaii (small states) a voice equal to California. The system is genius inspired. Honestly, Colorado is seeking to give that up. Seriously. Sixth graders understood this 50 years ago. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
windowasher Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 They must be sampling the Maryjo at the statehouse 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moeman Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 9 hours ago, Historian said: Right. The point of the electoral college is to give a state like Vermont or Hawaii (small states) a voice equal to California. The system is genius inspired. Honestly, Colorado is seeking to give that up. Seriously. Sixth graders understood this 50 years ago. Why is it genius? In 1787 there wasn’t a population disparity anything like today among states. Also, why should a state like Montana with a population of around 600k be equal to states with up to 38M? We need to rethink that one too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moshe Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 That may mean their votes are all disqualified for Presidential Elections, and the potentially elected will simply ignore their State. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Czervik Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 Colorado was once a wonderful place. It is now lost to the commie hordes imported from liberal hells like California. Anyone advocating the national popular vote system is an imbecile. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bish1309 Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 9 hours ago, Al Czervik said: Colorado was once a wonderful place. It is now lost to the commie hordes imported from liberal hells like California. Anyone advocating the national popular vote system is an imbecile. Why do you think they call it dope? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moshe Posted February 5, 2019 Share Posted February 5, 2019 First the Californians went to Arizona and nothing was said. Then they went to Colorado, and nothing was said. Then they devoured New Mexico and nothing was said. Whose next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Tiger Posted February 5, 2019 Share Posted February 5, 2019 On 1/30/2019 at 6:02 PM, Moeman said: Why is it genius? In 1787 there wasn’t a population disparity anything like today among states. Also, why should a state like Montana with a population of around 600k be equal to states with up to 38M? We need to rethink that one too. They're not. California has a LOT more electoral votes. The system is brilliant, but I'm afraid as a country we've lost our stomach for things that are a good idea but not popular. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moeman Posted February 5, 2019 Share Posted February 5, 2019 35 minutes ago, SC Tiger said: They're not. California has a LOT more electoral votes. The system is brilliant, but I'm afraid as a country we've lost our stomach for things that are a good idea but not popular. Ooopps, I was referring to the Senate in the senate as for smalll states (I think most got that). And yes popular vote versus electoral colllege makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Tiger Posted February 5, 2019 Share Posted February 5, 2019 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Moeman said: Ooopps, I was referring to the Senate in the senate as for smalll states (I think most got that). And yes popular vote versus electoral colllege makes sense. The senate also makes sense when you consider it is balanced out by the House of Representatives. The idea is to strike a balance between equal representation for the states, and the populations OF the states. That is the core design of the United States Government. Lest we forget, we are a Union of States. Most places consider a state as we view a country. As to the Electoral college - let's imagine for a minute that a candidate comes out that completely appeals to the white majority. And part of his platform is to deport every non-white person. If he carries the majority this could easily happen. This is a hypothetical since I have neither the time nor the inclination to build up a more realistic scenario. THAT is part of what the Electoral College is supposed to prevent. But since, as a nation, our balls have apparently fallen off it doesn't work as well. Edited February 5, 2019 by SC Tiger 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moeman Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 9 hours ago, SC Tiger said: The senate also makes sense when you consider it is balanced out by the House of Representatives. The idea is to strike a balance between equal representation for the states, and the populations OF the states. That is the core design of the United States Government. Lest we forget, we are a Union of States. Most places consider a state as we view a country. As to the Electoral college - let's imagine for a minute that a candidate comes out that completely appeals to the white majority. And part of his platform is to deport every non-white person. If he carries the majority this could easily happen. This is a hypothetical since I have neither the time nor the inclination to build up a more realistic scenario. THAT is part of what the Electoral College is supposed to prevent. But since, as a nation, our balls have apparently fallen off it doesn't work as well. In 1787, doubt they ever pictured states on nearly 40 million people and other around 600,000 people. There was disparity but the slaves didn’t have votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Tiger Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 13 hours ago, Moeman said: In 1787, doubt they ever pictured states on nearly 40 million people and other around 600,000 people. There was disparity but the slaves didn’t have votes. Doesn't really change the concept. If we went with popular vote then New York, California and probably Ohio would effectively choose the President. The rest of us would basically have no voice at all. As it stands now, look at where most of the campaigning is done. That should tell you all you need to know. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moeman Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 5 hours ago, SC Tiger said: Doesn't really change the concept. If we went with popular vote then New York, California and probably Ohio would effectively choose the President. The rest of us would basically have no voice at all. As it stands now, look at where most of the campaigning is done. That should tell you all you need to know. First three states are CA, TX, Fl , just saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Beararms Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 The Founders were wise beyond their years. This is a Federal issue. The CO law is useless and will not stand. With a popular vote versus the Electoral College, the Welfare whores in LA, CHI, NYC and other population centers will select the producers in less populous areas who pay for everything won’t have a voice. In time, the producers will send their money elsewhere. The country will experience what NY State is getting a taste of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limeylad Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 State rights died with the passage of the 17th Amendment. If it's repealed then I'll support the EC process otherwise it's time for a direct election for the Presidency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramjet38 Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 All it takes is a Republican to win the popular vote then they'll be scrambling to change it back. If that were ever to happen again. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Czervik Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 2 hours ago, Ramjet38 said: All it takes is a Republican to win the popular vote then they'll be scrambling to change it back. If that were ever to happen again. I submit that would only happen if Commiefornia is destroyed by an earthquake or other such natural disaster, and NY is smitten by fire and brimstone for their latest crap. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK_Stick Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 On 1/30/2019 at 5:02 PM, Moeman said: Why is it genius? In 1787 there wasn’t a population disparity anything like today among states. Also, why should a state like Montana with a population of around 600k be equal to states with up to 38M? We need to rethink that one too. To prevent mob rule. Letting seven or eight cities rule America is a folly. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK_Stick Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 2 hours ago, limeylad said: State rights died with the passage of the 17th Amendment. If it's repealed then I'll support the EC process otherwise it's time for a direct election for the Presidency. Why is it time? That will effectively give a small number of cities the power to decide the fate of the nation. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now