Majority Leader John Thune is holding a vote in the Senate to require voter ID nationwide in elections by law, a provision of the SAVE America Act

Tbird19482 said:
They would have one big problem if it passes it would be struck down as being UNCONSTITUTIONAL. it states in plain language in the Constitution that how the states decide their Electors to the EC is completely up to the State legislature .
They do NOT even need to hold elections.
And they can not tell the states how they run their state elections.
Click to expand...
Well, one way that is unconstitutional is the national popular vote initiative by blue, Democrat run, states. Electors in one state are not beholden to the vote of another state.
 
Guno צְבִי said:

States, Not the President, Run Elections in America​

The administration’s attempts to undermine or interfere with elections run afoul of constitutional delegations of responsibility.

statecourtreport.org

States, Not the President, Run Elections in America

The administration’s attempts to undermine or interfere with elections run afoul of constitutional delegations of responsibility.
statecourtreport.org statecourtreport.org
Click to expand...
And the federal govt has long been involved with elections. You can read correct?
 
Jade Dragon said:
You dumbass MAGA always spout off about needing to be constitutional when a D has the presidency, but change your tune immediately like a fickle fucktard when an R has it. You either don't have a clue what is in the document, or you don't care. Either way, you can eat a bag of dicks.
Click to expand...
You said you have every MAGA person on ignore.
How what you know what was said?
 
Tbird19482 said:
What the fuck are you talking about?
Click to expand...
These:


It's an attempt to make an end run around the electoral college by the Left / Democrats. What it does is have each state agree that its electors will go to the candidate that gets the most votes nationally in a Presidential election.

The problem with that is it potentially disenfranchises voters in a state that vote for the candidate that didn't get the most national votes. That is state X voted for candidate A. Candidate B got the most (popular) votes nationally. State X is in this compact, so the state allocates its electors to candidate B even though the people in that state voted for A. That totally disenfranchises state X's voters who wanted A but got B because voters in OTHER states voted for B. In short, it has the potential to let votes in one state determine the outcome of an election in another state. That is unconstitutional and illegal.

If you look at the list, it is 100% Democrat / Left and 0% Republican.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
These:


It's an attempt to make an end run around the electoral college by the Left / Democrats. What it does is have each state agree that its electors will go to the candidate that gets the most votes nationally in a Presidential election.

The problem with that is it potentially disenfranchises voters in a state that vote for the candidate that didn't get the most national votes. That is state X voted for candidate A. Candidate B got the most (popular) votes nationally. State X is in this compact, so the state allocates its electors to candidate B even though the people in that state voted for A. That totally disenfranchises state X's voters who wanted A but got B because voters in OTHER states voted for B. In short, it has the potential to let votes in one state determine the outcome of an election in another state. That is unconstitutional and illegal.

If you look at the list, it is 100% Democrat / Left and 0% Republican.
Click to expand...
I don't know " If you look at the list, it is 100% Democrat / Left and 0% Republican." I would need a link for that one.
BUT IMPO, and I have said this for years IF a Congressional district votes one way then the Rep. they voted for should get their vote.
I am against this winner take all BS.
Like NY , I think it has 27 Congressional districts and say 13 vote one way and 13 vote the other and the last one votes and that district is decided by one vote, ( I know that has a snowballs chance in hell of happening , but it could ) as it is now with the winner take all BS half the voters wishes are not being recognized.
They should stop the winner take all BS and give the candidate whom the district votes for those votes.
as I said if your state has 27 districts and 13 vote one way that candidate should get their vote.
 
Tbird19482 said:
I don't know " If you look at the list, it is 100% Democrat / Left and 0% Republican." I would need a link for that one.
BUT IMPO, and I have said this for years IF a Congressional district votes one way then the Rep. they voted for should get their vote.
I am against this winner take all BS.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with that. The problem is, the Democrats would never agree to it because that puts them at a huge disadvantage.
Tbird19482 said:
Like NY , I think it has 27 Congressional districts and say 13 vote one way and 13 vote the other and the last one votes and that district is decided by one vote, ( I know that has a snowballs chance in hell of happening , but it could ) as it is now with the winner take all BS half the voters wishes are not being recognized.
They should stop the winner take all BS and give the candidate whom the district votes for those votes.
as I said if your state has 27 districts and 13 vote one way that candidate should get their vote.
Click to expand...
Totally agreed. But as I said with the Democrats typically taking urban areas and large cities, much of the time as much as 75% of the area of a state is voting Republican but those districts have fewer people in them than the one or two large cities in the state does.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I totally agree with that. The problem is, the Democrats would never agree to it because that puts them at a huge disadvantage.

Totally agreed. But as I said with the Democrats typically taking urban areas and large cities, much of the time as much as 75% of the area of a state is voting Republican but those districts have fewer people in them than the one or two large cities in the state does.
Click to expand...
And you really think the Republicans would?
NOT.
They are just as bad as the DEMS are.
 
Tbird19482 said:
And you really think the Republicans would?
NOT.
They are just as bad as the DEMS are.
Click to expand...
Oh yea, the Republicans would in a nanosecond. Think about it. California has 54 electors. If say, 22 ended up voting for the Republican--most of rural California along with some pockets are heavily Republican--it would be disastrous for the Democrats.

This was how California voted by county in 2024
:

960px-2026_California_attorney_general_primary_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png



This is New York in 2024 with 28 electors. Again if say, 10 were to now be Republican...

OIP.eOtdNk2DsjqFGlgsKK4dKQHaFr


Those two states alone would flip the results in the Republican's favor in almost every election for President.
 
Yakuda said:
Bout time
Click to expand...
Probably too late.
archives said:
It is a show move, means nothing, only a token gesture to Donnie, even if passed would have to go to the House and if passed there would be immediately challenged and delayed in the Courts. Nothing burger
Click to expand...
Dumbass, it already came from The House. Thune is and has been the road block the entire time.
Don't you know how our government works, anchovies?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top