- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: New Mexico National Popular Vote Bill Headed to Governer's Desk
Posted on 3/13/19 at 11:50 pm to kbmaverick
Posted on 3/13/19 at 11:50 pm to kbmaverick
1. They wouldn't need to amend the constitution to do this. They would just have to do it independently and not as some weird interstate treaty. States are free to decide how they want to pick who their electors vote for.
2. Th electoral college isn't an amendment its an article. So we wouldn't have to repeal an amendment to get rid of it, we woudl have to pass an amendment. Most amendments have to do with changing something in the constitution. Again this has nothing to do with this being constitutional or not.
3.something being in the constitution doesn't make it ideal. Lots of compromises were made to get the federal government off the ground, and we have amended several of them, and expanded past our forefarther's thinking of who should be allowed to pic the president to add popular votes in states in the first place.
4. I think there is a difference constitutionally between each state passing this law on their own, and the states all agreeing they will pass the law if the other do. It seems like this is constitutional
educate yourself. You can't apply your basic civics class to actual situations.
2. Th electoral college isn't an amendment its an article. So we wouldn't have to repeal an amendment to get rid of it, we woudl have to pass an amendment. Most amendments have to do with changing something in the constitution. Again this has nothing to do with this being constitutional or not.
3.something being in the constitution doesn't make it ideal. Lots of compromises were made to get the federal government off the ground, and we have amended several of them, and expanded past our forefarther's thinking of who should be allowed to pic the president to add popular votes in states in the first place.
4. I think there is a difference constitutionally between each state passing this law on their own, and the states all agreeing they will pass the law if the other do. It seems like this is constitutional
educate yourself. You can't apply your basic civics class to actual situations.
This post was edited on 3/14/19 at 12:14 am
1
Posted on 3/14/19 at 12:22 am to SammyTiger
To get rid of EC, yes they would.
But I do realize none of this sinks into your skull. You still have extreme butt hurt because HC lost and to permanently damage you, Trump will win again. Take another look at the number of counties that Trump won. Even in New York he carried the majority of the counties. The votes of two cities gave Hilary a majority. What you are defending would result in a Constitutional crisis this country has never seen before. We are already in the beginning of a Civil War and giving power to the "MOB" (yes it is a mob) would bring it to a nasty ending.
But I do realize none of this sinks into your skull. You still have extreme butt hurt because HC lost and to permanently damage you, Trump will win again. Take another look at the number of counties that Trump won. Even in New York he carried the majority of the counties. The votes of two cities gave Hilary a majority. What you are defending would result in a Constitutional crisis this country has never seen before. We are already in the beginning of a Civil War and giving power to the "MOB" (yes it is a mob) would bring it to a nasty ending.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News