15
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
As expected, Dems are soft-launching abolishing the electoral college
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:26 pm
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:26 pm
A small price to pay for temporary $4/gallon gas. Glad the far-right and never trumpers made their "statement" this cycle.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:26 pm to The Pirate King
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:28 pm to The Pirate King
Gavin Newsom talking about votes not counting 
What s fool this greasy MF'er is.
What s fool this greasy MF'er is.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:30 pm to The Pirate King
The Orange princess caused this,,, Thank him and you will see the real cause.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:30 pm to The Pirate King
Abolishing the Electoral College would, in my opinion, justify seceding from the Union by any means.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:31 pm to The Pirate King
The work of geniuses undone by morons.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:34 pm to The Pirate King
I think the EC Compact some states are discussing violates the Guarantee Clause of the Constitution.
Art. 4, Sec. 4 says
Allowing your electoral college votes to be pledged not by the voters of your state, but by the national popular vote, violates the guarantee that each state shall ensure a Republican form of government. It disenfranchises your own voters.
It’s novel and clever and I don’t even hate the ingenuity, but I think it’s plainly against the text (and spirit!) of the Constitution.
Art. 4, Sec. 4 says
quote:
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
Allowing your electoral college votes to be pledged not by the voters of your state, but by the national popular vote, violates the guarantee that each state shall ensure a Republican form of government. It disenfranchises your own voters.
It’s novel and clever and I don’t even hate the ingenuity, but I think it’s plainly against the text (and spirit!) of the Constitution.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:36 pm to The Pirate King
I hope they try this. Dems always overplay their hand
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:39 pm to The Pirate King
Democratic Republic.
No majority rule.
Liberals want L.A., Chicago and NYC to be the voice of the entire country while places like Kansas, Arkansas, most of the south... have no voice.
The EC was put in place for every state (you know that tricky UNITED STATES part), to have a voice.
frick you Newsom
frick you Democrats
This is a hill to die on.
No majority rule.
Liberals want L.A., Chicago and NYC to be the voice of the entire country while places like Kansas, Arkansas, most of the south... have no voice.
The EC was put in place for every state (you know that tricky UNITED STATES part), to have a voice.
frick you Newsom
frick you Democrats
This is a hill to die on.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:40 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
It’s novel and clever and I don’t even hate the ingenuity, but I think it’s plainly against the text (and spirit!) of the Constitution.
Since some states have already implemented this why aren’t there suits from within those states challenging the Constitutionality now while we have a conservative SCOTUS.
Other than republicans never do shite…which is the obvious answer.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:45 pm to SquatchDawg
That’s a good question and I think the answer is that its been seen more as not serious before this and there is a trigger mechanism in each state’s law that it’s only in effect once a threshold is met (which hasn’t been). It may get kicked on standing grounds as there is no actual case or controversy for a federal court to adjudicate since it is not yet in effect.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:47 pm to aubie101
quote:
The Orange princess caused this
Mouthbreathers such as yourself would gladly give up every right you have just to make yourselves feel superior to everyone else.
Congrats, you did it!
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:51 pm to boosiebadazz
It violates
equal protection: each state has a different system; from registration, to who can vote, to method of voting, to how they are counted/audited/etc.
and
due process: the jurisdiction votes for candidate X but the law makes it so candidate Y wins the jurisdiction.
equal protection: each state has a different system; from registration, to who can vote, to method of voting, to how they are counted/audited/etc.
and
due process: the jurisdiction votes for candidate X but the law makes it so candidate Y wins the jurisdiction.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:55 pm to JimEverett
I have to ask, does this matter with a blue Texas?
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:56 pm to aubie101
quote:
The Orange princess caused this,,, Thank him and you will see the real cause.
nonsense, par for you
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:56 pm to JimEverett
I personally think the states should have their own EC so the big cities can't decide the outcome for the whole state.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:56 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Abolishing the Electoral College would, in my opinion, justify seceding from the Union by any means.
100%
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:59 pm to SquatchDawg
quote:
Since some states have already implemented this why aren’t there suits from within those states challenging the Constitutionality now while we have a conservative SCOTUS.
No standing? Same reason Louisiana's law banning abortion that only kicked in if Roe v Wade was overturned wasn't challenged.
Democrats are being short sighted with this push. If they truly turned Texas blue, there wouldn't be any contest. Since 1992, 15 states had always voted blue and 13 always red with a 193-103 advantage. Flipping Texas gets them to 233-63.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 12:59 pm to SquatchDawg
quote:
Since some states have already implemented this why aren’t there suits from within those states challenging the Constitutionality now while we have a conservative SCOTUS.
Because nothing has happened. There is no case to be heard. Someone could try to create a controversy based on where we are at right now - say someone says the possibility of this being implemented has caused some sort of harm, but I am not sure what that could look like.
Posted on 11/13/26 at 1:00 pm to CubsFanBudMan
quote:
Democrats are being short sighted with this push. If they truly turned Texas blue, there wouldn't be any contest. Since 1992, 15 states had always voted blue and 13 always red with a 193-103 advantage. Flipping Texas gets them to 233-63.
no one seems to realize that we are in the early stages of a single party state.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News