- 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
1
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:43 am to Jjdoc
quote:
why would anybody in any state vote.
To get the most votes nationally.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:45 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
It would be funny but we all know that's near 0% chance of happening. Nationally the DEMs have a pretty safe lead.
When was the last GOP popular vote winner? 2004? Then 1988 before that?
How many Rs in NY CA etc don't vote since it is pointless? This would fundamentally change how campaigns are run, so your questions are pretty fricking irrelevant. Absolutely no shock that you ask them that way though.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:47 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
OK explain which clause you believe applies and how it applies to this argument, with case cites.
You know how to look it up.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:48 am to Jjdoc
quote:
You know how to look it up.
This is Jj’s way of saying “I don’t know”
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:49 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
To get the most votes nationally.
Like I said.. I know you LOVE the idea, but it will be struck down.
Smaller states Like MS, Al, LA, etc.. all of those states will be disenfranchised.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:50 am to Jjdoc
quote:
You know how to look it up.
I already looked up the applicable provision from the Constitution.
YOU brought up the 14A. Burden is on you to defend that position (or, hell, make an actual argument in the first place)
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:50 am to pankReb
quote:
This is Jj’s way of saying “I don’t know”
No Pank, this is my way of ending a conversation with a hack who is pro this and nothing is going to change his mind.
Legal scholars even agree.. Just look it up.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:
state voters being denied their right to vote electors for candidate of their choosing because the selection is to be determined by the voters of other states. This is the equivalent of letting citizens of Nebraska vote for the governor of Massachusetts. shouldn't pass 14th amendment muster. also appears to be a violation of Article 1, Section 10.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:51 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Smaller states Like MS, Al, LA, etc.. all of those states will be disenfranchised.
Where does the "14th Amendment" address this?
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:52 am to udtiger
quote:
state voters being denied their right to vote electors for candidate of their choosing because the selection is to be determined by the voters of other states. This is the equivalent of letting citizens of Nebraska vote for the governor of Massachusetts. shouldn't pass 14th amendment muster. also appears to be a violation of Article 1, Section 10.
You are arguing with a leftist masquerading as a GOP moderate.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:53 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
YOU brought up the 14A. Burden is on you to defend that position (or, hell, make an actual argument in the first place)
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:54 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Jjobama
quote:
leftist masquerading
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:54 am to cajunangelle
Unconstitutional
The will of the People above the will of their agents.
The will of the People above the will of their agents.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:55 am to cajunangelle
States have the constitutional authority to determine how their Electoral college casts their votes. But I am not sure about this.
This is a terrible idea. The people of Michigan may want one candidate, but because the national poplar vote went for the other candidate it won’t matter. And larger states like NY, CA, or TX would have far too much influence over Michigan’s electoral votes.
The electoral votes from that state should in some way reflect the will of the voters of that state.
This is a terrible idea. The people of Michigan may want one candidate, but because the national poplar vote went for the other candidate it won’t matter. And larger states like NY, CA, or TX would have far too much influence over Michigan’s electoral votes.
The electoral votes from that state should in some way reflect the will of the voters of that state.
This post was edited on 7/13/23 at 8:58 am
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:58 am to dewster
quote:
States have the constitutional authority to determine how their Electoral college casts their votes. But I am not sure about this.
Not in this manner. It will be struck down.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 8:58 am to udtiger
quote:.
also appears to be a violation of Article 1, Section 10.
quote:
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
How?
Is your argument that all State compacts violate this provision?
quote:
state voters being denied their right to vote electors for candidate of their choosing because the selection is to be determined by the voters of other states.
They're going to be denied their ability to choose in some way by an electoral system. That's how elections work in a representative system. The point of the representative election system is to offer the potential to deny some sort of choice/representation for the individual (because one representative is chosen for a large population). The alternative is direct democracy, which none of us want.
quote:
shouldn't pass 14th amendment muster.
Which section?
The current USSC has stripped federal oversight/review of state election laws (while this term strengthening state overview of its own election laws via judicial review).
Posted on 7/13/23 at 9:01 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Not in this manner. It will be struck down.
I doubt it. I agree with SFP.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 9:04 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
State's rights
Here is the problem with that. Their "right" will infringe on voters rights in Michigan and in other states.
Posted on 7/13/23 at 9:06 am to SlowFlowPro
I've read a few articles and law review articles on the topic.
Its definitely a lot more grey than people want it to be.
I think THIS Court would find a way to strike it down if it actually came up.
Take one Conservative away and I'm not sure Roberts would have the backbone for it
Its definitely a lot more grey than people want it to be.
I think THIS Court would find a way to strike it down if it actually came up.
Take one Conservative away and I'm not sure Roberts would have the backbone for it
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News