- 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: Virginia Governor Abigail signs bill into law giving all electoral college votes to winner
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:It absolutely does by definition.
That doesn't mean you're disenfranchised.
1
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That has nothing to do with the votes counting in both systems, mind you.
There is no other system you cocksucking loser. We don’t elect via the popular vote
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:35 pm to L.A.
Communism here we come!
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:37 pm to grizzlylongcut
quote:
the one truly national vote we have is the presidency
This is not true...today at least.
The President is determined by elections at the state level, who then choose representatives to attend the Electoral College. There is no uniform national election or national rules. There isn't even uniformity in how states decide those EC representatives.
quote:
Which isn’t determined by the popular vote. It’s determined by the electoral college.
And?
There is nothing that prevents a state from using the popular vote to determine its EC representatives.
quote:
Therefore giving your state’s electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote nationally flies in the face of the very system we have set up here.
Only the one that is most popular today. That means nothing regarding Constitutionality or disenfranchisement. Make no mistake, states could actually disenfranchise their voters, but this particular system doesn't do that.
quote:
If your state votes for the candidate who didn’t win the popular vote then guess what? Your vote is disenfranchised under this system.
Only if it's not counted in the national tally.
Again, this is the flaw in your argument. You're not seeing the big picture and only are looking at it within the current paradigm, pretending that's the only determining system. As I said
quote:
You're only assigning the state-based value to the vote and pretending it has no value in the national vote, when it clearly does.
In this scenario, your vote would count in the national tally. As the EC reps in your state would be determined by the national vote in which you participated, you are not disenfranchised.
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:38 pm to Barstools
quote:
It absolutely does by definition.
How?
Is your vote counted in the determining system? Yes
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:38 pm to SallysHuman
I don’t want to steal votes either.
But I’m not going to get in the way when these evil bastards are committing political suicide.
But I’m not going to get in the way when these evil bastards are committing political suicide.
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:
Except, under this plan, it doesn't.
How?
Every national vote would be literally equal.
quote:
In fact, it doesn't count at all.
How would your vote not be tallied in the national vote count?
Do you not grasp that when you are voting in a presidential election, you are not voting in a national.elecrion. You are voting in a state election for state electors who are pledged to vote for a particular presidential and vice presidential candidate. This "compact" absolutely invalidates someone's vote (those that voted rhe opposite of the "national" vote) and further usurps the role of the electors.
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:39 pm to grizzlylongcut
quote:
There is no other system you cocksucking loser.
We are discussing a proposed alternative system, if you didn't know.
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:41 pm to udtiger
quote:
Do you not grasp that when you are voting in a presidential election, you are not voting in a national.elecrion.
You're conflating the current system in LA with the proposed alternative system
In the alternative system, you would be voting in a national election.
Your vote would be counted within that national tally, so it could not be disenfranchised.
quote:
This "compact" absolutely invalidates someone's vote (those that voted rhe opposite of the "national" vote)
Now you're arguing the absurdity that any losing side in an election has been disenfranchised
Stop
quote:
and further usurps the role of the electors.
The electors' role is to vote as the state commands, how the state determines those commands. They have no role otherwise.
This post was edited on 4/14/26 at 9:42 pm
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Now you're arguing the absurdity that any losing side in an election has been disenfranchised
Holy shite you're stupid
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:42 pm to udtiger
quote:
Holy shite you're stupid
No. You're making a bad argument and don't like the absurdity of it being pointed out.
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:44 pm to L.A.
Virginia is heading toward being like Colorado due to liberals...getting dumber by the minute.
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:47 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:
Holy shite you're stupid
No. You're making a bad argument and don't like the absurdity of it being pointed out
I'll type slow so you will understand it...
We don't vote for president in a national election.
We vote for presidential.electors in a state election.
One side loses at the state level and the electors for the winning side will cast their ballot.
Each side's votes "count" towards the outcome equally - the determination of that states electors.
However, under this scheme, the winners may not get their electors, because voters in other states decided to the contrary.
Thus, negating the votes in that state.
Ergo, they do NOT count the same.
If you dont understand it, start over and read it slower.
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:48 pm to SlowFlowPro
I bet if National Voter ID and other election security measures passed, they'd back off this compact with the quickness.
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:51 pm to udtiger
quote:
We don't vote for president in a national election.
Nothing prevents a state from using that to assign their electoral votes. You do realize this, right?
They could do it on a coin flip.
quote:
We vote for presidential.electors in a state election.
Only under the current system. We are discussing an alternative system.
quote:
One side loses at the state level and the electors for the winning side will cast their ballot.
Again, you're describing the current system and ignoring the alternative system we're discussing.
Again, there is no requirement that any vote is held. You do realize that, right?
quote:
However, under this scheme, the winners may not get their electors, because voters in other states decided to the contrary.
Voters *nationally decide how the EC reps are allocated.
The individual voters within that state would have their votes counted equally with all other votes cast nationally, which is the determining system in that alternative system.
quote:
Thus, negating the votes in that state.
Again, you're conflating the current system with the alternative system.
Try discussing what we're discussing.
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:54 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
I bet if National Voter ID and other election security measures passed, they'd back off this compact with the quickness.
DEMS have a pretty sizeable lead in the national popular vote. They may lose some of that, but unless they're in another 2024 situation, they're pretty safe.
And 2024 likely doesn't go how it did if we had a national vote. Remember, Kamala didn't get Biden's 81M b/c of DEM voters in DEM states primarily. Those states still went to Kamala, but not by the margin they would have had a national vote mattered.
Protesting with wasted votes is much easier than protesting with meaningful votes.
This post was edited on 4/14/26 at 9:55 pm
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:57 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
And? There is nothing that prevents a state from using the popular vote to determine its EC representatives.
Except for the will of the people in your own motherfricking state you dumbass. If this is allowed to stand, then there will be no point in voting in Virginia anymore. Except for around 250 fricking years of precedent.
quote:
Make no mistake, states could actually disenfranchise their voters, but this particular system doesn't do that.
You keep saying this, it doesn’t make it true. It absolutely is the state doing that. Because if a candidate wins the election in your state then guess what? The people elected him! If your state decides that their electoral college votes be thrown behind whoever wins the national popular vote (which doesn’t matter at-fricking-all, mind you) then your state just failed to do the will of the people! It disenfranchised its people! What is impossible for your pedantic, douchebag brain to get about it?
Is this the system the founders had in mind when they created the electoral college?
quote:
Only if it's not counted in the national tally.
It’s not counted in the national tally you dumb frick! It literally doesn’t matter who wins the popular vote! That isn’t how this system is designed holy shite.
You have to be the biggest cocksucking faggót on this entire site man. You fricking know your argument is bullshite and you fricking know what you’re spouting is wrong. Why you’re allowed to continue to post on this site is beyond me; and I generally am 100% against banning people. But you’re the exception. You need to be banned from here. You’re one of the most derided people here, wayyyyy moreso than anyone else I see. It isn’t that you’re constantly in the wrong. It’s the manner in which you do it so confidently, so arrogantly, and so smugly.
You desperately needed to have your arse whipped many times when you were growing up.
This post was edited on 4/14/26 at 10:01 pm
Posted on 4/14/26 at 9:57 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Biden's 81M
Posted on 4/14/26 at 10:03 pm to grizzlylongcut
quote:
Except for the will of the people in your own motherfricking state you dumbass.
Their role is electing the state legislature that determines how the state allocates its EV reps
quote:
Because if a candidate wins the election in your state then guess what? The people elected him! I
Only in the current system.
We are discussing a proposed alternative system.
quote:
What is impossible for your pedantic, douchebag brain to get about it?
You still haven't addressed how the votes of those voters are counted in that national election.
quote:
It literally doesn’t matter who wins the popular vote!
We're discussing a state enacting a system where the national popular vote does matter, though.
You just keep trying to avoid having the actual discussion and trying to conflate it with a discussion about our current system, for some reason. I'm guessing to use exclamation points.
quote:
You have to be the biggest cocksucking faggót on this entire site man. You fricking know your argument is bullshite and you fricking know what you’re spouting is wrong.
I'm not wrong. You haven't even addressed my actual point. You just keep avoiding that conversation to discuss the status quo.
quote:
It isn’t that you’re constantly in the wrong. It’s the manner in which you do it so confidently, so arrogantly, and so smugly.
This would have been a PERFECT opportunity to use one of those exclamation points you like so much.
*ETA: Let's just start from the beginning. You do realize a state legislature could vote to assign the EC based off the governor's unilateral desires or a coin flip, right? Or, hell...if the state lotto numbers end in an even or odd number. No elections, just one of those methods. You do understand those would be legal, right?
This post was edited on 4/14/26 at 10:07 pm
Posted on 4/14/26 at 10:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
DEMS have a pretty sizeable lead in the national popular vote.
Sure, Jan... their "lead" is in states with very loose "rules" and no ID.
quote:
And 2024 likely doesn't go how it did if we had a national vote. Remember, Kamala didn't get Biden's 81M b/c of DEM voters in DEM states primarily. Those states still went to Kamala, but not by the margin they would have had a national vote mattered.
Because there wasn't the cover of covid.
Page 6 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News