Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

onenote

(46,147 posts)
51. Your response was to cut and paste a page I've read in the past and was responding to in my post.
Thu Aug 22, 2019, 04:21 PM
Aug 2019

Again, the problem of faithless electors doesn't go away with the NIC unless and until something more than states representing a bare majority of the EC adopt it (in which case it goes away as a practical matter although not as a theoretical matter -- which is pretty much the situation today anyway).

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Damn uponit7771 Aug 2019 #1
Tax returns are next Kilgore Aug 2019 #2
We have no choice but to end the EC, either directly or indirectly hlthe2b Aug 2019 #3
How does that help? Kilgore Aug 2019 #6
???? Do you know what the National Interstate Compact is? hlthe2b Aug 2019 #8
Yes Kilgore Aug 2019 #11
Kindly try reponding to my actual post argument rather than kneejerk, reflexive nay-saying. hlthe2b Aug 2019 #12
I did Kilgore Aug 2019 #14
The NIC would not "replace" the EC. It would change how states choose their electors onenote Aug 2019 #41
I never said it did replace EC. Kindly stop rephrasing or attributing words I never said. hlthe2b Aug 2019 #43
Actually, you said it would 'end' the EC 'indirectly.' onenote Aug 2019 #47
It does-- INDIRECTLY-- end it if successful. INDIRECTLY--look it up. hlthe2b Aug 2019 #49
Your answers assertions addressed in detail: hlthe2b Aug 2019 #44
You're misunderstanding what the compact does, or how it would work Ms. Toad Aug 2019 #57
I fully understand. You are misinterpreting my posts intentionally it would appear. hlthe2b Aug 2019 #58
Then please explain Ms. Toad Aug 2019 #60
This doesn't fix the problem of faithless electors Sgent Aug 2019 #19
Laurence Tribe believes it will. hlthe2b Aug 2019 #20
Tribe doesn't offer an explanation as to how the National Popular Vote compact would do away with onenote Aug 2019 #42
Your answers assertions addressed in detail: hlthe2b Aug 2019 #45
See my response - post #47 onenote Aug 2019 #48
See my response that you didn't bother to read. hlthe2b Aug 2019 #50
Your response was to cut and paste a page I've read in the past and was responding to in my post. onenote Aug 2019 #51
Your answers/ assertions addressed in detail: hlthe2b Aug 2019 #46
I brought this up yesterday but sarisataka Aug 2019 #28
You miss the point that they require (currently) states supplying more than 70 more EC votes. hlthe2b Aug 2019 #29
It still leaves no incentive for red states, sarisataka Aug 2019 #33
Had someone endlessly brought up the what-ifs of a Donald Trump to the founding fathers hlthe2b Aug 2019 #35
Different philosophies sarisataka Aug 2019 #38
Yet you offer no alternative... hlthe2b Aug 2019 #39
Yup. The litigation would be epic (nt) Recursion Aug 2019 #37
And NOW we're told that the 2020 presidential winner... maddiemom Aug 2019 #31
SC appeal next and there is time before 2020... hlthe2b Aug 2019 #4
Honestly do you think the outcome will change Kilgore Aug 2019 #7
Kneejerk response, but we won't know until they take it up. hlthe2b Aug 2019 #9
True Kilgore Aug 2019 #16
This is the type of issue more likely to come down 9-0 than 5-4. n/t PoliticAverse Aug 2019 #52
Your probably correct Kilgore Aug 2019 #61
Have you looked at the composition of the panel that made the ruling? FBaggins Aug 2019 #40
So now they can be bought and paid for by a bribe and no one can contest thier vote. infullview Aug 2019 #5
It's so much easier to pay off a few electors than to try Farmer-Rick Aug 2019 #25
"I know you're pledged to vote for Candidate X, and can give me Buns_of_Fire Aug 2019 #10
Well Played!!!!! Kilgore Aug 2019 #13
And money is speech according to Citizens United Captain Zero Aug 2019 #15
then why do we even vote? samnsara Aug 2019 #17
40 percent don't Farmer-Rick Aug 2019 #26
Show. Kid Berwyn Aug 2019 #32
I have pointed out for years sarisataka Aug 2019 #34
Hmmm. But not over even at this level. The 10th Circuit returned it Hortensis Aug 2019 #18
The Lessig name was familiar so I looked him up... WePurrsevere Aug 2019 #23
Exactly. Me too. Hortensis Aug 2019 #24
This message was self-deleted by its author groundloop Aug 2019 #21
Perhaps not as big a deal as it seems Fiendish Thingy Aug 2019 #22
At Some Point, If We Are to Remain a Democracy, the Electoral College Must Go dlk Aug 2019 #27
My own view is that I don't think it's so much PRETZEL Aug 2019 #36
Meh.... Sgent Aug 2019 #62
Electors in Red states may just come around. Trump does not deserve a 2nd term. ProudMNDemocrat Aug 2019 #30
No, it didn't "change how we pick our president". Electors could always vote for whomever they PoliticAverse Aug 2019 #53
Time to get rid of the EC. roamer65 Aug 2019 #54
The "Democratic" elector in the case voted for KASICH against Hillary?!1 This decision is NOT GOOD!1 UTUSN Aug 2019 #55
Three others voted for Colin Powell Shrek Aug 2019 #56
Changed? Isn't this how it's always been? Joe941 Aug 2019 #59
Stealing 2020 in its early stages? IdealsAndReal42 Aug 2019 #63
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A court ruling just chang...»Reply #51