Maine And Nevada Reject Popular Vote Pact

The Daily Signal

Last month, both Maine and Nevada did what was in the best interests of their states: They rejected bills that would have enrolled their states in the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an unwise effort to override the Electoral College.

In Maine, it was killed by legislators in the state House after it passed Maine’s Senate. In Nevada, Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak vetoed the bill that had been passed by members of his own party in the Legislature. More

8 Comments on Maine And Nevada Reject Popular Vote Pact

  1. We’re still screwed if dems are allowed to “vote harvest” the 40 million dems who didn’t vote in the last election. Will repubs learn the lesson and do their own “vote harvesting.” I doubt it. Lots of races will be lost to fraud and this electoral college scam. “Paging DOJ. Paging DOJ.”

    10
  2. Maine and Nevada know that their people may as well stay home if the “popular vote” movement win enough states.

    10
  3. Demographic time bomb might sound like a cliche but it’s true. Right now in Texas, every year there are about 220,000 latinos added for every 55,000 whites. 4-1. Are all of them going to vote REgressive? Of course not but still an overwhelmingly proportion will.

    But you say that 2nd and 3rd generation latinos will “get it” Hmmm, my neighbor was telling us how happy he was making $30/hr at the new sand fracking facility in Lamesa, 3x what he had been making. The Permian is booming and almost 100% because of President Trump’s deregulation.

    So who shows up on his yard signs for the last election? BETO. Sorry but when you’re dealing with IQs 1+ standard deviation below, the lights are on but no one is home.

    It’s the same thing happening in every state, some slower then others, but every state is trending blue. Name me one state that is trending red.

    Not only do latinos have more children then whites but throw in over 1.5 immigrants/year, both legal and illegal and still most from big government countries, and face it, we’re fooked.

    You see this in the constant and unrelenting demonization of whites. A lot even coming from other whites! Note how even the Moon Landing had to made into a slam on whites.

    Well you can take this to the bank, when Jamal and Rashonda are out from behind the desks at the DMV & are wondering which wire goes onto that contact(see $9/hr engineers coding for the latest Boeing disaster) you better be ready for it because Wakanda it ain’t gonna be.

    They say 1984 wasn’t meant to be a blueprint, I say Idiocracy wasn’t either.

    8
  4. My point Phil, is that soon enough, an unConstitutional compact like this won’t be necessary.

    3
  5. This is at least Step Two toward the dissolution of statehood in the US. Step One was the 17th Amendment: take away the representation of the states and replace it with more representation of the people.

    3
  6. States have the responsibility and constitutional power to make all of their voters relevant in every presidential election and beyond. Now 38 states and their voters are politically irrelevant in presidential elections.

    Unable to agree on any particular method, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method for selecting presidential electors exclusively to the states by adopting the language contained in section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution—

    “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . .”
    The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as “plenary” and “exclusive.”

    Federalism concerns the allocation of power between state governments and the national government. The National Popular Vote bill concerns how votes are tallied, not how much power state governments possess relative to the national government. The powers of state governments are neither increased nor decreased based on whether presidential electors are selected along the state boundary lines, or national lines (as with the National Popular Vote).

  7. With National Popular Vote, every voter, in every state, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election.
    Every vote would matter equally in the state counts and national count.

    The vote of every voter in the country (Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or Green) would help his or her preferred candidate win the Presidency. Every vote in the country would become as important as a vote in a battleground state such as New Hampshire or Florida. The National Popular Vote bill would give voice to every voter in the country, as opposed to treating voters for candidates who did not win a plurality in the state as if they did not exist.

    The National Popular Vote bill would give a voice to the minority party voters for president in each state. Now they don’t matter to their candidate.

    In 2012, 56,256,178 (44%) of the 128,954,498 voters had their vote diverted by the winner-take-all rule to a candidate they opposed (namely, their state’s first-place candidate).

    And now votes, beyond the one needed to get the most votes in the state, for winning in a state, are wasted and don’t matter to presidential candidates.
    Utah (5 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 385,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004.
    Oklahoma (7 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 455,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004 — larger than the margin generated by the 9th and 10th largest states, namely New Jersey and North Carolina (each with 15 electoral votes).
    8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.




Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!