SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Journal by DeathMonkey
Good news everybody!
Hillary Clinton will be an Electoral College Elector for NY
Aren't you glad to know that your votes don't actually count and that Hillary Clinton is one of mere 538 people in the United States whose vote actually does count?
Hillary Clinton, Electoral College Elector
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 79 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Now KEN and BARBIE are PERMANENTLY ADDICTED to MIND-ALTERING DRUGS ...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @03:53AM (18 children)
Already on it buddy!
Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote [nationalpopularvote.com]
The winner of the Presidential election should be the person with the most votes.
And I just did the most powerful thing I can do as an American to support that proposition: I just voted for it on the Colorado ballot. [ballotpedia.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday October 29 2020, @03:58AM (6 children)
And I just voted against it! I did the most powerful thing I can do as an American to prevent this from happening!
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @03:49PM (5 children)
You just voted to take your own vote away and give it to Hillary Rodham Clinton.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:03PM (1 child)
And you just voted for a non sequitur.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:09PM
Nope, I voted to take away Hillary Rodham Clinton's vote.
And New York agrees with me! They also voted to take away Hillary Rodham Clinton's vote.
Why do you want Hitlery to vote so badly?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:18PM (2 children)
My state has a democratically elected government - the federation does not need to be directly elected. I'm all for increasing the number of electors (through repealing the Permanent Apportionment Act), but that would require changes that are unpopular with the elites who would lose power.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @07:29PM (1 child)
Sorry, the anti-federalist wind farmers were defeated not once in 1789, not twice in 1865, but a third time starting in 1933 when it took a librul commie to save capitalism from itself by proving that when the jerb creators go galt, we can still employ the working class to continue the work of building civilization. That pseudo-anon shitposter Publius would be proud.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @07:51PM
Ah, I see. Only supporters of monolithic government are allowed to be socialists. Ill go burn all those lefty books I'm no longer authorized to read, quit reading wsws, and move to Somalia.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @03:58AM (3 children)
And that is the right way to do things.
Not get all frothy at the mouth because someone does not declare a legal, corporate owned bank account, on a declaration asking about personal assets.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @03:53PM (2 children)
We can also be angry that the President of the United States of America kept a bank account he owned in China secret from the American public.
This is why every other President in the history of the Union has divested himself from his businesses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @07:38PM
So super secret, it was listed on the corporate tax return.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2020, @12:47AM
Incorrect again.
Trump does not own the bank account.
The corporation owns the bank account.
The corporation is not Trump, and Trump is not the corporation (in the eyes of the law). They are completely separate entities.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:18AM (2 children)
Direct democracy in action.
Defund the police? Ballot initiatives eventually forcing an article V convention.
Single payer health care? Ballot initiatives. Article V convention. (Keep trying!)
End the war on some drugs? Convention.
And the forever war? Convention.
Approval voting? Convention.
Recall Ms. Women Are Property and Mr. Frat Boy Rapist? Convention.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:16PM (1 child)
No thanks.
I like Representative Democracy I just think it needs to be, y'know... representative.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:59PM
Ah, direct democracy is too representative, unless we're talking about abolishing the electoral college. A very moderate stance. Again I'm reminded of one of the original SJWs:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:29AM (3 children)
United States Constitution, Article I, Section 10, Clause 3:
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.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:41AM
Ballot initiatives and article V convention! No compact is involved other than the mutual interests of states that have passed similar ballot initiatives, such as cannabis legalization. However, usually when an article V convention is imminent, Congress will amend the Constitution first to save face. Consider the history of alcohol prohibition from a several states viewpoint. Either way ballot initiatives are the way to go, and some forward-looking state legislatures will even pass similar laws on their own.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:53AM (1 child)
Additionally, for this specific issue, allow me to also quote scripture. Article II, Section 1, Clause 2:
Each state has the authority to determine how its electors are appointed, and no compact is involved if this manner depends on the national popular vote. Theoretically Jo20 could get 1 elector from a state appointing electors in such a manner.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:36PM
"Compact" is one of those words that has different meaning in different contexts.
Compact used as a legal term really just means a contract. [thefreedictionary.com]
NPV is using the general sense.
Passing a law that says "From now on our electors go to the winner of the national popular vote" does not meet the strict sense. There's no exchange, there's no enforcement, there's no contract.