does not surprise me - the dems have long been the anti Constitution party and the Party of wanting eternal political power. I think it will not pass but at some point in the future when the dems once again gain control of 2 of the 3 branches of guvment in the US, they will push it again and yes probably change the rules to gain its passage https://www.theblaze.com/news/democ...ST - TheBlaze Daily AM&tpcc=email-premiumtest
Has about a much of a chance at passing as any attempt to erase the second amendment. iow, ain't gonna happen.
It would be terrible , IMO, if it did pass. The EC is the on'y thing that gives all Americans a voice in our leadership. Without the EC, most elections would be decided by about 10 densely populated municipalities.
Good Lord, is this what passes for discourse these days? "Anti Constitution party and the Party of wanting eternal political power" ? Eagerly anticipating OP's profound opposition to Trump trying to change the 14th Amendment. Wait, Trump has already spoken about that. Surely OP chimed in his opposition, because he's not.... "anti Constitution" ?
The EC no longer makes sense now that the states has ceded their power in directing EC votes to a popular vote. However, as the electorate gets dimmer by the year, maybe a group of “learned” individuals is what is needed.
This is performative nonsense. The Democrats know that eliminating the EC requires a Constitutional amendment. I know you know this as well. It isn’t “anti-Constitution” anymore than wanting to give women and non-white people the right to vote was “anti-Constitution.” Or end slavery. Or institute term limits. Or prohibit and later allow the consumption of alcohol. Or honestly the entire Bill of Rights….
Trump proposed jailing people for burning the flag. And maga wants to talk about constitutional protections. Save me the keystrokes
*American voters, rather than reliance on a system that’s turned elections into a contest for 3-5 states. FIFY.
Not the first time a bill was introduced to eliminate the anachronism that is the Electoral College. In 1969, Democrats and Republicans united to get rid of the electoral college. Here's what happened It turned out to be a bipartisan effort. In 1969, Republican President Richard Nixon supported a push in Congress to abolish the electoral college. So too did his rival in the presidential race a year earlier, Democrat Hubert Humphrey. The reason both united in support: Former Alabama Gov. George Wallace.Wallace — who had famously said, “Segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever” — stoked racial animosity as the candidate of the American Independent Party. He won five Southern states and netted 46 electoral votes.
Appears the OP “disagrees” with the fact that amendments to the Constitution exist or have a path of passage.
The bill that was introduced conforms with the procedure set out in the Constitution to properly amend it. That's hardly "anti Constitution."
Pardon, but you do understand that it’s “Anti-American” or potentially illegal unless it comes from the American Republican Party, right?
The EC gives disproportional strength to voters who live in swing states. And silences minority party voters in all others. In 2024, for example, Harris had 0% chance to win OK, and Trump had 0% chance to win MA. Even though about 500k people voted for Harris in OK, and over 1.2 million voted Trump in MA, their votes never had a chance of making a difference. To prove the point, neither Harris nor Trump visited OK or MA during the 2024 general election. Arizona, a swing state, had 13 combined visits. All votes should be equal in my opinion. Under the current EC law, they clearly are not. And it makes me wonder, how many Ds in OK or Rs in MA didn't vote at all because of this?
