Theres been a lot of talk lately about a group of states adopting a law that would circumvent the Constitution and essentially abolishing the electoral college. Liberals hate the Electoral College system; some because they understand the power that it gives to states, some because they don't have the intellectual capacity to understand how it works, and some because Al Gore told them to hate it.
I don't see this law happening. The more exposure it gets, the more opposition it will get and even if it's adopted by states with 270 electoral votes, and don't think it will withstand the courts.
The electoral college was a factor in many states adopting our Constitution, and for a group of states to work in collusion to circumvent it shouldn't pass judicial scrutiny. Then again, Roe v Wade should have been laughed out of the courts, too.
First, let's expose the intellectual dishonesty of the whole thing. The law implies that it will prevent a Presidential Candidate that a majority of Americans voted against from being elected. In fact this knucklehead Democrat lawmaker named James B. Eldridge from MA said this yesterday :
"What we are submitting is the idea that the president should be selected by the majority of people in the United States of America."
What you are submitting is that a PLURALITY of the American People should Select the President, even if a VAST MAJORITY of people in your state vote for someone else and could affect the outcome under the Electoral system.
There is a practical matter, however, that I have not heard addressed as of yet....
Under the Constitution, the states determine election laws and standards. In virtually every state, there is a margin that triggers a RECOUNT (usually less than 1%). Thankfully, unless the states electoral votes will determine the winner of the election, we are spared the divisive partisanship and ballot counting shenanigans that are inevitable.(ie Florida 2000)
Now here's the Million dollar question:
What the heck happens if this law is in effect an the popular vote is really close? Three times in the past 50 years the margin between the top two candidates has been less than 1%.
Which states votes will be recounted?
The ones who've enacted the 'popular vote' law or the ones who haven't..?
Or are recount triggers still determined by the individual states?
And if they are, how do they states recognize if a recount is to be triggered unless they know the results of the other states recounts?
But wouldn't one state recounting purely based on the results of another state violate 'equal protection' as per the Supreme Court?
So I guess every precinct in every state should conduct a simultaneous hand recount.....That won't be ripe for corruption...Will it?
CHAOS.... Division ... And I Guarantee You, every Narrative will include Racism...
Or could it be that's just what the Liberals behind this law are hoping for?