The Supreme Court Just Pointed Out the Absurdity of the Electoral College. It's Up to Us to End It

–David Litt

July 7, 2020, 8:00 AM PDT–

Here’s one nice thing we can now say about the Electoral College: it’s slightly less harmful to our democracy than it was just days ago. In a 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that states have the right to “bind” their electors, requiring them to support whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote in their state. Justice Elena Kagan’s opinion was a blow to so-called “faithless electors,” but a win for self-government. “Here,” she wrote, “the People rule.”

Yet while we can all breathe a sigh of relief that rogue electors won’t choose (or be coerced) into derailing the 2020 presidential contest, the Court’s unanimous ruling is a helpful reminder that our two-step electoral process provides America with no tangible benefits and near-limitless possibilities for disaster. To put it more bluntly, the Electoral College is a terrible idea. And thanks to the Justices’ decision, getting rid of it has never been easier.

The Electoral College we have today isn’t the one in the original Constitution. Instead, it’s a product of the 12th Amendment – put in place after the 1800 contest between Jefferson and Burr so chaotic it got its own number in Hamilton. For those in need of a refresher, here’s how our current two-part presidential contest works: Every fourth November, Americans participate in separate statewide elections, plus one in D.C. With two exceptions (Maine and Nebraska, which award electors by congressional district), the winner of a state’s popular vote receives all its electoral votes—equal to that state’s number of senators plus its number of representatives. Whichever candidate wins a majority of the electors wins the White House.

Why do we conduct our presidential elections in such a complicated way? Today, the conventional wisdom is that the Electoral College benefits small-population states, rural voters, and the Republican Party. None of this is true.

https://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-just-pointed-absurdity-150048477.html

>>9895867

Deep state leftists desperate to regain power. Leftists always trying to remove the safe guards our founding fathers gave us.

>>9895890

It was posted here to make anons aware of the stupidity the left is trying to promulgate.

>>9895923

I believe my first post was the lefts interpretation of this ruling.

Supreme Court Makes Historic Electoral College Ruling For 2020 Election

In 2016, we saw a disturbing trend among those tasked with casting electoral votes. Several electors from various states were “faithless,” refusing to vote for the candidate who won the state’s election. It appears this trend would have been used to prevent Trump from winning re-election. But the Supreme Court—by unanimous vote—just shut this scheme down.

This is what normally happens during a presidential election: whichever candidate wins a state’s popular vote, he or she wins all their electoral votes. Barring a few exceptions, that means every state’s electors have to cast their vote for the person who won.

Some states are trying to get rid of the Electoral College altogether, a feat that is far from being accomplished. In the meantime, it appears there are some electors who think they can “go rogue,” refusing to cast their vote for the person who won the state. This happened during the 2016 Election. These faithless electors were not successful, because state laws required them to vote the right away.

So, these people took their case to the Supreme Court, hoping obviously that this would affect 2020. But the Supreme Court, every last justice, gave them the bad news.

States can pass laws that punish so-called “faithless electors” who refuse to cast an official ballot for the winner of that state’s popular vote, the Supreme Court said Monday, in a unanimous 9-0 decision authored by Justice Elena Kagan…

“10 of the 538 presidential electors went rogue, attempting to vote for someone other than their pledged candidate. In all, 32 states and the District of Columbia have laws that are meant to discourage faithless electors. But until 2016, no state had ever actually punished or removed an elector because of his or her vote.”

“The Constitution’s text and the Nation’s history both support allowing a State to enforce an elector’s pledge to support his party’s nominee — and the state voters’ choice — for President.” [Source: Daily Wire]

This is pretty significant, thanks to the unanimous vote. Every justice on the court, both conservative and liberal, refused to let faithless electors get away with their scheme. This is important, because this entire movement was built around preventing Trump from winning the 2016 Election. Had this group of electors gotten away with it, you better believe there would have been many more in 2020.

In fact, Democrats might have been planning on an uprising across key states, depriving Trump from securing the needed votes to win re-election. It’s possible that Democrats would have targeted enough electors to make sure Biden won—even if he lost the state.

https://www.nationalinsiders.com/supreme-court-makes-historic-electoral-college-ruling-for-2020-election/

>>9895951

Could you change the title of the Supreme court one to something else because it looks misleading? Change to something like, "Leftists trying to remove electoral college," perhaps?

>>9895970

Oh, good, glad to see you don't like that info getting out. Not going to let you clowns remove what few safeguards we have left.

>>9896008

Uh, I don't believe this stupid article fren, I just posted it to let people know that they are trying to push this bullshit. Forewarned is forearmed.

>>9895997

Well, something, because some numbnuts seem to think I am for removing the EC which I very definitely am not.

>>9896079

Yeah I guess so thanks. Might want to tie it in to what I think they are really talking about which was the news the other day.

>>9895950

>>9895867

Anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who tried to remove or go around our constitution and bill of rights or remove the safeguards we were given, has only one logical reason to do so, and that is to remove your freedom and replace it with slavery.

>>9896132

Leftists and those who are trying to enslave you, view the constitution and bill of rights, not as valuable tools to safeguard our freedom, but rather as obstacles to overcome.