Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Maine Senate passes bill to give EC votes to National pop vote winner

That was a few years ago. Some big uns in that river at night.

My mom lives in orono.
My wife is a penobscot Indian from the island in Old Town.
Grew up with Indians.
Married into the tribe basically.
One of my uncles was in the coast guard and was the resident lighthouse attendant on Wood island .
Had a decent sized house attached to the light house.
They had a boathouse in Biddeford pool.
Back in 1974 or 75 ish.
Family spent 3 or 4 days on the island for Thanksgiving.
Place covered up in rats.
Had elevated wooden road way from island boat house to the lighthouse.
Had a 2 wheel ATV Rick shaw thing with a trailer to go from one end of island to the other.
He had 2 full size boxer dogs .
I spent most of my daylight time shooting rats with his crossman pellet rifle and the 2 boxers getting em and fugging em up

Pretty good time for an 11yr old.
Rats
Pellet rifle
And 2 cool dogs.

30 seconds on Google shows that Maine already splits their EC votes to represent the vote of the state, as does Nebraska.



As stated several times, state law determines how the state votes at the electoral college.

I don't know whats Happening to my state...southern maine has gone full libtard and they control the whole state.friggen m@$$holes!!

That interstate compact was what I was referring to about it maybe not legal. But play it out:

- Enough states sign on, so it kicks in.
- SC says "illegal interstate agreement" voids it
- Each state then still has the right to allocated electoral vote as they see fit, so they do

They can void the interstate agreement, but the state can allocate how they see fit.

SCHADENFREUDE - when TRUMP or some other REP picks up a Million or so in CAL, a Million or so in NY, and another couple Mill or so scattered across the Lieberal bastions of the country securing the Popular Vote and all those LIB states that thought they were winning are then required, by their own Law, to cast their EC votes for the REP......................

The EC should be dumped, and the sooner the better. Despite the outcome of the 2000 and 2016 elections it is hurting conservatives by encouraging them to not vote if they live in blue states. Bush would have beaten Gore and Trump would have beaten Clinton without the EC and without the drama. The campaign strategy changes, and I think in favor of Conservatives. I'd argue that without the EC neither Bill Clinton nor Obama would have won a 2nd term.

What most don't understand is that I'd bet money NO ONE here on the campfire has ever voted for a president. Under the current system we vote in our states and in most states the winning party is allowed to pick representatives who go to Washington a few weeks later. And it is perfectly legal for those states to do as they wish with their electors. Those 538 people are the only ones who actually cast a vote for the president. And there is no federal law stating that they must vote for the party they are pledged to. In fact it is quite common for them to cross lines. There were 6 or 7 people who pledged their vote to Trump in 2016 who actually voted for Clinton after arriving in Washington. But it wasn't enough to change the outcome.

In 2000 it would have only taken 2 people to have crossed the line and voted for Gore instead of Bush and neither party would have had 270 EC votes. In that case the Senate gets to select the president. It would have only taken 4 crossover votes to have given the win to Gore. And it is all perfectly legal.

The electoral college is the only thing standing between us and tyranny. What you folks aren't seeing is what else the progressives are doing: Passing laws to keep Trump off the ballot, while simultaneously entering into the NPV. If Trump doesn't appear on California or Illinois' ballot, then he can't win a popular cote count, even though he might lose California by 4.5 million votes. There is no precedent for a state holding a presidential election and then casting their electoral votes in opposition with their electorate. The EC requires that candidates garner support from a broad cross-section of states, rather than focusing just on population centers. States issues which are important to rural areas, like water rights, energy production and farming would be lost to crazy people promising to end cow farting forever, regardless of the impacts to rural America. The NPV also disenfranchises every state that is not a signer to the compact. We are going to put it on the ballot in Colorado and get it overturned. Don't believe for a second the claims that conservatives would benefit from a National Popular vote.

Interesting, the way the story reads it seems that the citizens of Maine won't even have to vote if the state's electoral college votes are going to side with the national popular vote. Did I read that right?

Just like Kommiefornians. They schitt their nest making unliveable and then move to yours and proceed to do the same.

You read it right, this is how these states are "removing" the electoral college and moving to a National public vote only.

If it goes nationally public is will mean DRASTIC CHANGES in somethings:
- Politicians will have to change their strategy. Right now they focus really on a few key states and pretty much ignore easy wins and loss states. They will hvae to focus on big population states, espcially ones they typically lose, because every vote now counts.

- Get hte vote out becomes important. How many R's in CA don't even vote, or NY. How many D's don't vote in WY, MT, TX? My guess is many people in these states don't vote because it doesn't matter, another R vote in CA today has no meaning, if this passes, it matters.