1. This country is being destroyed.

2. A survey of 800 Rhode Island voters conducted on June 1, 2008 showed 74% overall support for a national popular vote for President.

   Support was 78% among independents, 86% among liberal Democrats, 85% among moderate Democrats, 60% among conservative Democrats, 71% among liberal Republicans, 63% among moderate Republicans, and 35% among conservative Republicans.

   By age, support was 77% among 18-29 year olds, 80% among 30-45 year olds, 70% among 46-65 year olds, and 76% for those older than 65.

   By gender, support was 84% among women and 63% among men.

   By race, support was 76% among whites (representing 90% of respondents), 60% among African-Americans (representing 4% of respondents), 54% among Hispanics (representing 2% of respondents), and 69% among Others (representing 5% of respondents).

   see http://www.NationalPopularVote.com

3. What is stop a State from having children under 18 and lots of foreigners be voters for the purpose of electing a Prez/VP with the NPV scheme ???

   Proper remedy –

   Uniform definition of Elector in ALL of the U.S.A.

   NONPARTISAN nominations and elections of all elected executive officers and all judges using Approval Voting.

   Much too difficult for the armies of New Age MORONS and their quick fix screwed up statutory schemes to understand.

4. The closer the National Popular Vote Plan gets to being in force, the more likely it becomes that we will get a constitutional amendment setting forth a rational system of electing the president, which would almost certainly authorize Congress to pass a uniform definition of a voter, and also would authorize Congress to set a ballot access law for presidential general elections.

   A Constitutional amendment could also clear up the messy provision in the same section of the Constitution on “natural born”. Perhaps the amendment would just repeal the restriction. Why shouldn’t the U.S. voters be free to choose an Arnold Schwarzengger or a Jennifer Granholm for president? If those two can be Governors, why can’t they run for president? That’s why Schwarzenegger is so foolish to have twice vetoed the National Popular Vote Plan.

5. You nailed it, Richard. Thanks.

6. #4 –

   Most agree that there is much work to be done to rationalize our electoral process. A constitutional amendment which would jettison the antiquated EC in favor of a system more in step with the 19th century, let alone the 21st century, would be a positive step. Every four years for who knows how long someone talks about an amendment, but it never happens because:

   1) The amendment process is (appropriately) cumbersome and succeeds infrequently, and
   2) In this instance there will always be a sufficient number of small states which presently get disproportionate representation in the election of the president and will block an amendment to move to a direct popular vote on the president.

   So, indeed, the NPV would be a step toward the broader objectives of improving our electoral process. Starting by giving each voter one equal vote in selecting the Executive would be an excellent first step.

   #1 – How would equal representation in selecting the President “destroy” this country?

7. The EC system has lasted 240yrs. A track record that is very hard to beat. Why mess with something that works and works fairly?

8. 7 –

   Longevity is no barometer of quality. By that measure disease is good for us.

   And what is your standard for a successful “track record?” That we haven’t yet gone over to communism?

   The election of 1876 was riddled with fraud that worked ONLY because of the inane EC. Florida would not have gotten a second look in 2000 had we elected presidents on the basis of a national popular vote. In two other elections a candidate was elected president with fewer popular votes than an opponent. The election of 1800 was a near disaster that was settled only by backroom politics of kind the Founding Fathers feared most. And the election of 2004 might have been exposed as the greatest fraud of all had the Democrats chosen to pursue the myriad instances of outright criminal acts in Ohio.

   Even if fraud had never tainted a presidential election, inaugurating a president who receives fewer popular votes than an opponent, in a democracy, is simply ludicrous.

9. Oy, there are so many things wrong with the whole idea of “popular vote” for the presidency, it is hard to know which aspect of the arguments to deal with first.
   But I will make one comment to the one above: Baronscarpia, this is NOT a democracy.

10. The 3 forms of regimes –

    Democracy — Majority Rule

    Oligarchy — Minority Rule by 2 or more

    Monarchy — Minority Rule by 1

    ALL monarchy regimes are de facto oligarchies since the tyrant monarch needs lots of help to do his/her evil stuff — think Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Saddam, etc.

    Thus 2 regimes — Democracy versus Oligarchy-Monarchy.

    The E.C. is one more OLIGARCHY minority rule gerrymander system — with all the resulting powermad EVIL control freak leftwing / rightwing Prezs (especially since the gerrymander Congress is so UN-representative of the People since 1789).

    —
    Sorry – for delusional supporters of Anarchy (NO government) and Unanimity (100 percent approval of everything).

11. #9 –

    Oh no, please…please…PLEASE…don’t hold back! Give us all of your arguments against electing a president by popular vote. Or alternatively give us arguments for preserving what you believe is our non-democratic condition, one which you apparently support.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.