An encouraging, democratic trend.....which will no doubt be opposed by Repubs

I believe the disenfranchisement of voters from any state is unconstitutional. Time will tell.

 

What if the legislature ignores it? What if the governor ignores it? What then?

 

How is the Dems in the CO Gen Assembly telling the voters of CO there voice won't matter in Presidential election and encouraging democratic trend? That sounds horrible

 

Yet some states already have a winner take all system.

 

"Under the Constitution, states have the power to determine how they award their electoral votes in national elections. Most states have winner-take-all laws, which award all of its electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes within the state."

 

I guarantee you that the first time (like 2020) where the citizens of Colorado allocate their electoral votes to Trump because he wns the popular vote, CO will rescind this law quicker than your neck swivels. The whiplash will be enjoyable to watch though...

 

Clinton beat Don in 2016 by 5 percentage points in CO. If he is the nominee the Dem will beat him by more in 2020.

 

Winner take all means that the winner of that state, not the winner from some other state.

 

• A 2020 Presidential ballot test finds 55% of unaffiliated voters supporting the “generic” Democratic candidate, 23% supporting Donald Trump, 4% supporting an “other” candidate and 17% were undecided.

https://magellanstrategies.com/magellan-strategies-colorado-survey-2018-unaffiliated-voters/

 

Yes that's great....the people's voices are heard. In CO now the Dems are saying what the CO voters say is meaningless they will give their votes to whom ever wins the national vote...pretty sad and undemocratic

 

"Under the Constitution, states have the power to determine how they award their electoral votes in national elections. Most states have winner-take-all laws, which award all of its electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes within the state."

 

Its a stupid idea for many reason, but these idiots are actually basing the concept of some really faulty logic. They think they have a numerical majority, and that simply is not true. They forget that millions more didn't vote than the difference between the candidates. To even suggest such a measure when participation rates are less than 90% is folly...

 

"They" don't believe President Trump has a chance because "they" believe all of the lies they have told about President Trump. Some people are so caught up in their own political fantasies that they are incapable of learning anything contradicting their narrow minded ideology.

 

The national system as it exists renders the majority's votes "meaningless" in an instance like 2016 and 2000. That needs to be fixed.

 

TRANSLATIONS of OP:
" we lost so change the rules "
" mommy, mommy, we lost, change dah wules"
"Commiefornia and NY should decide for the WHOLE country"

 

Dems are advocating for measures to increase voter participation. Ones being blocked by Turtleman McConnell because he knows greater participation is bad for Repubs.

 

I think you know this, but it's a problem because California and New York would decide the presidential election and lower population states would have no say, might as well not vote. It's a problem because a lot of us don't want CA and NY alone to decide who will be president nor how we will live.

 

"Under the Constitution, states have the power to determine how they award their electoral votes in national elections."
That's bullpoop!

The constitution allows a lot of leeway to the states - but it does not allow the states to disenfranchise their own voters by ceding those votes to other jurisdictions.

 

They aren't pushing for an increase in verifiable and lawful participation, that's why its getting opposed...

 

No it doesn't....the President is elected by the States. The Majority votes aren't meaningless within the State. We are a Republic....the United STATES.

 

LOL.. a lot of wishful thinking on your part. As noted, CO voters will revolt if their electoral votes have to add to Trump's electoral landslide in 2020. And states, like CO are just setting the table then to accomplish this. Don't you, for a single moment, recognize the danger of that?

 

Dems are advocating for younger, more uninformed voters...which is bad for the country, but good for the left

 

Actually, it is the electors of that state who determine how they will award their electoral votes. When one votes for President one is actually voting for a slate of electors pledged to vote for a particular candidate.

 

Riiiiight but the Constitution INHERENTLY means we live in a Republic. Not a democracy. If you change us to a democracy then you have undermined the constitution and as such the Supreme Court which derives it's authority from said constitution.

The problem is that don't you think our founding fathers considered the fact that one vote should count for every person the same? They decided AGAINST that because they wanted us to be a REPUBLIC. And they did so because a true democracy is a VERY dangerous game to play.

 

So if Trump wins the national popular vote he gets 121 electors from states that didn't vote for him? I'm sure California and Colorado will love to pledge their electors to Trump even if he loses their states.