DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Maine Senate passes bill that would give Electoral College votes to winner of national popular vote

Maine Senate passes bill that would give Electoral College votes to winner of national popular vote


The Maine Senate has passed a bill that would award the state’s Electoral College votes to the winner of the national popular vote in a presidential election.

The Bangor Daily News reports that the state chamber approved the bill in a 19-16 vote on Tuesday.

If passed by the state House and signed by Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D), the state would become the latest to join the National Popular Vote interstate compact, which is an agreement among a number of states to give their Electoral College votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote.

So far, 14 states and Washington, D.C., have joined the pact, which will only take effect if a number of states holding the majority of the Electoral College’s 538 electoral votes join the agreement.

Since the formal body was created in 1787, there have only been five instances where a presidential candidate has been elected without winning the popular vote.

President Trump was the most recent to win the office without winning the popular vote. During the 2016 election, Trump lost the popular vote to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by nearly 3 million votes. However, Trump won the election after he managed to secure 304 electoral votes.

According to the local paper, the measure has faced some criticism from conservatives who argue the bill will minimize Maine’s voice in the presidential election.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch...ollege-votes-to

This will give GOPers fits.

Instead they should be working to get rid of the electoral college.

While there is certainly a strong case for such ... I can't see that ever happening.

I say just let the United States fall already. It's already apparent that big states with large populations want to minimize and destroy the voice of small states so why should those states stay in a place where they have no voice or fair and equal representation.

Hell big states are even happy enough with having a large population but instead feel the need to invite illegal aliens and have them counted as part of the census so they can steal even more votes from small states. Small states have already lost over 30 seats in the House of Representatives so they can represent people who are not even US citizens.

The populous vote is not the end all, be all of fair representation in a country of over 50 states and territories that represent a wide range of culture and lifestyles. Every state should have a voice and not be silenced just because there are more people in another state.

Or perhaps we could have a difference in taxes. One for city people and a different one for rural people. I mean why should those of us who know how to do things for ourselves and don't need the government to wipe our arses for us pay the same taxes and city slickers who need the government to do everything for them, coddle them and give them "safe" places.

My only need for the government is to stfu and get out of my way so I can live my life in peace.

its a known fact that the city slickers subsidized the rural people.

we've been over this plenty of times. please stop using incorrect information to spread your BS

Rut Row.

Time to dig those Confederate statues out of the museums and warehouse.

It be split time!

Yeah. What they should do is just split the electoral college by the votes and not have a winner take all method. States are silencing their own citizens that way and it doesn't make sense.

What a load of crap. Where do 99% of people on welfare live? Where do 99% people who benefit from big government and all their wasteful social programs live? Even with farm subsidies 80% of those given are to giant corporate farms run by offices that are where? Yep all of them in the big cities.

Most rural people grow their own food and are self sufficient, so long as, they are not taxed to death or have some corporation set up shop to kill the land while they rape it for one resource or another that is needed for some city slickers' materials needs.

Big Cities are nothing but giant cesspools of people greedy to collect as much material wealth as they can, while they consume as much goods as they can, so they can live their lives chained to the slavery of debt to big banks. All in the name of the almighty "convenience." And why do they need so much convenience? Because they have to work all day to pay money to their slave masters the big banks who control all their debt they went into to have all that material wealth.

How much debt are you enslaved to city slicker?

Come talk to me when you have your freedom back.

lmfaooooooo omg im cryying:

Despite that stereotype, the chart below shows rural areas have a higher percentage of households receiving SNAP than both metropolitan and micropolitan (small city) areas.

https://www.cfra.org/news/140730/snap-benefits-and-rural-households

again, stop using incorrect information to spread your BS. just stop it.

So your saying the US census is wrong?

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2017/11/income-poverty-rural-america.html

you gave a link talking about income.

Razor and i are addressing subsidies and federal welfare spending. try to keep up.

If rural communities had wealth, they wouldn't be rural communities. They would be towns and then cities. People flock to wealth, they don't just leave it be.

Ist off I was replying to razors AND your posts above (the two directly above mine) He said 99 percent of people on welfare live in the cities. (I proved him wrong) You changed the subject to snap as {IMO} you realized you were wrong about this subject, so you changed it like you seem to do a lot.

I kept up so deal with it bro.

100 percent bull crap. Some people woun't live in a big city for a huge pay check. Why because they like rural life. Give me a 100,000 per year and a life in a rural community or 1,000,000 a year and I have to live in a huge City. It's an east choice keep your damn city life.

you might want to reread the convo. nobody changed the subject except you.

The convo started out as a Bill on Electoral College Votes. Then it changed. You should be use to that as you love to change the subject when your losing the argument.

says the guy who literally changed the subject to income.

i was addressing razor's clearly incorrect notion about the city population and the rural one. that was it. the fact that you got triggered is something bizarre, but ultimately something i dont care about.

BTW your ignoring the FACTS again.

BTW I pointed out that Razor was wrong, why do you feel the need to ignore that?

And what job pays 100k a year where you don't interact with the city? A gas station clerk?

I made well over 100K in a city that was the largest one in the county. At the time the population was under 12,000 and that included everybody in the Zip code. Including those who lived on farms.

Your showing your ignorance about small town life.

My cousin probably pulls in over 100k in a city of about 14,000....

All these states will change back when Trump wins the popular vote this next election.

He's gonna have to step up his game, then.

This website is petty much the only community I know of in which he seems to have any popularity at all. I can't name 5 people at my job who think he's of any value whatsoever. The folks at my place of worship feel pretty much the same. My family? Oh, merciful heavens. They would only sign on after mass lobotomies at the family reunion. Parents of my private students? Another hard pass.

It's weird, but Trump is more popular here in PP than virtually any other place I know of outside of sites like Breitbart, Newsmax and Stormfront. Those folks ain't exactly 'mainstream,' you know. In my everyday life, this place is the anomaly. The outlier. And I know people from all walks of life. None of us get his appeal, and all of us look at his most enthusiastic supporters and shake our heads slowly.

That popular vote thing is going to be pretty steep hill for the most unpopular PoTUS in the last 100 years.

THat said, I suppose it could happen.



...and monkeys could fly out of my butt, too.

In the words from the Bill Clinton campaign...

"It's the Economy, stupid."

Then he should be somewhere in the high 50's/low 60's by now.

And yet, he's not.
I'm too lazy to do homework for this convo, but if your word can be taken that Razzpolling has him at 45%, it's a strong bet that the aggregate of ALL polls have him at something like 39-42(+). Because that's how Rasmussen always tracks in almost every one of these things.

And um... by the way: 39-42(+) is right where he's always been.

America has 2 years of game film on this dude.
He's been living at his ceiling this entire time.

He’s not even popular on the bmw boards that is filled with old white conservatives.

Especially cause he keeps threatening the German auto industry with tariffs.

I'm telling you, Dawg:
He's only popular... here.

And by here, I mean specifically: the PP section of DawgTalkers-
-because I'm not convinced he's all that popular with the rest of the guys who only come here for the football.

Nowhere else I go, does the landscape look like this.
And I go to lots and lots and lots of places. Both online, and IRL.

..................

This place is #crayaf, Swish. Don't get it twisted, and don't overthink it.
My 'Real Life Mileage' is so very, very different... everywhere else I go.

__________________


"That's why I'm able to keep all my sanity
(I'm still in touch with the rest of Humanity).
Auto-immune to the viral inanity
Spread by disease vectors soundin' like Hannity."


Reality exists outside these walls.

Nowadays, I only come here to watch TV:

Lol ..yeah all those farmers getting their millions in handouts from the gov. now that trump screwed up their economy with the trade snafu with vchina.

All this bickering on both sides.

But this post by you makes the most sense. I've always felt this way. This is a fair compromise. Give small states an advantage by allowing the electorial college. But at least divi-out the votes with proportion.

Why should a state like Florida, that is the third biggest in the US, give all its votes out to one side when they electorate votes 49-51?

Regarding the thread topic, we do not vote in a federal election for President. We vote in 51(50 states plus DC and maybe PR also but I don't recall) individual state elections because the constitution was set up that way so the large states alone did not did not determine the leader of the nation. In my opinion the electoral college is one of the greatest creations by any government in history. Remember it is part of a complete system, not standing alone. each state gets 2 senators to create one chamber, while another is representative based on population.

We are not a democracy either. We are a Democratic Representative Republic. The founders were smart enough to know that in a true democracy the "majority" could repress the minority by sheer numbers.

Maine has pretty much assured itself that any presidential candidate will not bother campaigning in their state much after the primary season.

Regarding what the thread has evolved to, I live in a very rural area. Our town population is about 1,300 and county population is near 35,000. I can assure you our area has an extremely strong economy and one of the lowest unemployment rates in Ohio.

During the housing bust on 08 our home prices remained steady or increased in value.

While it is true that sue to a very large ag economy in our area does create some subsidies, we also have a lot of small independent light manufacturing and tech jobs. Regarding our percentage of Snap funds our area receives I have no idea but I am guessing the percentage of residents on assistance is less than a large metropolitan area. Again, I don't have stats so I could be wrong.

So even with some farm subsidies, and say our public assistance is a higher percentage than metro areas, we don't reap the benefits of large public housing tracts or public transportation. If our car breaks down we need to walk or get a ride to work with a co-worker. No bus, train or subway is available for cheap transportation.

To lump rural people as drag on the cities is part of the problem in our country and why we are so divisive. We need to stop acting like a bunch of tribes and treating each other as collective citizens of the United States,. I also hate the terms "Americans" when someone really means US citizens. Using American includes Canada, central &South America also by definition.

Sorry to rant but just my 2 cents.

You haven't spent a lot of time in the rural south have you?

And in case you missed it, thanks to the new Trump tariffs, aka Trump Tax, farmers are receiving billions upon billions from the new Trump socialist program "farm welfare".

You mean when we had only 13 states and one state didn't have a situation where one of its citizens votes equaled up to four votes in yet other states. Yeah, when the circumstances were much different and our nation was much smaller, it made sense.

there is a difference from living in the country and living in the city. If you live in the country you grow your own food and don't need foodstamps. That is rural America to me. It doesn't mean you own a 20 acre farm. It means you might own an acre or two and just plant a garden, maybe some chickens and ducks for eggs. You probably don't own large livestock that requires a lot of maintenance because you work on a job instead of working a farm..

Those who live is a small city or big city live there for the sake of city life. A life of consumption and the desire for material wealth.

One large city has more people on welfare than 1000 small cities because they have them in the hundreds of thousands. Except now a days in big cities the people even on welfare are becoming homeless too.

One important difference between big city and small city welfare is that in small city welfare the numbers tend to reflect the numbers of population that are on disability whereas in big cities that number diverges far above the population of people that are disabled. IMHO disabled people SHOULD be able to receive those benefits.

I've lived in both big cities and in some very poor backwater areas too. I'd much rather be poor in the countryside than in the city. Then again when I was younger I preferred the easy city life too because I just didn't know any better. It took we a lot of effort to free myself from the slavery of the city life and being held down by debt to banks.

2 acres of land and a little know how and your family will never go hungry. 10 acres of land and your grandchildren will never go hungry either. Sadly most people are too ignorant to grow their own food these days. Not stupid, just ignorant. I find that once people actually learn how easy it is and how much better your food tastes they change for the better.

The food I grow for myself has amazing taste compared to the nutrient deprived food at the grocery store. My young daughters of 10 and 12 love summer and fall because they know that is when we will get to have our garden and have really tasty food again.

We desperately need to regain our American know-how and culture back to regain our people's freedom again!

Nah, I love my bmw and Whole Foods.

Yeah lol..We’re all going to have to wait until the trump era is ancient history for that to be realized now.

the Electoral College is the most fair system ever created to Elect an official such as the President.

Each political party "nominates" Electors. When you go to vote, if you vote for a Democrat Candidate, your voting for the electors picked by the Democratic Party, and same if you voted for a Republican Candidate you are voting for the Electors nominated by the Republican Party.

Those electors then usually cast a vote for the President of the party that nominated them, however they are not required to vote party line. The Electoral college is actually the last line of defense in our election system to help prevent the rise of a dictator. As the electors can vote against the popular vote if they believe its in the best interests of the country.

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html

the Electoral College for example prevented a crazy guy named Aaron Burr from becoming President because some the electors voted with their conscience and broke rank not voting for the popular candidate...in the long run it saved this nation. As Burr would later be caught up a conspiracy of insurrection against the US.

This country needs the Electoral College more now than it ever has in its history.

However, lets get to the real issue. The US was never intended to be a country run by the popular vote.

The only parts of our government intended to be elected by the popular vote are:

1. US House of Representatives
2. State Legislatures and State Governors.
3. Local/city/town/county governments.

The US Senate was supposed to be appointed by the State Legislatures of each state, Senators were intended to be "The States" representation in Washington, and the House of Representatives to be "The People" representation. The States agreed to the Constitution under the premise they could appoint representation, but the States have had their representation in Washington usurped, the states have been reduced to un-representated vassals.

The issue with the US government is the people have too much say. The People should elect the House, the States should appoint the Senate, and the Electoral College should select the President.

There is a reason the long line of statesmen we had the past 200 years no longer hold or gain office in this country, and its solely because the ignorant populace of the US has too much power.

Our Constitution was never intended, written, or designed in the mind of people being able to elect most of our government, and for the states to not have representation.

the system works right when:

1. The People Elect "The House"
2. The States appoint "the Senate"
3. The Electoral College selects the President.

This is the system that allowed great men to run this country because they were selected from the best of the best.

today we select people who pander the most to the public, promise them the most money, etc...look no farther than Trump and Ocasio-Cortez....that's what you get when an ignorant populace is allowed to select most of the leaders of our government.

the Electoral College and State appointed Senators was put into place to prevent exactly the trash we are dealing with today. We had a system that worked, and we blew it.

We had a system that was built to enable slavery. Now we only partially do.

Do you really believe this?
I moved from rural Ohio to city life Ohio, then city life Oregon, for opportunities. I could have stayed behind in rural Ohio like my older sister. We both have the same nursing degree. She struggles to make ends meet on her wage. Her employment opportunities are scarce without miles and miles of commuting.
I moved to the city to open up opportunities. I didn’t want to have only 3 options for employment over the course of a 30+ year career. I didn’t want to make less than the state average wage. I didn’t want financially struggle in the sticks with no opportunities to rise out of my family’s general poverty.
So yes. On some level I moved for my financial gain. Staying would have been financial suicide. It also would have shrunk my dating pool. It would have kept me out of the arts scene. It would have culturally stunted my personal growth. The lack of diversity where I grew up is staggering.
I left the sticks because it offered me nothing.
The city offers me opportunities. If my company treats me poorly, I can move on. There’s plenty of work elsewhere. I’ve met other artists and have pushed my art to a place I never could have imagined. My dating pool opened beyond my high school peers... thankfully. With that I’ve met an amazing woman who also left her sleepy backwater town of her childhood to pursue her career and life.
We don’t live a life of consumption or desire for material wealth. I own the smallest house in my hood. We own utilitarian vehicles... though we could afford bigger and better of both. Hell, I only work in my profession 32 hours per week. By choice. I prefer a better work life balance over the money I’m ‘missing out on’. I worked hard to put myself in a situation to not need that money.
Material wealth means little to me. I just want to pay my bills, travel a little, and make art.
No amount of gardening in backwater Ohio would afford me that.

This such nonsense.

The only thing slavery had to do with the founding of our government and legislatures was on the basis of population in terms of taxation and how may representatives each state would have the in House.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise

The States appointing Senators, and the Electoral College voting for President have nothing to do with slavery.