| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Colorado Senate Passes Bill Nixing Electoral College in Favor of Popular Vote |
| 2019-02-03 |
| [BREITBART] The Democratic-majority Colorado state Senate passed a bill this week that would give the state’s electoral votes in presidential elections to the candidate who wins the popular vote instead of the Electoral College. Colorado’s Senate passed the bill in a 19-16 vote Tuesday along party lines. This will change the first time the political tables turn, which they will. The bill would mandate that the state’s members of the Electoral College vote for the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote. Under current state law, the state’s electoral college members cast their vote for the candidate who wins the election in Colorado. The legislation, sponsored by state Sen. Mike Foote (D-Lafayette), would have allowed Colorado to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact with 11 other states and the District of Columbia. "This really isn’t a red versus blue idea. This is about making sure that the president of the United States is elected by the entire nation, not just a handful of ’battleground states’ that get to decide our presidential elections under the current system," Foote said of the bill in a statement. "All of Colorado’s voters should be heard, regardless of whether or not we are considered a battleground state." |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #22 Modern siege warfare can reduce their population in mere weeks. |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2019-02-03 20:06 |
| #21 Meet your future rulers - half of the U.S. population lives in these counties: |
| Posted by: Anomalous Sources 2019-02-03 19:27 |
| #20 The California Plague has finally killed Colorado and given its electoral votes to California. |
| Posted by: Injun Bucket8891 2019-02-03 18:06 |
| #19 Colorado wil break apart. And the country follows. Like logs on my log splitter. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2019-02-03 16:20 |
| #18 So, then, is it OK if states whose populations chafe under the rule of New Yorkers and Californians secede? Or are we really setting ourselves up for another civil war? |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2019-02-03 14:23 |
| #17 If this is in force then it’s going to be fun when Trump wins the 2020 popular vote and CO turns red in spite of them voting almost exclusively blue... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2019-02-03 11:55 |
| #16 And so starts the second Civil War, I hope patriots make note of every elected official that has voted for these and makes them pay for their full devotion to their ideals of destroying the US. |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2019-02-03 11:40 |
| #15 Okay, candidate X is 10,000 votes ahead in all the other states.....candidate Y is 12,000 votes ahead in Colorado....who wins? The favorite of the progressive Democrats. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2019-02-03 11:22 |
| #14 " Fixed. As Glolush noted this basically disenfranchises the CO voters. No candidates will visit or give a crap about CO, instead focusing exclusively on more populous states like NY, CA... I think they are going to get a nasty lesson as to why the electoral collage is needed. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2019-02-03 11:13 |
| #13 ..it is. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2019-02-03 10:28 |
| #12 Who determines the "popular" vote? How long will that take? Do the votes of Coloradans count? This should be the end of the federal republic. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2019-02-03 09:45 |
| #11 Currently (Wiki) the Colorado House is 63.1% D. |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2019-02-03 09:24 |
| #10 from the article: "If enough states sign onto the compact, it would change the outcome of presidential elections by awarding all electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote. But the bill is not likely to become law unless the Colorado House approves and enough states agree to the compact." So, is the Colorado House likely to approve? |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2019-02-03 09:21 |
| #9 IN other words, Colorado just gave its populace the middle finger and handed over their electoral representation to California and New York. So Candidate A wins the aggregate vote, fraud and all, by 10,000, but Candidate B wins Colorado by 30,000. And you're giving the electoral votes to Candidate A, counter to what the people of Colorado wanted? I smell a lawsuit and a deleayed outcome. Or Candidate A wins the aggregate vote, but absent these give-away laws, Candidate B wins the electoral vote by, say, 30, but with the shenanigans they lose by 2. Can you say constitutional crisis? |
| Posted by: Glolush Whusotch4899 2019-02-03 08:05 |
| #8 Well you are correct, the established FEMA regions are indeed 'the next level.' |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2019-02-03 07:18 |
| #7 ...nah, just taking the logic to the next level given the socialist/Left lust for power and micro-management. The historically illiterate have no use for 'lessons learned' on the scale the founder did. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2019-02-03 07:12 |
| #6 We could probably consolidate it down to maybe two dozen regional districts. Posted by Procopius2k Independent provinces? What are you suggesting, another British invasion and attempt at land and natural resource grabbing ? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2019-02-03 06:49 |
| #5 And switch to proportional representation, 2Pk? Otherwise... |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2019-02-03 06:40 |
| #4 Then there is no need for states. They're just inconvenient, inefficient, and redundant administrative units to a federal system owned and dominated by 10 or so major metropolitan areas. We could probably consolidate it down to maybe two dozen regional districts. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2019-02-03 06:18 |
| #3 Does that include ballots cast under electoral fraud? What if the vote is about 50-50 and Colorado's vote could tip the balance either way? What if several states went this route and they were all waiting on each other? |
| Posted by: gorb 2019-02-03 05:33 |
| #2 Actually, if you were to combine this with effectively enforced voter ID ... |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2019-02-03 03:14 |
| #1 Imagine that! |
| Posted by: AlmostAnonymous5839 2019-02-03 01:52 |