Re: Censorship Communist style

On 1/9/21 4:12 PM, Wolf K wrote:
> On 2021-01-09 17:45, Ken Springer wrote:
>> IIRC, if you take a *strict* view of the Constitution, the popular vote
>> in a state can be ignored by the state legislature in picking the
>> electors to the Electoral College. [...]
> 
> IOW, the strict view is that the legislature of each State decides how
> to interpret or apply the popular vote to their Electoral College. 

Not originally.  Summarizing here, since I'm too lazy to look details up 
again (LOL), state legislatures would appoint/elect/????  "Electors" to 
vote for who would be President and Vice-President.  There was no 
requirement to even pay attention to the popular vote.  I can't say for 
sure every state even had a popular vote.  Also not well known, I think, 
is at first the President and Vice-President were elected separately. 
So it was possible to those positions filled by individuals of different 
parties.  This was later changed, I believe by Constitutional Amendment.

Initially, there was no Electoral College, it came into being sometime 
after the Civil War, I believe.

Also not well known, but the framers of the Constitution considered the 
popular vote solution, but instead went with the Electors.  So we have 
an "indirect" election of a President, not a "direct" election.  Smaller 
states did not want larger states to have total control, among other issues.

Case in point for me...  Living in the mountains of Colorado, do you 
think I want the forestry management policies of California?  :-)

When you read the Constitution, you become very aware the framers did 
not expect the county to basically become a 2 party county.  In the case 
no candidate gets the majority, the top 5 candidate names are taken to 
the House of Representatives (I believe it's the House), and the House 
elects the President.

And the US is *not* a two-party country, although you wouldn't know that 
from the national media.  Colorado, in fact, had 21 candidates for 
President on the ballot.  Including Kanye West!  LOL

I have to give Fox credit, in 2016, they interviewed some of the lesser 
known candidates, including the Socialist, Libertarian, and Green party 
candidates.  I watched them.  I don't know what the other national news 
outlets did.

So while we make a big issue of having a free press, we don't get a 
press that presents *all* sides of a question so the populace can make a 
better informed decision at the polls.

> That
> implies that each State can legislate how the Electors shall cast their
> votes. 

As far as the US Constitution is concerned, yes.  However, now all 
states, by different manners, choose the electors by popular vote.  I do 
not know if thee were any lawsuits over this, or if any of the 
unratified amendments address this.

> AFAIK, most have legislated that the winner takes all the
> Electoral Votes. 

I believe it's either 3 or 5 states do otherwise.

> The Colorado case you mention implies that Colorado did
> not mandate that Electors vote according to the popular vote. Id that
> the case?

Colorado does, but the one elector decided, for what ever reason, he/she 
would not obey that, and the court upheld the choice.

Personal suspicion, you can't force someone to vote a certain way.

The US is not a democracy.  The US is a Democratic Republic, comprised 
of 50 free and independent states.  Another fact the news media never 
mentions. Although you may hear it on Fox.

-- 
Ken
MacOS 10.14.6
Firefox 84.0.1
Thunderbird 60.9.1
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
      and it's gone!"