politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I believe that if we had a full-on popular vote for President, and each state's margin was outside their recount threshold, but the total popular vote was extremely close, the losing side would petition to have all 50 states recounted. Some states would oblige, under the notion that the total popular vote is what counts, and that is within their threshold, while others won't, because they will use the text of the recount law as written. it will all be inconsistent, and up to the opinions of dozens of judges. Imagine the chaos of 2000 in Florida, times 51.
If the NPV compact goes forward, then I think it is more likely that recounts would be triggered everywhere if the popular vote is close enough, because it specifically allocates electors based on that. And if recounts are going on in any one state by the Safe Harbor deadline, there will be a push to certify both slates of electors in every NPV state.
NPV is a good idea, but is a ticking time bomb. If we decide we want to have the Presidency decided via popular vote, we are better off ripping up the entire EC and starting over from scratch. The NPV compact should be seen a just the first step toward that.