Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)

17. But that is two different things

Reply to RDANGELO (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 04:39 PM

Jan 2013

The Constitution says specifically that it is up to the state how it's electoral votes are determined. The Federal government has no right to change that because the electoral college itself is considered a check on federal power.

How the districts are drawn is NOT in the federal constitution. Most states have laws against gerrymandering, but when the lawmakers are the ones breaking the law, it shouldn't surprise you that no one seems to get in trouble or held accountable. It's a bug in our country's operating system. There are a few flaws in the government...and that's one.

The founders didnt consider specifying the drawing of districts in the constitution for a few reasons. For one they never imagined it would be a problem. There was no way for them to know how political divisions (parties) were going to form. And second, they considered such a thing to be a state issue.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

20 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Pennsylvania House Republicans Introduce Bill To RIG The 2016 Presidential Election [View all] Segami Jan 2013 OP

this has been debunked now 4 times. Obama still would have won, and Hillary45 will win next time graham4anything Jan 2013 #1

I've seen nothing debunking this. RomneyLies Jan 2013 #2

but it relies on constants and constants don't remain constant. A river keeps flowing graham4anything Jan 2013 #4

hasn't been debunked at all CreekDog Jan 2013 #5

But it wouldn't happen. Another defeatest attitude. Same as saying there were thefts graham4anything Jan 2013 #9

Can we at least get a de-bunked link. I'm curious. JaneyVee Jan 2013 #10

how many votes total in 2012? CreekDog Jan 2013 #12

Post #13 has the vote totals for 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012 graham4anything Jan 2013 #15

you've just debunked every one of your bullshit talking points in this post.. frylock Jan 2013 #16

Palast is a conspiracy theorist who makes money being controversial. graham4anything Jan 2013 #19

okay then.. frylock Jan 2013 #20

I don't see why the justice department wouldn't block it. RDANGELO Jan 2013 #3

PA, MI, OH, and WI are not subject to the restrictions in the VRA. RomneyLies Jan 2013 #8

It's end up in the Supreme Court, the DOJ has no power over how the states divide up EVs davidn3600 Jan 2013 #11

Yes, but since the states are severely gerrymandered, RDANGELO Jan 2013 #14

But that is two different things davidn3600 Jan 2013 #17

They do seem to spend their time plotting and scheming how to Mc Mike Jan 2013 #6

time to get rid of the electoral college Angry Dragon Jan 2013 #7

Total votes, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012- 2000 was lost because of democratic voter disinterest graham4anything Jan 2013 #13

RNC P.R. B.S. at it again, I see..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #18