you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (2 children)

The allusion is to the state-level pact several states have made to always assign their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in their state. With Texas and other flipping, that makes enough states to be over 270 votes, meaning if all those new blue state governments join the compact, the EC essentially doesn't matter anymore.

And it doesn't need to include Texas

On Tuesday, Democrats took control of state legislatures and governorships in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Wisconsin, and Nevada, all states that haven’t agreed to the compact. If all five vote to join, then the total number of electoral votes apportioned based on the national popular vote jumps to 283.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 hour ago (1 child)

    I am enlightened! Appreciate the response.

    Any thoughts on how binding such a pact is?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 54 minutes ago*

    Bad news there I'm afraid, some people think it might even be unconstitutional, but because it's never triggered it's never been tested. It's probably a safe bet that if it ever did trigger the Republicans would set their own children on fire summoning the best lawyers hell can offer.

  • source
  • parent