Lindsay Graham wants to change electoral process

[eyecu2]

Lady G, aka Graham is trying his best to cheat a win in for Trump.

Washington — Sen. Lindsey Graham said Thursday he's hopeful Nebraska will change the way it apportions its Electoral College votes in the upcoming election, given the possibility that the presidential election could come down to a single electoral vote.

"I hope they will allow winner-take-all," Graham, a South Carolina Republican, told reporters on Thursday. Graham met with Nebraska's governor and state lawmakers to discuss moving the state to a winner-take-all electoral system the day before. "Trump's going to win the state by 20 points."


On a close race, Lindsay wants to change how a state he has no business in, to change their state voted process. Literally met with the state governor to voice his "strong favor of opinion" towards a last minute change of process.

Apparently GOP members will lie cheat and steal to get the outcome they want .

Project 2025 is at hand

[Yssup Rider]

Sounds like a MAGA dick move.

[DEAR_JOHN]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Sounds like a MAGA dick move.

..........and the democrats, if they remain in power, will do everything they can do to change the Supreme Court by adding judges so the liberals will be in control.

Every time you liberals cry about something, it makes me laugh.

On topic reply, what is the context of your complaint? What does Graham want to change? How about making Nebraska a total vote state like every other state except Maine. You claim he wants to change the electoral process like it's something major, except it only effects 1 electoral vote.

Because harris and her staff are able to manipulate weak minded voters with the numerous lies to get their votes, I don't think this election will come down to one vote in Nebraska. It's amazing how some people hate this country so much they're willing to see America destroyed from the inside versus casting a vote for Trump.

[Yssup Rider]

LOLLING at your laffing, Dude.

Let’s talk about Lindsey Graham, OK?

[TheDaliLama]

Graham is a Bozo but the Libtards want to do away with the electoral college completely.

I believe our founding fathers figured it out right to kept our States truly united.

Otherwise our Presidents would all be from either California or New York.

Why would we even bother having elections then?

[eyecu2]

Lindsay has been flip flopping and mopping up for Trump like an attendant after a peep show. The electoral process has been how we elect POTUS since 1787. Despite conversation and innuendo of replacing with the popular vote, that would have to voted on by, and approved by Congress. Never gonna happen. There is merit in the popular vote, but not as the method for passing electoral votes. This other bullshit about stacking SCOTUS is off topic, so let's keep it on Lindsay and his attempts to ACTUALLY cheat a state on its voting rights under the state laws.

[DEAR_JOHN]

Originally Posted by eyecu2

Lindsay has been flip flopping and mopping up for Trump like an attendant after a peep show. The electoral process has been how we elect POTUS since 1787.

I like Graham, he's a good solid conservative, but not POTUS or VPOTUS level of person. He's a solid citizen and for the most part has the GOP members back. South Carolina puts out solid citizens with their politics. Graham, Scott, Haley, and Gowdy are good folks to have on our side.

No doubt Lindsay used chemicals and a mop to clean up peep shows, however E8 walz says he enjoys using straws to clean up the messes.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by eyecu2

Lady G, aka Graham is trying his best to cheat a win in for Trump.

Washington — Sen. Lindsey Graham said Thursday he's hopeful Nebraska will change the way it apportions its Electoral College votes in the upcoming election, given the possibility that the presidential election could come down to a single electoral vote.

"I hope they will allow winner-take-all," Graham, a South Carolina Republican, told reporters on Thursday. Graham met with Nebraska's governor and state lawmakers to discuss moving the state to a winner-take-all electoral system the day before. "Trump's going to win the state by 20 points."


On a close race, Lindsay wants to change how a state he has no business in, to change their state voted process. Literally met with the state governor to voice his "strong favor of opinion" towards a last minute change of process.

Apparently GOP members will lie cheat and steal to get the outcome they want .

Project 2025 is at hand

project 2025?

nonsense.

what exactly is the issue here? ah .. i SEE it . the eye thinks any time a "evil republican" proposes changes to the electoral process it's ... "An existential threat to Democracy"

No .. actually it's .. wait for it ..


"Actual Democracy"


who knew?

[txdot-guy]

As I understand it the Constitution doesn't make any requirements on how electors are chosen or how they are apportioned. If Lindsey Graham wants to try and convince the state legislature to change the way they apportion electors there is certainly nothing illegal about that.

On the other hand I do think that it's a fools errand at this late date. I also believe that all states should apportion electors according to votes rather than winner takes all. It promotes more moderate candidates in my opinion.

[DEAR_JOHN]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

On the other hand I do think that it's a fools errand at this late date.

Believe it not, I must agree. Not only is it too late, but it seems very desperate. This is the kind of stuff you tend to a minimum of a year before putting it into law that would effect any election. I don't think one electoral vote will benefit either party, but it's about the principle.

[Salty Again]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

As I understand it the Constitution doesn't make any requirements on how electors are chosen or how they are apportioned. If Lindsey Graham wants to try and convince the state legislature to change the way they apportion electors there is certainly nothing illegal about that.

On the other hand I do think that it's a fools errand at this late date. I also believe that all states should apportion electors according to votes rather than winner takes all. It promotes more moderate candidates in my opinion.

... And I'll also agree that it's up-to the Nebraska
state legislature to address the problem.
IF they considour it a problem. ...

#### Salty

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

As I understand it the Constitution doesn't make any requirements on how electors are chosen or how they are apportioned. If Lindsey Graham wants to try and convince the state legislature to change the way they apportion electors there is certainly nothing illegal about that.

On the other hand I do think that it's a fools errand at this late date. I also believe that all states should apportion electors according to votes rather than winner takes all. It promotes more moderate candidates in my opinion.

correct as to the constitution

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by DEAR_JOHN

Believe it not, I must agree. Not only is it too late, but it seems very desperate. This is the kind of stuff you tend to a minimum of a year before putting it into law that would effect any election. I don't think one electoral vote will benefit either party, but it's about the principle.

not so much desperate but certainly too little too late for this election cycle. all Graham was doing is expressing an opinion .. and what do the "usual suspects" say about it .. what they always say ..

"Republicans are an existential threat to Democracy!"


nonsense

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

As I understand it the Constitution doesn't make any requirements on how electors are chosen or how they are apportioned. If Lindsey Graham wants to try and convince the state legislature to change the way they apportion electors there is certainly nothing illegal about that.

On the other hand I do think that it's a fools errand at this late date. I also believe that all states should apportion electors according to votes rather than winner takes all. It promotes more moderate candidates in my opinion.

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

correct as to the constitution

that's it in a nutshell isn't it? the Constitution granted wide latitude to the States to decide how their electoral process is done. not surprisingly there isn't a lot of variance in how elections are conducted in the States. including that pesky little requirement to show ID to vote. who knew?

[farmstud60]

It can't be done by election day in Nebraska. The legislation meets for 60 days one year and 90 days the next year, So by May the legislation is done for the year unless a special session is called.


The governor already called a special session to deal with property taxes. I don't remember exact days but in July or August and that special session is over.

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by DEAR_JOHN

What does Graham want to change? How about making Nebraska a total vote state like every other state except Maine. You claim he wants to change the electoral process like it's something major, except it only effects 1 electoral vote.

There is a realistic scenario that the outcome of the election could depend on this one electoral vote. If Harris wins it the electoral college vote count would be 270 - 268 Harris. If Trump were to win this one vote the count would be a tie 269 -269. The lower house takes a vote if there was a tie (right now the lower house has more republicans). This is why Sen Graham is trying to get it changed.

The scenario needed for there to be a tie is Trump would have to win swing states Penn and Ariz and that one 1 vote district in Nebraska (this assumes that Harris has won Mich, Wisc,Nev and North Carolina). In this scenario you would get a 269 -269 tie.