Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signs national popular vote bill into law

Image result for colorado "senate bill 42"

The agenda to subvert the Constitution continues as another bellwether state negates the state’s voters in favor of the popular vote polluted with voter fraud.

David DeGerolamo


Colorado’s governor has signed into law a bill to have the state join others in bypassing the Electoral College system and casting their presidential electoral votes for the winner of the national popular vote.

Gov. Jared Polis signed Senate Bill 42 on Friday afternoon. He’d long said he supported the measure.


Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Editorial, Voter issues. Bookmark the permalink.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
5 years ago

Perhaps they’ll live to regret it…

s e (@oldgulph)
5 years ago

With the current system (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), a small number of people in a closely divided “battleground” state can potentially affect enough popular votes to swing all of that state’s electoral votes.

537 votes, all in one state determined the 2000 election, when there was a lead of 537,179 (1,000 times more) popular votes nationwide.

The current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes maximizes the incentive and opportunity for fraud, mischief, misinformation campaigns, coercion, intimidation, confusion, and voter suppression. A very few people can change the national outcome by adding, changing, or suppressing a small number of votes in one closely divided battleground state. With the current system all of a state’s electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who receives a bare plurality of the votes in each state. The sheer magnitude of the national popular vote number, compared to individual state vote totals, is much more robust against manipulation.

The National Popular Vote bill would limit the benefits to be gained by fraud or voter suppression. One suppressed vote would be one less vote. One fraudulent vote would only win one vote in the return. In the current electoral system, one fraudulent vote could mean 29 electoral votes, or just enough electoral votes to win the presidency without having the most popular votes in the country.

The closest popular-vote election count over the last 130+ years of American history (in 1960), had a nationwide margin of more than 100,000 popular votes. The closest electoral-vote election in American history (in 2000) was determined by 537 votes, all in one state, when there was a lead of 537,179 (1,000 times more) popular votes nationwide.

For a national popular vote election to be as easy to switch as 2000, it would have to be 200 times closer than the 1960 election--and, in popular-vote terms, 40 times closer than 2000 itself.

Rich Collins
Rich Collins
5 years ago

Unfortunately you are ignorant of the US Constitution which requires all states to have a republican form of government. This act eliminates the concept of republic and substitutes the rule of the mob, something the founding fathers went to great lengths to demonstrate they would not tolerate in any form.

Further popular voting clearly enhances voter fraud rather than prevents it. In California 7 districts had more than 130% voters than actual adults living in those districts. Surprise, surprise. The Hildabeast total margain of victory came from California and its phantom voters. We have witnessed dozens of democrat appatcheks convicted of voter fraud. Let us not look too closely at Black Panthers at polling places, illegals voting, or clear vote tampering in Florida and Georgia. And we can all rest safetly knowing a fair vote count will be carried out in major cities like Philadelphia where districts failed to register a single republican vote being cast in the last presidential election.

By the way, your education is showing. If you want to see the closest election in American history take a look at the election of 1860 where Lincoln won with a whopping 37% of the vote. I would even mention the ludicrous election of 1864 that Hugo Chavez would have loved.

So please save such braying for the faculty lounge and the uneducated and retarded.

s e (@oldgulph)
5 years ago

Under National Popular Vote, all votes would actually help the candidate each of us actually vote for.

In presidential elections, current state winner-take-all laws create the illusion that entire states voted 100% for the state’s winner, because the laws award 100% of each state’s electoral votes to the candidate receiving the most votes in the state. However, for example, in Connecticut, the actual vote was 898,000 votes for Clinton; 673,000 for Trump, 49,000 for Johnson, and 23,000 for Stein.

The price that a state pays for its winner-take-all law is that no presidential candidate has anything to gain or lose by soliciting voters or catering to voter issues in 38 states in the November general election. The Democratic candidates take blue states for granted, The Republican candidates take red states for granted. Every voter in safe states—Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or Green—ends up without any meaningful influence or voice in the presidential election.

If you add up all the runner-up votes and all the surplus votes cast for president, then about 60% of all votes cast for president under the current system do not matter at all.

Under National Popular Vote, every voter, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would matter equally in the state counts and national count.

The vote of every voter in the country (Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or Green) would help his or her preferred candidate win the Presidency. Every vote in the country would become as important as a vote in a battleground state such as New Hampshire or Florida. The National Popular Vote plan would give voice to every voter in the country, as opposed to treating voters for candidates who did not win a plurality in the state as if they did not exist.

The National Popular Vote bill would give a voice to the minority party voters for president in each state. Now they don’t matter to their candidate.

In 2012, 56,256,178 (44%) of the 128,954,498 voters had their vote diverted by the winner-take-all rule to a candidate they opposed (namely, their state’s first-place candidate).

And now votes, beyond the one needed to get the most votes in the state, for winning in a state, are wasted and don’t matter to presidential candidates.
Utah (5 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 385,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004.
Oklahoma (7 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 455,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004 — larger than the margin generated by the 9th and 10th largest states, namely New Jersey and North Carolina (each with 15 electoral votes).
8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

Cleetus O'Toole
Cleetus O'Toole
5 years ago

Another moron walks amongst us!! You must have graduated college with a degree in women’s art studies or transgendered feelings!! The Electoral College stops a handful of large cities from determining our President every four years. There is no illusion that 100% of the citizens voted for one candidate.
In other words the give away artists of the Democratic Party pass out more freebies to capture more votes. Wow that sounds really fair to me. NOT!
We have a Representative Republic. Not a Democracy. Huge difference. A democracy is like three wolves and one lamb voting on the tonight’s dinner menu!!

5 years ago

We don’t live in a Democracy, you fool, we live in a Republic.
The popular vote is mob rule, 51% of the population telling the other 49% what to do.

Maybe you should move to Western Europe and see how that “democracy” has worked out for their freedoms.

Rich Collins
Rich Collins
5 years ago

You can always tell the aspiring communists among us. A system which has served us so well for over 200 years must now be changed because the Left can’t find enough illegals, felons, 16 year olds, dead, and senile to vote for them. The majority of people having realized that identity politics is destroying the America they knew and flooding the country with third worlders doesn’t benefit the nation.

What the communists want is masses of illegals they are importing to be counted. Because we all know that voter ID laws are racist.

s e (@oldgulph)
5 years ago

Unable to agree on any particular method for selecting presidential electors, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method exclusively to the states in Article II, Section 1
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors….”
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as “plenary” and “exclusive.”