Talk:National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

Florida

Bush didn’t win Florida as stated. Bush was awarded Florida by the Supreme Court. Recounts gave it Gore 73.159.217.224 (talk) 02:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

It's complicated, but it's unfair to say that recounts gave it to Gore, only that recounts *could* have done that were they not halted. 2000 United States presidential election recount in Florida is a helluva read. TheSavageNorwegian 04:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

it is not complicated. after the Florida vote count, Gore and Democrat lawyers sued to have recounts performed in a few districts that would favor him (Gore) vote total - e.g. Dade and Broward. Florida election law at the time said if there is a recount the entire state has to undergo recount. Florida state Supreme Court went along with the Democrats to allow an extremely limited recount. U.S. Supreme Court overruled Fla S C and supported Fla law that the entire state would have to be recounted. then Gore/Democrats gave up. epilogue - every news outlet on the US east coast sent reporters to Florida to conduct hand recounts, and not one was able to create a Gore majority Ronster76 (talk) 04:15, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect

An article by the Washington Post written by Dan Keating and Dan Balz, posted November 12, 2001 stated that recounts would have favored George W. Bush. --Firejack007 (talk) 04:45, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

About Wisconsin

Hey, me again, so, long story short, some user recently changer the status of the Wisconsin bills, claiming that since April 15, they died in comittee.

The thing is, as I previously stated, Wisconsin is one of the 5 legislatures websites I cannot access (don't know why), and as I was searching for secondary sources, I came across an article of the Harvard Political Review, April 19, claiming that bill are still pending in Wisconsin (https://harvardpolitics.com/abolishing-the-electoral-college-might-not-be-as-hard-as-you-think/)

So could anyone who has access to the Winsconsin legislature website look for the bills status and either come back here to tell me it has indeed died in comittee or not, or directly change the info on the main page? Thank you very much Niivlem (talk) 22:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

I've never edited a wiki whatsoever, but according to

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2023/proposals/reg/sen/bill/sb144

it died in the state senate, quote "Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1"

Which, from what I can tell just means it didn't get voted on at all? There's no tally of votes on Legiscan at least:

https://legiscan.com/WI/bill/SB144/2023 24.154.92.226 (talk) 07:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Does this mean that almost every Democrat state will have to cast their votes for trump if he wins the popular vote?

If Trump were to win the popular vote does this bind the states who signed it to cast their votes for Trump? Most of the states that signed to this have usually voted Democrat. 108.63.216.11 (talk) 09:17, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

This isn't the forum to ask questions about how the compact works. That said, it only takes effect when enough states to equal 270 EVs have approved it, and that hasn't happened. 331dot (talk) 09:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit of "Public support for Electoral College reform"

This topic includes wording about which party would've been given votes had this compact been in place(specifically for 2016). In order to ensure readers are informed, would it be worth adding a similar paragraph (or edit of existing) to show which party would've had the compact's votes in 2024?

my understanding is it would be for the Republicans, but I'm asking for comments here before potentially editing the page.

In short, should we extend the wording/add a sentence to include who wouldve won the votes in 2024, like it already has for past elections? 92.15.59.76 (talk) 10:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

'national popular vote total'

The phrase 'national popular vote total' should be put in quotes as shown since it is an imaginary ethereal concept. there is no such thing as a national popular vote total; there are in reality 51 separate and independent state/district vote-based contests. to add all 51 contest vote totals together may be some kind of academic exercise, but it has no relation to the election outcome.Ronster76 (talk) 03:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

The square root of -1 is imaginary. The votes of all Americans isn't EvergreenFir (talk) 04:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

the US MLB World Series in 2017 ended in a tie. after 7 games both teams had scored 34 runs. neither team won the series. that's your imaginary score 'total'. Ronster76 (talk) 04:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Maps need to be updated

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/state-status states that many states are currently in the process of joining the NPVIC Sigmatoiletfortniterizz (talk) 03:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

That's a map of historic actions, not present status. IdiotSavant (talk) 04:05, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Missouri, for example, has house approval and was not vetoed, yet it is not on the map Sigmatoiletfortniterizz (talk) 17:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

That's a previous legislative session. The map is for states which have passed the law, and bills active currently. Historical information is in the table of "Bills receiving floor votes in previous sessions". Note that bills which were merely heard by a committee are not recorded in that table (because its just not notable enough). IdiotSavant (talk) 22:26, 13 November 2024 (UTC)