Given SC didn’t allow it’s people to vote, this feels blatantly wrong.
Given there is no record of a vote about secession, nor any history mentioning it’s existance, it’s a pretty safe assumption a vote wasn’t held re: secession.
Then I vote we move on from this discussion. Given it’s probably the worst possible way to defend the electoral college (eg, why you brought it up), there seems to be very little to discuss moving forward
Well, I looked it up. South Carolina held no popular votes for president from 1792 to 1860, so they never held a popular vote for president.
Technically a popular vote is not required since the president is chosen by the electorates and not directly by the population. So they didn’t merely abstain in 1860, they just didn’t hold a popular vote for president ever at that point in their existence.
The people were not ‘stripped’ of anything, the law was followed.
The popular vote is more a courtesy than a requirement. I don’t actually know if the popular vote for president is required even now federally.
But the way it’s done now is that the electorates follow the will of the people in the popular vote. That’s not the way it was done then in SC.
People voted for their representatives, who elected the electorate. For SC, it was vote by proxy.
Gotcha. Have a good one