Weren't those electors from states Clinton won?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Politico: 20 Trump electors could flip says law professor
- Thread starter Tom Nook Sawyer
- Start date
- Status
beacuse that would it be at this point. No new information that came out about trump. People knew who exactly they were voting for.
Trump has even back down on some of the crazy stuff like going after Clinton to "lock her up."
People acting like trump doing everything by himselves. it the whole gop doing this. Stopping trump not going to stop the gop. Trump saved the gop this election now people like they will turn against him LOL
I dont really know if its a pipe dream or not...
But it amazes me some ppl still think all this is about ppl upset the person they voted for lost.
......all this is way, way, way beyond winning and losing.....
Way, way beyond.
Way beyond.
When was the last time anything like this was talked about, hinted at? Bush vs Gore? Even then it was just about some possible issues with the votes in Fla.
Not trying to enact some rarely used parts of the the voting laws. Or politicians actually turning their back on their parties president elect.
This entire election has been one for the history books.
But it amazes me some ppl still think all this is about ppl upset the person they voted for lost.
......all this is way, way, way beyond winning and losing.....
Way, way beyond.
Way beyond.
When was the last time anything like this was talked about, hinted at? Bush vs Gore? Even then it was just about some possible issues with the votes in Fla.
Not trying to enact some rarely used parts of the the voting laws. Or politicians actually turning their back on their parties president elect.
This entire election has been one for the history books.
Already Torn
Banned
I get the impression that not only did you refuse to read the very post you replied to, but that you still don't seem to understand why the electoral college exists.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Yep, more than 2.5+ million more people voted for Hillary. They did speak; we aren't going to listen.
At this point I'm hoping for secret defectors to Clinton just like the hidden surge Trump vote. No one said anything until it came time to vote and bam. There it is.
chaosblade
Unconfirmed Member
If it went to the House, only 31 Republicans would need to support an alternative Republican candidate and the Democrats could make up the rest to form a majority. So even if 87% of the Republicans were too spineless to select someone else, a different person could still be selected.
Assuming a simple majority is required, I actually don't remember what kind of majority is needed.
Trump only had support from the fridge of the party, and the desperate. Much of the GOP establishment has stood against him and refused to endorse him. It's not a stretch for them to refuse him if given the opportunity.
New information is irrelevant. He's still incompetent and unqualified, and he is still surrounded by conflicts of interest. That alone is enough to stand against him, or get him impeached fairly quickly. This is exactly the sort of situation the electoral college was intended to protect us from.
If it went to the House, it'd be based on State Constituencies, not majority vote. So it'd be a vote of 50 (one vote per state), not 435. State Constituencies are all of the House Members of each state choose (by popular vote of those House members) who they're voting for. It's a complex system by design.
Now the Senate would choose the VP via a simple majority vote, but that would obviously be Pence since everybody in the GOP loves Pence and the GOP controls the Senate.
BUT I want to emphasize that going against Trump now at this stage by the GOP would cause an INSANE INSANE INSANE backlash against them for decades to come.
The Chosen One
Member
I'd like to see about 7-8 electors flip to get Trump under 300 EC votes, so it creates enough stir and helps educate more people about how our election process actually works.
And of course the side benefit would be seeing Trump have another Twitter Tantrum.
Too many people tune out of politics after Nov. election day. Trump will still be President but it would be nice to have more people learn about how election process and stay engaged.
And of course the side benefit would be seeing Trump have another Twitter Tantrum.
Too many people tune out of politics after Nov. election day. Trump will still be President but it would be nice to have more people learn about how election process and stay engaged.
Rich Uncle Skeleton
Member
To the electoral college! The cause of, and solution to, all of America's problems!
titiklabingapat
Member
The people have spoken and Hillary Clinton is the winner by a few million votes.
Oh wait.
clinton good at getting votes that do not matter. She had more votes than obama too.
Why is it always the same people who say "Trump won, get over it" also say "The electoral college potentially doing what it is constitutionally allowed to do would start full blown war"?
Hmmmmm
Certainly couldn't be an effort to fear those uppity blacks and liberals into letting Republicans run all over our rights and accept THEM stealing the election via Putin. Nope. Not at all.
All but one, yes. The other was from Texas, and has already announced he's going to be faithless.
Still a small win IMO, anything to make people question the EC.
Oh and this one is PRECIOUS.
The same constitution that allows the EC to override the ACTUAL voice of the people, the popular vote, is the same constitution that allows that same EC to be faithless.
Can we PLEASE stop with the fucking lies? The electoral college is the voice of the representative republic, not the voice of the people. We do not have a direct democracy, it's very far from that.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
Going to need more.
This is so true. It's not even "people have spoken" as Trump can't even claim a mandate for this election as he lost the actual popular votes by millions, the EC just undermines that.
This is so true. It's not even "people have spoken" as Trump can't even claim a mandate for this election as he lost the actual popular votes by millions, the EC just undermines that.
that just not true. many states have laws against this.
29 states in fact has laws against fatihless electors. In some state faithless votes are not valid.
Just like with the recount will make it harder to do recounts with new laws and voter ID law going up everywhere.
Faithless elector laws are only going to get tougher.
Play right into the GOP playbook. Take the bait hook, line and stinker.
Some states have already starting to put in place new voter ID laws just because of the election recounts.
Haha...no, those voter ID laws were going to be pushed no matter what.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
It sure would be fun though.
and the reason they are using is the recount and "voter fraud."
DontBeThatGuy
Member
Voter suppression has always been the reason. Nothing has changed.
The people has spoken and what they said was Clinton.
Completely unconstitutional laws, yes.
ITT: Republicans only started pushing strict voter ID laws because of Jill Stein in December of 2016.
SuperBanana
Banned
Yeah, no. Trump won when no other republican had a chance. He could take a steaming hot shit on every single one of them and they'd take it. America is fucked.
EatinOlives
Member
We're gonna get less than 5 faithless electors when all is said and done, it won't be a vote of non-confidence, it'll be all the more reason to make Trump and his supporters go ape-shit with conspiracy theories.
What I'm noticing more than "sending a message" is throngs of people mistakenly believing there's a real chance of this happening.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
1952, Ray v. Blair is the Case Law
The only thing I'm unaware of is how certain states cast their votes and what can be done about faithless electors on the 19th.
BUT judging from what I know about the system, its legacy, and the electors themselves, people hoping for a change are in for a rough Christmas.
None of those laws have been tested by the Supreme Court. None of them would survive such a test.
Not to say that there'll be enough defectors, of course, but hopefully we'll at least get a chance to knock those laws off the books for precedent's sake.
Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal*"
*except in matters of presidential elections
This isn't democracy, he lost the popular vote....
You all who think that 37-38 electors are going to flip really need to do your research on faithless electors in general and learn how rare they are.
Also Congress would just laugh it off and change it back anyway if it did happen. But they won't, because it won't be necessary.
The last faithless elector was an unknown vote in 2004 when an unknown elector voted for John Edwards instead of John Kerry in Minnesota.
EDIT: The United States of America is not a Democracy, but a Constitutional Representative Republic (obviously not as sexy or simple to say). Each individual state is a democracy sure, but as a country, we are not.
D
Deleted member 1235
Unconfirmed Member
this seems exactly like the fake news garbage that is everywhere these days, just wish shit into existence
Ray v. Blair is about whether states can force electors to sign a pledge. It doesn't cover what happens when the pledge is reneged upon. It was an issue never considered by the court.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
Interesting that you say unknown there. If they can vote anonymously, faithlessness increases.
They do, actually. The Electoral College was established to prevent people like Trump taking office.
They literally do. It's the point of the entire system.
Let's not forget that while the EC may be technically supposed to prevent Trump it is only tolerated these days because it has not gone against the vote.
The US is a representative democracy with a pretty shitty election system but that doesn't make it not a democracy. The original Greek democracy gave each class a number of representatives and the lower class (which was the most numerous) got the fewest.
The US is a representative democracy with a pretty shitty election system but that doesn't make it not a democracy. The original Greek democracy gave each class a number of representatives and the lower class (which was the most numerous) got the fewest.
Dead letter, no precedent on this scale, and it doesn't align with the electoral expectations. Electors are supposed to vote based on their state results. They barely register as people.
TheWasTheJoke
Member
Trump won by the rules that every candidate since Lincoln won on, he has more electoral college votes. Is that democratic? Depends on your point of view, should states vote's or individuals take precedance? In my view it should be the latter but nonetheless the situation it is what it is and infinitely more fair than any alternative. Who else is there, a career Republican hated by both sides? Fucking Hillary?
You have to take a long term view. America right now has a democracy, a flawed one, but pretty good nonetheless. If the electoral college betrayed the people, it wouldn't only be signing its own death warrant, but also that of the nation. Riots would happen, Democrats would be stigmatised for a generation, the constitution would be overhauled by the GOP and a far worse system be put in to satisfy their perverse agenda.
Which politician is better is ultimately subjective. It may seem clear the Dems are better, but remember, we can never prove it. Imagine in 20 years, another pivotal election, except this time the Dem candidate is Satan to half the country. What happens then when good is betrayed?
We must work through the system. Trust must be built. Dems need to give up this futile endeavour and work on showing they are the party of the people and not the elite.
This isn't helping.
You have to take a long term view. America right now has a democracy, a flawed one, but pretty good nonetheless. If the electoral college betrayed the people, it wouldn't only be signing its own death warrant, but also that of the nation. Riots would happen, Democrats would be stigmatised for a generation, the constitution would be overhauled by the GOP and a far worse system be put in to satisfy their perverse agenda.
Which politician is better is ultimately subjective. It may seem clear the Dems are better, but remember, we can never prove it. Imagine in 20 years, another pivotal election, except this time the Dem candidate is Satan to half the country. What happens then when good is betrayed?
We must work through the system. Trust must be built. Dems need to give up this futile endeavour and work on showing they are the party of the people and not the elite.
This isn't helping.
This appeal to "The Founders' Wisdom" is already so tired. Why privilege what a couple dudes intended their system to be over the thousands and thousands of people who rejected that vision in the hundreds of years since?
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Would this be your point of view if the president-elect campaigned mostly on scapegoating people who looked like you?
Because that's the American Way. Appeals to the founders and the sanctity of the constitution are very American.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked