patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,252,061 comments by 14,932 users - Blue, Patrick online now
invite responseComments 1 - 7 of 7 Search these comments
HydroCabron
2016 May 4, 7:33pm
No.
About as likely as aliens landing on the White House lawn, or Kim Kardashian breaking Nolan Ryan's strikeout record.
Patrick
2016 May 4, 7:51pm
it is at least theoretically possible, and this election has already gotten so weird that i would not be surprised if the electoral college just picks someone who isn't even on the ballot.
Go figure? 150 million people vote and then only about 200 democrat and about 200 republican electoral college people elect the president.
Now 48 states have winner-take-all state laws for awarding electoral votes, 2 have district winner laws. Neither method is mentioned in the U.S. Constitution..
There have been 22,991 electoral votes cast since presidential elections became competitive (in 1796), and only 17 have been cast in a deviant way, for someone other than the candidate nominated by the elector's own political party (one clear faithless elector, 15 grand-standing votes, and one accidental vote). 1796 remains the only instance when the elector might have thought, at the time he voted, that his vote might affect the national outcome.
The electors are and will be dedicated party activist supporters of the winning party’s candidate who meet briefly in mid-December to cast their totally predictable rubberstamped votes in accordance with their pre-announced pledges.
The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld state laws guaranteeing faithful voting by presidential electors (because the states have plenary power over presidential electors).
If Trump won states with 270 electoral votes, there is no reason to think that the Electoral College would prevent Trump from being elected President of the United States
The National Popular Vote bill is 61% of the way to guaranteeing the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country.
Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps of pre-determined outcomes. There would no longer be a handful of 'battleground' states (where the two major political parties happen to have similar levels of support among voters) where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 38+ predictable states that have just been 'spectators' and ignored after the conventions.
The National Popular Vote bill would take effect when enacted by states with a majority of the electoral votes—270 of 538.
All of the presidential electors from the enacting states will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC)—thereby guaranteeing that candidate with an Electoral College majority.
The bill has passed 34 state legislative chambers in 23 rural, small, medium, large, red, blue, and purple states with 261 electoral votes. The bill has been enacted by 11 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes – 61% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.
Dan8267
2016 May 5, 9:58am
The electoral college was a bad idea from the start and it's only more ridiculous today. The founding fathers got everything wrong about elections, and got most things wrong in the structure of the government.
EastCoastBubbleBoy
2016 May 5, 8:23pm
dedicated party activist supporters of the winning party’s candidate
... that's just it. A portion of the party (either D or R) is not fully behind (Trump / Sanders / Clinton) as of yet
Is it likely.. NO. Could it happen... YES.
Will it happen this year - who the heck knows - but in this strange election cycle who knows what might go down between now and the inauguration?
Unless I'm mistaken (and I may be), when we vote for November, we are actually voting for a representative elector, and it is this gathering of the electoral college that choose the president and vice president. Further in many states these electors need not cast their vote for the party nominee.
So would it be possible, that Trump (or Clinton or Sanders) win the requisite 270 electoral votes in November... only to see said electors cast a different vote when they meet in mid-December?
Just wondering.