Trump is 37 “faithless electors” away from re-election

[CubicleGangster]

Well, except for that pesky electoral college of course.

Read your post wrong and thought you were complaining about CA having too many EC votes.
My bad, bud.

 

[My Spot]

 

[Rational Poster]

No thanks to California deciding every election.

Sounds like a loser's argument.

 

[Seano]

Sounds like a loser's argument.

It was my exact argument when Trump won the electorate and when Biden does the same, douche.

 

[Rational Poster]

It was my exact argument when Trump won the electorate and when Biden does the same, douche.

Sounds more like you're admitting that your favored policies are not favored by the majority.

 

[Swing]

The electors should vote the way that the American people are accustomed to them voting. I don't like the electoral college, but the time to change the rules isn't right after the American people have cast their ballots. Changes that influence how a president is decided should be made clear well in advance of an election taking place.

 

[Falsedawn]

I wonder how people will feel when the population is such that all the population centers monopolize electoral votes and all the sparsely populated states are left with 2.

Because as more people cluster in cities, that's exactly what's going to happen. I wonder how much people will love the Electoral College then.

 

[Rod1]

Isnt the president picked by the House if nobody gets 270 votes?

 

[oldshadow]

They should be required to vote as their state voted.

 

[ultramanhyata]

No thanks to California deciding every election.

It's called the United States for a reason. A citizen is a citizen is a citizen. The birthplace lottery doesn't change that.

One nation. Indivisible.

Take your Balkanizing rhetoric and stick it where the sun don't shine.

 

[Officer Rick]

No thanks to California deciding every election.

if its based on popular vote ... whats your issue? Republicans vote republican and Democrats vote democrat and popular vote wins

you act like crossing the state line into California changes someone magically into the opposing party or something


I lived in NY for decades
still voted republican (mostly)
now i live in FL
Still vote republican (mostly)
I dont like Trump so i vote against him
and if the republicans put up a better person in 2024 than the democrats i will vote republican in 2024

 

[Hadron90]

if its based on popular vote ... whats your issue? Republicans vote republican and Democrats vote democrat and popular vote wins

you act like crossing the state line into California changes someone magically into the opposing party or something


I lived in NY for decades
still voted republican (mostly)
now i live in FL
Still vote republican (mostly)
I dont like Trump so i vote against him
and if the republicans put up a better person in 2024 than the democrats i will vote republican in 2024

No.

 

[Officer Rick]

No.

explain yourself

 

[Seano]

It's called the United States for a reason. A citizen is a citizen is a citizen. The birthplace lottery doesn't change that.

One nation. Indivisible.

Take your Balkanizing rhetoric and stick it where the sun don't shine.

Geography absolutely makes a difference in your path in life, don't be retarded.

Electorates give us all a voice, not just the geographical majority having all the say.

 

[Seano]

if its based on popular vote ... whats your issue? Republicans vote republican and Democrats vote democrat and popular vote wins

you act like crossing the state line into California changes someone magically into the opposing party or something


I lived in NY for decades
still voted republican (mostly)
now i live in FL
Still vote republican (mostly)
I dont like Trump so i vote against him
and if the republicans put up a better person in 2024 than the democrats i will vote republican in 2024

Thats just not how we do it and the only reason you want it like that is because California puts your team over the top by a wide margin. You'd be making the exact opposite argument if the roles were reversed.

 

[woodguyatl]

So with Fox, the AP, and other sources now calling Georgia and Arizona for Biden, Biden is poised garner what Trump should have won in the Electoral Collage 4 years ago—306. Trump however wound up with only 304 electoral votes. Hillary did worse as she had 5 electors vote for other candidates. If 37 Biden electors just vote for someone else, say Bernie, that would reduce Biden to 269 in the EC and give Trump a win in the house by state delegations.

Should electors be allowed to vote their hearts and disregard the popular vote? A billionaire is on the ballot—could any Biden electors be swayed by some vague promises of cash or prizes?

Typically, each party’s designated slate of electors is comprised of the most loyal elected officials and party activists. That is why defections are rare. My take is electors should be free to vote with either their state or the national popular vote.

What saeth the WR?

Regardless of what the WR says, SCOTUS ruled in June 2020 that states can remove faithless electors and/or force them to vote for the candidate who won the state.

 

[TUFNewb]

As I understand from what some constitutional lawyers have said the democratically selected electors don't just vanish. There would be essentially two groups of electors for congress to choose from. In the case where the houses are split not sure exactly what happenes the confusing electoral count act comes into play, but the senate is close to split itself and there would be a few decenting r votes (a few r senators have already acknowledged and congratulated Biden). Trump has no path here at all apparently. Thanks to math in the senate it makes highly unlikely scenario impossible.

 

[woodguyatl]

Isnt the president picked by the House if nobody gets 270 votes?

Yes, so Republicans will win.

 

[blaseblah]

Thats just not how we do it and the only reason you want it like that is because California puts your team over the top by a wide margin. You'd be making the exact opposite argument if the roles were reversed.

If the majority of the country doesn't like Republican policy, shouldn't they adjust their policies?

They would get a lot more votes if they dropped stuff like opposing gay marriage and polluting the environment.

 

[Seano]

If the majority of the country doesn't like Republican policy, shouldn't they adjust their policies?

They would get a lot more votes if they dropped stuff like opposing gay marriage and polluting the environment.

Because the minority is vast. We're talking 70 million people (assuming we're talking voters), who get no representation. The electorate gives the lesser a voice, even if the majority still carries the day.