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

Like I always say, I would favor all states being able to split their electorate as well.
 
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.

What about the moderates? The people who believe in science, live and let live, basic human decency, but also care about the budget, secure borders, and gun rights. The Republican party has basically abandoned them. They don't have a voice.

If it were based on the popular vote the Republicans would be forced to tone down their more extreme positions and actually have some positive contributions to the country, which is how it should be.
 
Won't happen... if it did Trump should be hung from a rope... and choke slowly.

And I'm curious what the Trump fans think of a dictator like move of replacing electors?

h3Uz6hJ.jpg
 
What about the moderates? The people who believe in science, live and let live, basic human decency, but also care about the budget, secure borders, and gun rights. The Republican party has basically abandoned them. They don't have a voice.

If it were based on the popular vote the Republicans would be forced to tone down their more exteme positions.
True, but thats more a criticism of the 2 party system, isn't it?
 
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?

{<BJPeen}

Not going to happen.
 
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?
There are some states that require their electors to go with the popular vote. I don't know which ones, but since you made the thread, how many of those 37 are in those states? Any?
 
True, but thats more a criticism of the 2 party system, isn't it?

We are multiple decades away from a third party having any sway. I think it's insane that the Republican party has not had to legislate for the past decade and going by popular vote would fix that.

The Republican party has to fearmonger every election about Democrats and socialism. The issue is they aren't coming up with any moderate or conservative solutions of their own to fix the problems facing the country. There should be multiple solutions. Not just solutions from one side that half the country thinks is too extreme. If they had to win the popular vote that would change very quickly.
 
But not for lack of trying, it must be said. To me, even if he doesn't succeed, that the possibility should exist in the first place is a ginormous issue.
Wasn’t a problem four years ago.
 
Won't happen, but lol at posters saying they’d “take it to the streets” if it did.

If everyone(on both sides)who claimed they were going to, "take it to the streets" actually did so, the streets would look like Woodstock;)
 
delete--wrong thread.
 
Last edited:
Not Woodstock, Altamont.

Yeah, that was my homage to the classic scene in Buffy the Vampire Slayer where Spike takes the piss out of a Vampire who claims to be so old, he attended the Crucifixion.

Spike, "You were there? Oh, please! If every Vampire who claimed to be at the Crucifixion was actually there, it would have been like Woodstock. I was actually at Woodstock. That was a weird gig; I fed off a flower person, and spent the next six hours watching my hand move...":)
 
Yeah, that was my homage to the classic scene in Buffy the Vampire Slayer where Spike takes the piss out of a Vampire who claims to be so old, he attended the Crucifixion.

Spike, "You were there? Oh, please! If every Vampire who claimed to be at the Crucifixion was actually there, it would have been like Woodstock. I was actually at Woodstock. That was a weird gig; I fed off a flower person, and spent the next six hours watching my hand move...":)
I didn't watch that much Buffy so I missed the reference. I was thinking more about the chaos and violence comparison.

Edit: I had also forgotten about the old joke about "if everyone who says they were at Woodstock were actually there..."
 
Each State gets one vote and more States are controlled by Republicans, buddy.


Went and read about, it and im quite confused now.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top