Today: Electoral College Trump Defector Writes Explanation In NYT

[anaconda]

Sounds like the founders intended the Electoral College to weed out popular winners if they didn't think they were qualified. Yet, if so, perhaps they should have weeded out every elected POTUS in modern history. Thoughts?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/o...-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html

 

[anaconda]

Also now an effort to challenge 29 states requiring binding to the elected candidate.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...mpromise-candidate-in-to-block-trump-n2255693

 

[Superfluous Man]

I hope this gains steam.

I don't see that happening. But it would be great.

I also like how the anti-Trump people can't decide if the electoral college is a good thing or a bad one.

 

[anaconda]

.............

 

[anaconda]

I hope this gains steam.

I don't see that happening. But it would be great.

I also like how the anti-Trump people can't decide if the electoral college is a good thing or a bad one.

Certainly this crap written by Mr. Suprun in the NYT about George W. Bush leading us through the aftermath of 9-11 and being a uniter rather than a divider is not terribly compelling. Especially to those that are not satisfied with the 9-11 investigation. And Mr. Suprun conveniently neglects to mention how the Electoral College, in the spirit of Madison and Hamilton, has failed to veto all of the endless parade of unacceptable presidential elects for the past 100 years or so.

 

[Son_of_Liberty90]

Also now an effort to challenge 29 states requiring binding to the elected candidate.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...mpromise-candidate-in-to-block-trump-n2255693

Really? Kasich? KASICH? The spineless wimp who talks to us all like 5 year olds? Who voted for John McCain?

**** that

 

[anaconda]

Did the founders contemplate whether electors might be one day be compromised?

 

[CPUd]

They are calling themselves the Hamilton Electors. I doubt they would find more than a handful of House members willing to vote across party lines and against Trump or Clinton, so pretty much guaranteed Trump would win that vote.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Sounds like the founders intended the Electoral College to weed out popular winners if they didn't think they were qualified. Yet, if so, perhaps they should have weeded out every elected POTUS in modern history. Thoughts?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/o...-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html

The guy is a Hamilton worshipping, neoconservative douchebag.

First of all, the timing is simply sour grapes. Has this guy been working his whole life to challenge States rights to determine how Electors vote, or did he just pull this out of his ass? It's like there are 30 seconds left in the Super Bowl, the winning team is taking a kneel to end the game, and someone jumps up to say "rule change, touchdowns are only 5 points, and field goals are 4, the other team wins".

Are they challenging "winner take all" laws in all States, or just the States where Trump won? There are probably some Electors in California and New York who would like to change their vote.

If this guy's hypothesis is that State laws are invalid, and Electors are all free agents, who chose him to be an Elector? Did he run a campaign to be selected? Did he tell everyone his positions? Was he vetted and elected? Why should he represent the State of Texas?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Also now an effort to challenge 29 states requiring binding to the elected candidate.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...mpromise-candidate-in-to-block-trump-n2255693

Does that include California and New York?

 

[Miss Annie]

Texas Rogue Electoral Delegate Chris Suprun Is Linked to far left Van Jones, Think Progress

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/12/busted-texas-rogue-electoral-delegate-chris-suprun-linked-van-jones-think-progress/

 

[UWDude]

Did the founders contemplate whether electors might be one day be compromised?

Electoral college should not have actual electors, IMHO. It should just be a tally. electors can be threatened or bribed or narcissists.

 

[Superfluous Man]

Did the founders contemplate whether electors might be one day be compromised?

I assume that that was their intention.

 

[anaconda]

I assume that that was their intention.

LOL

 

[otherone]

Sounds like the founders intended the Electoral College to weed out popular winners if they didn't think they were qualified. Yet, if so, perhaps they should have weeded out every elected POTUS in modern history. Thoughts?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/o...-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html

history fail.

 

[angelatc]

If this guy's hypothesis is that State laws are invalid, and Electors are all free agents, who chose him to be an Elector? Did he run a campaign to be selected? Did he tell everyone his positions? Was he vetted and elected? Why should he represent the State of Texas?

I wondered about that when I saw him upset about SNL.

 

[Son_of_Liberty90]

They are calling themselves the Hamilton Electors. I doubt they would find more than a handful of House members willing to vote across party lines and against Trump or Clinton, so pretty much guaranteed Trump would win that vote.

I'm sick of this Hamilton obsession. Ever since that stupid musical I've noticed an uptick in Hamilton worship. Yet Jefferson is demonized as a racist slaveholder.

 

[anaconda]

I'm sick of this Hamilton obsession. Ever since that stupid musical I've noticed an uptick in Hamilton worship. Yet Jefferson is demonized as a racist slaveholder.