Jump to content
Advertise With Us!
Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Cinnamon

My conspiracy theorist mind is doing f***ing back flips over this shit! ELECTORAL COLLEGE INFO

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

 Cinnamon    15,915

Summary: The electors can vote for ANYONE THEY WANT. It has to be 270 UNANIMOUS ELECTORAL VOTES. If they are not unanamous, then the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE (OVERWHELMINGLY CONTROLLED BY REPUBLICANS) choose from the TOP 3 VOTE GETTERS.  

My conspiracy theorist mind is doing f***ing back flips over this shit!  What if this whole thing is another globalist attempt to throw us into direct democracy by eliminating the Electoral College entirely?  Mob rule!  The founders believe that people in general were too emo to choose rationally, that's why they set up the system to have very few direct democratic ways to vote on anything. But, at that time, people were not corrupted by the entire system like they are now. This prospect is frightening to me! 

EDIT:Everyone has heard of the electoral college, well, I'm getting an education on this that never happened before. The Electoral College has been thrown into the spotlight like never before!  If the electoral college fails to elect Trump, you are going to have a shit ton MORE people screaming to get rid of it, NOT JUST THE LEFT!!!!!!!!!!!!

I attached this info below to 2 other posts I made today, it's THAT important to know what can happen and be ready for what might come and keep our heads if it does. 

Good luck fellow patriots! 

We see, then, that the plainest reading of the Twelfth Amendment is strongly supported by the clear intent of the Framers: the presidential electors have an absolute right to deliberate among themselves, setting aside external pressures, and to direct their electoral votes toward, as John Jay put it, “those men only who have become the most distinguished by their abilities and virtue, and in whom the people perceive just grounds for confidence” (“The Federalist,” No. 64). Indeed, this is more than a right: it is a grave and difficult duty.

Each and every elector, then, must search deep within his or her conscience and determine who ought to be the next president of the United States: the commander-in-chief of the world’s greatest military, chief executor of the world’s greatest body of laws, and chief defender of the world’s greatest Constitution. In this decision, the electors are bound by nothing—not the instructions of their state legislatures, not the will of the democratic mob. To make the electors subservient to someone else’s will, mere automata executing a decision already made, would betray the Founding Fathers, undermining the scheme of the Constitution and the presidency itself.

It is true that a number of states purport to bind electors in various ways. Many states demand that electors pledge to cast their electoral votes for a particular candidate and threaten fines for electors who “break” that putative pledge. However, these laws do not alter how votes cast by electors are counted (the Twelfth Amendment makes this clear), nor can these laws be used after-the-fact to punish electors, because—as originalist legal scholars have shown—they are uniformly unconstitutional. No sanction against a conscientious elector has ever survived court review, and such sanctions remain on the books only because they are completely unenforced.

Nor is there any risk that a conscientious elector will accidentally cause Hillary Clinton to be elected because of a “spoiler effect.” Unlike direct democratic votes in our system, the Electoral College requires an absolute majority of 270 electoral votes to win. It doesn’t just give the presidency to whoever has the most votes. If no candidate receives 270, then the House of Representatives—controlled overwhelmingly by Republicans—chooses the president from among the top three vote-getters. Regardless of how each elector acts, the next president will be a Republican.

The Responsibility Is Theirs Alone

So the decision falls to the electors. They are free to choose the next president. They cannot escape this awesome responsibility by appealing to the will of the people, nor by hiding behind a legally meaningless pledge to some state or party. Just as Clinton did not earn the White House by winning the popular vote, Trump did not earn the White House just because 306 Republican electors were chosen on November 8. Those electors now face a difficult choice. I do not envy them.

Each elector who feels that way has both the right and the duty to vote for somebody else.

If each of the 306 Republican electors truly believes, in his or her heart of hearts, that Trump is the best man for the job, that he is the American with the greatest “abilities and virtue, in whom the people perceive just grounds for confidence,” who has all “the qualities adapted to the station” of the presidency… in that case, by all means, they should cast their votes accordingly, and Trump will become, on December 19, president-elect of the United States.

But if there is doubt; if, after deliberation with fellow electors, it seems clear that there are Americans better suited to serve as commander-in-chief, then each elector who feels that way has both the right and the duty, as officers of the Constitution of the United States, to vote for somebody else.

That is the system our Constitution demands. It is not a theft. It is not an error. It is by design.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/11/15/electoral-college-didnt-steal-election-trump/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Cinnamon    15,915

Everyone has heard of the electoral college, well, I'm getting an education on this that never happened before. The Electoral College has been thrown into the spotlight like never before!  If the electoral college fails to elect Trump, you are going to have a shit ton MORE people screaming to get rid of it, NOT JUST THE LEFT!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 thoth    205

Hmm interesting perspective 

The electoral can vote the way they want 

going with the popular vote is just a way to keep the sheep quite

if they vote different this time than the sheep. 

The sheep just may hit the fan

hmmm

Edited by thoth
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Tarmalen    1,002

Won't happen in a landslide. (It was a landslide folks)

Now if it split at 269 then all hell would break lose regardless of the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Cinnamon    15,915
Just now, Tarmalen said:

Won't happen in a landslide. (It was a landslide folks)

Now if it split at 269 then all hell would break lose regardless of the outcome.

This is how they start a civil war. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Tarmalen    1,002

Well hell....I had a moment of clarity...

I'm now the old fuddy duddy that doesn't get hyped at every theory and instead posts to rain on someone's parade..

 

 

 

 

 

The days of youth spent in the library looking for clues about the Bermuda Triangle, long ago  now a bygone era.

 

How I shall miss thee!

 

:yah:

Edited by Tarmalen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Walk Softly    1,874

Current results have Hillary in the lead for the popular vote by 758,290 votes. 

Just fyi. 

 

Edited by Walk Softly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Cinnamon    15,915
4 minutes ago, Riccioli said:

"This first part of the process results in each Presidential candidate having their own unique slate of potential Electors."

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that Electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties' nominees. Some state laws provide that so-called "faithless Electors" may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No Elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Riccioli   
Riccioli
4 minutes ago, Walk Softly said:

Current results have Hillary in the lead for the popular vote by 758,290 votes. 

Just fyi. 

 

That was some edit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Cinnamon    15,915
Just now, Riccioli said:

That was some edit

And? He saw he screwed up and fixed it. And your post is misleading. It doesn't matter about the slated electorates. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up to our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  1. Jump To Top
×