Is this commercial by Hollywood considered “election interference”?

If trying to keep your tryst with a porn "actress" out of the news during a presidential campaign is considered election interference then this PSA should be also.
 
How the eff could it be looked at as election interference?

The Trump prosecutions have pushed far too many of you people over the proverbial cliffs.
They were trying to get the electors to go against the will of the people and disenfranchise the voters and their states, you fucking retarded shitlord from hell! Yes, that's election interference, you pinhead!
 


Asking Republican electors to vote against Trump. This is election interference, right?

This ad is asking Republicans to interfere in the election.

If this is NOT election interference….what is?


Stop embarrassing us all. Good gawd, get a lobotomy.

 


Asking Republican electors to vote against Trump. This is election interference, right?

This ad is asking Republicans to interfere in the election.

If this is NOT election interference….what is?

Just say they can go F themselves or each other.
 
They were trying to get the electors to go against the will of the people and disenfranchise the voters and their states, you fucking retarded shitlord from hell!
another imbecile.

 

Are there restrictions on who the electors can vote for?​

There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States. Some States, however, require electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges to political parties.

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 decided (in 2020) that States can enact requirements on how electors vote. No elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged. However, several electors were disqualified and replaced, and others fined, in 2016 for failing to vote as pledged.

It is rare for electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party's candidate. Electors generally hold a leadership position in their party or were chosen to recognize years of loyal service to the party. Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of electors have voted as pledged.

The National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) has compiled a brief summary of State laws about the various procedures, which vary from State to State, for selecting slates of potential electors and for conducting the meeting of the electors. You can download the document, "Summary: State Laws Regarding Presidential Electors ," from the NASS website .

 
They were trying to get the electors to go against the will of the people and disenfranchise the voters and their states, you fucking retarded shitlord from hell! Yes, that's election interference, you pinhead!
So you were on the side of Hilary Clinton in 2016?

Wow! Call Tucker Carlson!

"several electors were disqualified and replaced, and others fined, in 2016 for failing to vote as pledged"


A historic number of “faithless” electors -- seven in total--each cast their ballots on Monday for a candidate other than the one who won his or her state. What may be more surprising, given the level of protests against Donald Trump and the pressure exerted on Republican electors, is that a greater number were untrue to Hillary Clinton than to Mr. Trump.

Among the 538 electors chosen to represent their states in the Electoral College, five were faithless to the Democratic nominee and two to the Republican. Prior to this year, there hasn’t been more than one faithless elector in any presidential election since 1948.
 
They spent money to influence an election.

An election crime is generally a federal crime if:

  • The ballot includes one or more federal candidates
  • An election or polling place official abuses their office
  • The conduct involves false voter registration
  • The crime intentionally targets minority protected classes
  • The activity violates federal campaign finance laws
 
Last edited:


Asking Republican electors to vote against Trump. This is election interference, right?

This ad is asking Republicans to interfere in the election.

If this is NOT election interference….what is?



Who the hell knows anymore. The Democrats are constantly moving the goal posts.
 


Asking Republican electors to vote against Trump. This is election interference, right?

This ad is asking Republicans to interfere in the election.

If this is NOT election interference….what is?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Democrats for Nixon
Democrats for Reagan


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It's asking people to vote for the better choice just as has beend done for the last 50 years.
 

Forum List

Back
Top