How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

[rightwinger]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

The popular vote is meaningless

Johnson would have to actually win states to get their electoral votes and Hillary has about a hundred electoral vote buffer over 270

No third party candidate has actually won a state since George Wallace almost 50 years ago

Why would a Republican House select a third party candidate over a Republican?

Because Trump is a Republican in the same way you're a 'rightwinger'.

What makes you think I'm not Rightwinger?

I was named after my maternal grandfather "Rightwinger McGee" he was a left handed pitcher in the Chicago White Sox organization in the 1930s

 

[Preacher]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

Wonder how they would rewrite this now? GOP seems pretty damn unified,DNC is in tatters Bernie folks are saying never Hillary so third party is going to hurt Clinton more since between the Green and Libertarian party almost 40% of Sanders folks say they are casting their votes for them and not Hillary

 

[dblack]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

Wonder how they would rewrite this now? GOP seems pretty damn unified,DNC is in tatters Bernie folks are saying never Hillary so third party is going to hurt Clinton more since between the Green and Libertarian party almost 40% of Sanders folks say they are casting their votes for them and not Hillary

GOP unified??

 

[Preacher]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

Wonder how they would rewrite this now? GOP seems pretty damn unified,DNC is in tatters Bernie folks are saying never Hillary so third party is going to hurt Clinton more since between the Green and Libertarian party almost 40% of Sanders folks say they are casting their votes for them and not Hillary

GOP unified??

Those that don't like trump either didn't show up or got put in their place. Did you see any delegates marching against trump? Booing trump? I sure didn't

 

[dblack]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

Wonder how they would rewrite this now? GOP seems pretty damn unified,DNC is in tatters Bernie folks are saying never Hillary so third party is going to hurt Clinton more since between the Green and Libertarian party almost 40% of Sanders folks say they are casting their votes for them and not Hillary

GOP unified??

Those that don't like trump either didn't show up or got put in their place. Did you see any delegates marching against trump? Booing trump? I sure didn't

I did. I saw plenty of dissension in the ranks. Trump can't get more than 30% of the popular vote.

 

[Preacher]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

Wonder how they would rewrite this now? GOP seems pretty damn unified,DNC is in tatters Bernie folks are saying never Hillary so third party is going to hurt Clinton more since between the Green and Libertarian party almost 40% of Sanders folks say they are casting their votes for them and not Hillary

GOP unified??

Those that don't like trump either didn't show up or got put in their place. Did you see any delegates marching against trump? Booing trump? I sure didn't

I did. I saw plenty of dissension in the ranks. Trump can't get more than 30% of the popular vote.

Funny I watched the entire convention and didn't see any dissension care to fill us in? Even cruz's own delegates were pissed at him for his stunt

 

[owebo]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

The popular vote is meaningless

Johnson would have to actually win states to get their electoral votes and Hillary has about a hundred electoral vote buffer over 270

No third party candidate has actually won a state since George Wallace almost 50 years ago

Why would a Republican House select a third party candidate over a Republican?

Is there a Republican in the race this year? So far all I've seen is two Democrats and a Libertarian.

There's no GOP'er....sadness on you...

See, this moron is the perfect example of why the DNC was right to oppose Sanders, and why we need to get rid of the primary system. This moron freely admits that Trump is not a Republican, and that as a Trump supporter he is openly hostile to the Republican party. Moron child thinks its funny to throw eggs at people's houses. That is what our politics have come down to. It's time to put these children to bed.

You GOP'ers just need to fuck off...you lost....

 

[Syriusly]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

While I wouldn't want the election to be decided by the House- I don't see how following the Constitution would be a 'crisis'.

 

[Syriusly]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

Wonder how they would rewrite this now? GOP seems pretty damn unified,DNC is in tatters Bernie folks are saying never Hillary so third party is going to hurt Clinton more since between the Green and Libertarian party almost 40% of Sanders folks say they are casting their votes for them and not Hillary

LOL- GOP 'unified'?

The GOP second finisher refused to endorse the GOP candidate. Still lots of Conservatives and Evangelicals still saying never Donald.

And Donald still has huge negative ratings- across the board.

And he is still your great white hope.

 

[Preacher]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

Wonder how they would rewrite this now? GOP seems pretty damn unified,DNC is in tatters Bernie folks are saying never Hillary so third party is going to hurt Clinton more since between the Green and Libertarian party almost 40% of Sanders folks say they are casting their votes for them and not Hillary

LOL- GOP 'unified'?

The GOP second finisher refused to endorse the GOP candidate. Still lots of Conservatives and Evangelicals still saying never Donald.

And Donald still has huge negative ratings- across the board.

And he is still your great white hope.

And yet our nominee allowed Cruz to bang himself which he did in spectacular fashion! What social cons and evangelicals? If that was a problem it was solved with pence as vp and if you had noticed one of the other threads have trumps likability and unfavorable ratings go up and down respectively

 

[dblack]

How deliciously ironic that an article written to rally the partisan troops lays out a roadmap for how we can, finally, break their stranglehold on power:

How a Third-Party Candidate Could Cause an Electoral Crisis

Imagine this scenario. As expected, Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, and Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. However, disaffected Republicans run a third-party candidate. In the presidential election Clinton wins a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (A third-party candidate would likely hurt Trump more than Clinton.) Clinton likewise wins a plurality but not a majority of votes in the Electoral College. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives then selects the president, with each state delegation possessing one vote. In this scenario the House of Representatives is the same heavily Republican body that now sits. The third party candidate, who finished second or even third in the popular vote, becomes president of the United States. Imagine the uproar, hopefully not a violent one, that would ensue such a subversion of the popular will.

While I wouldn't want the election to be decided by the House- I don't see how following the Constitution would be a 'crisis'.

Oh, I agree. The 'crisis' estimation was the opinion of the author of the article.