The future of Electoral Voters

[Mac1958]

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

Your choice of words is a bit confusing, but...

Could you define what obligations you believe electors have?

Good grief. It's a simple and clear question.

I've learned here to ask twice and then give up.

Never mind.
.

You can't define what 'obligations' you believe the electors have?

Infer whatever you want. You chose to avoid my question, I feel no "obligation" to address yours.
.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The popular just proved that California, Chicago and New York are full of liberal nutcases, many probably illegal. The EC did exactly what it was supposed to do and didn't allow a majority in 3 main urban areas rule the rest of the country.

This doesn't help.
It would be better if candidates had to find support where they traditionally never had to before. This would, IMO, reduce the partisan divide. Trump did almost nothing on the west coast and Clinton did almost nothing in the western states and the south.

 

[Fang]

The popular just proved that California, Chicago and New York are full of liberal nutcases, many probably illegal. The EC did exactly what it was supposed to do and didn't allow a majority in 3 main urban areas rule the rest of the country.

Uh, dude, the cities are where PEOPLE ACTUALLY LIVE.

There's no reason why 500,000 sheep herders in Wyoming should have more influence than 6 million people in Chicago.

The EC is such that people in 3 main urban areas can't have more influence over coal minors in Ohio, steel workers (what's left if any) in PA, the middle class in Wisconsin and Michigan and retirees in Florida. All these groups have different needs than the 3 main urban areas. If enough of these states vote one way then the popular vote can be overridden. This form of government gives everybody a say, not just the cities with the most people.

The problem with Liberals is they can't see past today for the greater good of the country. For the past 8 years all we heard from Liberals was the Republican Party is dead. I always maintained that politics goes in cycles. Neither party will remain in power indefinitely. The Democrats may have won the popular vote today and lost the EC, but there will come a time when the reverse is true. Don't change the rules of a great system to fit your needs today, because the political environment will shift one day and you'll win with the current rules.

 

[imawhosure]

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

Your choice of words is a bit confusing, but...

Could you define what obligations you believe electors have?

Good grief. It's a simple and clear question.

I've learned here to ask twice and then give up.

Never mind.
.

You can't define what 'obligations' you believe the electors have?

Infer whatever you want. You chose to avoid my question, I feel no "obligation" to address yours.
.

OK, I will answer your question directly--------->

It is a very bad thing that the far leftists are doing. Why? Because it sets precedent to remove the election from the people, and move it to the federal government which the people are suppose to control.

The scenario reversed would be--------->we get the electors to ignore Hillary after she won, and put in Bernie.........who is far further left than Hillary, just less crooked.

Point is-------->it is congress job to control a President. The only reason we should worry about that happening is--------->congress did NOT control Obama when they had the tools to do it, and every citizen who knows anything was aware of it. The only reason Democrats should fear Trump is that if they believe the most powerful branch of government is the executive branch. It is NOT; or at least it wasn't until you people (not you Mac) starting cheering on Obama as he pooped all over the separation of powers to implement his agenda. We warned ALL of the LEFTISTS that this could happen if they didn't hold the Presidency. They LAUGHED! Hilly, 370 EC votes, remember. Now you want us to fix YOUR mess, as usual.

 

[Fang]

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

Your choice of words is a bit confusing, but...

Could you define what obligations you believe electors have?

Good grief. It's a simple and clear question.

I've learned here to ask twice and then give up.

Never mind.
.

You can't define what 'obligations' you believe the electors have?

Infer whatever you want. You chose to avoid my question, I feel no "obligation" to address yours.
.

OK, I will answer your question directly--------->

It is a very bad thing that the far leftists are doing. Why? Because it sets precedent to remove the election from the people, and move it to the federal government which the people are suppose to control.

The scenario reversed would be--------->we get the electors to ignore Hillary after she won, and put in Bernie.........who is far further left than Hillary, just less crooked.

Point is-------->it is congress job to control a President. The only reason we should worry about that happening is--------->congress did NOT control Obama when they had the tools to do it, and every citizen who knows anything was aware of it. The only reason Democrats should fear Trump is that if they believe the most powerful branch of government is the executive branch. It is NOT; or at least it wasn't until you people (not you Mac) starting cheering on Obama as he pooped all over the separation of powers to implement his agenda. We warned ALL of the LEFTISTS that this could happen if they didn't hold the Presidency. They LAUGHED! Hilly, 370 EC votes, remember. Now you want us to fix YOUR mess, as usual.

Good post. The nuclear option comes to mind.

 

[OldLady]

Since politics has devolved into little more than short term thinking, here's a question to ponder. Let's look down the road a bit.

First, let's assume that the EV system remains, so all those who to bring that up don't need to (although I'm sure they will).

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

And does anyone doubt that this "targeting" will include threats and intimidation and bribery?

The presidential election will only be prelude. The real battle would begin after that. A few dozen faceless EV's will have the power to control the destiny of 300+ million Americans.

Is this really what we want?
.

As long as we've got social media, the Electoral Voters will be getting threats and intimidation. That's happening to just about everyone in the news, including the parents of the kid who got into the gorilla's enclosure last summer. People are nuts, but no one has gotten hurt.
Bribery? That would take an inside track and probably happens more than we know about, but it won't happen just from having your name on the list of Electors.
You seem to be trying to magnify the issue out of all proportion, Mac, and that's not like you.

 

[Mac1958]

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

Your choice of words is a bit confusing, but...

Could you define what obligations you believe electors have?

Good grief. It's a simple and clear question.

I've learned here to ask twice and then give up.

Never mind.
.

You can't define what 'obligations' you believe the electors have?

Infer whatever you want. You chose to avoid my question, I feel no "obligation" to address yours.
.

OK, I will answer your question directly--------->

It is a very bad thing that the far leftists are doing. Why? Because it sets precedent to remove the election from the people, and move it to the federal government which the people are suppose to control.

The scenario reversed would be--------->we get the electors to ignore Hillary after she won, and put in Bernie.........who is far further left than Hillary, just less crooked.

Point is-------->it is congress job to control a President. The only reason we should worry about that happening is--------->congress did NOT control Obama when they had the tools to do it, and every citizen who knows anything was aware of it. The only reason Democrats should fear Trump is that if they believe the most powerful branch of government is the executive branch. It is NOT; or at least it wasn't until you people (not you Mac) starting cheering on Obama as he pooped all over the separation of powers to implement his agenda. We warned ALL of the LEFTISTS that this could happen if they didn't hold the Presidency. They LAUGHED! Hilly, 370 EC votes, remember. Now you want us to fix YOUR mess, as usual.

Yeah, that's my opinion as well.

Those who are challenging this can point to various perfectly reasonable rules that would support this strategy, but I have to wonder if they fully understand the can of worms they're opening, or if they're just so crazed by the outcome of the election that they're blind to it, and/or they don't care.

No way to know.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Since politics has devolved into little more than short term thinking, here's a question to ponder. Let's look down the road a bit.

First, let's assume that the EV system remains, so all those who to bring that up don't need to (although I'm sure they will).

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

And does anyone doubt that this "targeting" will include threats and intimidation and bribery?

The presidential election will only be prelude. The real battle would begin after that. A few dozen faceless EV's will have the power to control the destiny of 300+ million Americans.

Is this really what we want?
.

As long as we've got social media, the Electoral Voters will be getting threats and intimidation. That's happening to just about everyone in the news, including the parents of the kid who got into the gorilla's enclosure last summer. People are nuts, but no one has gotten hurt.
Bribery? That would take an inside track and probably happens more than we know about, but it won't happen just from having your name on the list of Electors.
You seem to be trying to magnify the issue out of all proportion, Mac, and that's not like you.

I'm really not trying to, I'm just looking down the road and considering the behaviors of both ends of the spectrum.

The best parallel I can draw is the way the Democrats handled filibusters and reconciliation: Okay, fine, do it, but one day you may regret it.

I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that, if EV's are really up for grabs, both ends of the spectrum would do whatever it took to get their vote - do you?
.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The popular just proved that California, Chicago and New York are full of liberal nutcases, many probably illegal. The EC did exactly what it was supposed to do and didn't allow a majority in 3 main urban areas rule the rest of the country.

Uh, dude, the cities are where PEOPLE ACTUALLY LIVE.

There's no reason why 500,000 sheep herders in Wyoming should have more influence than 6 million people in Chicago.

The EC is such that people in 3 main urban areas can't have more influence over coal minors in Ohio, steel workers (what's left if any) in PA, the middle class in Wisconsin and Michigan and retirees in Florida. All these groups have different needs than the 3 main urban areas. If enough of these states vote one way then the popular vote can be overridden. This form of government gives everybody a say, not just the cities with the most people.

The problem with Liberals is they can't see past today for the greater good of the country. For the past 8 years all we heard from Liberals was the Republican Party is dead. I always maintained that politics goes in cycles. Neither party will remain in power indefinitely. The Democrats may have won the popular vote today and lost the EC, but there will come a time when the reverse is true. Don't change the rules of a great system to fit your needs today, because the political environment will shift one day and you'll win with the current rules.

It's up to the candidates to gain influence not the states or regions to provide it. Each candidate has equal opportunity to gain influence wherever they need it. A vote in a lesser populated state should carry no more weight than a vote from a more densely populated state. A popular vote would require candidates on all sides to have a more populist and centrist position so as to appeal to the broadest possible block of America. The truth is there are more independent voters now than ever.

 

[OKTexas]

Since politics has devolved into little more than short term thinking, here's a question to ponder. Let's look down the road a bit.

First, let's assume that the EV system remains, so all those who to bring that up don't need to (although I'm sure they will).

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

And does anyone doubt that this "targeting" will include threats and intimidation and bribery?

The presidential election will only be prelude. The real battle would begin after that. A few dozen faceless EV's will have the power to control the destiny of 300+ million Americans.

Is this really what we want?
.

What you will see is the States passing more laws to bound electors, have systems in place to immediately replace anyone who takes it upon themselves to ignore the will of the State and implement severe punishment for those who do so. In short the States will protect themselves for outside influences.

 

[OKTexas]

It needs to go.

Ain't gonna happen.

 

[Mac1958]

Since politics has devolved into little more than short term thinking, here's a question to ponder. Let's look down the road a bit.

First, let's assume that the EV system remains, so all those who to bring that up don't need to (although I'm sure they will).

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

And does anyone doubt that this "targeting" will include threats and intimidation and bribery?

The presidential election will only be prelude. The real battle would begin after that. A few dozen faceless EV's will have the power to control the destiny of 300+ million Americans.

Is this really what we want?
.

What you will see is the States passing more laws to bound electors, have systems in place to immediately replace anyone who takes it upon themselves to ignore the will of the State and implement severe punishment for those who do so. In short the States will protect themselves for outside influences.

Good stuff. Seems like a relatively simple fix.
.

 

[OKTexas]

Since politics has devolved into little more than short term thinking, here's a question to ponder. Let's look down the road a bit.

First, let's assume that the EV system remains, so all those who to bring that up don't need to (although I'm sure they will).

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

And does anyone doubt that this "targeting" will include threats and intimidation and bribery?

The presidential election will only be prelude. The real battle would begin after that. A few dozen faceless EV's will have the power to control the destiny of 300+ million Americans.

Is this really what we want?
.

Doesn't work that way Mac. If the electors change votes on the 1st ballot and were to elect anyone else, the electoral college would then be challenged and the choice would then go to the house for President, and the Senate for Vice-President. It is the way it works.

As far as the EC, why would small(er) states go along with a change? They and their legislatures would be silly to do so. But, there is a movement from deep blue states to make it so no matter who wins their state, their electors vote en mass for the winner of the popular vote. The blue states can do this legally as they are in charge of their electors. I am of the opinion that if they do this, it will trigger the red states who have been balking about an article 5, to get on board; especially now that so many states are red. They are virtually at the threshold of being able to call, and execute anything they decide on, by themselves. (very close. very, very close) If that is what the far leftists want, then that is probably what they are going to get. They need be careful what they wish for. Just the simple clause they are fighting for most.....forced balanced budget......would put the Democrats in the trick bag.

Actually the States are not constitutionally given the option to ignore the will of their respective States. Their electors are chosen by the State, democracy ends at the State line.

 

[Russ Alllah Gehry]

Electoral Voters?

no such thing

 

[OldLady]

Since politics has devolved into little more than short term thinking, here's a question to ponder. Let's look down the road a bit.

First, let's assume that the EV system remains, so all those who to bring that up don't need to (although I'm sure they will).

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

And does anyone doubt that this "targeting" will include threats and intimidation and bribery?

The presidential election will only be prelude. The real battle would begin after that. A few dozen faceless EV's will have the power to control the destiny of 300+ million Americans.

Is this really what we want?
.

As long as we've got social media, the Electoral Voters will be getting threats and intimidation. That's happening to just about everyone in the news, including the parents of the kid who got into the gorilla's enclosure last summer. People are nuts, but no one has gotten hurt.
Bribery? That would take an inside track and probably happens more than we know about, but it won't happen just from having your name on the list of Electors.
You seem to be trying to magnify the issue out of all proportion, Mac, and that's not like you.

I'm really not trying to, I'm just looking down the road and considering the behaviors of both ends of the spectrum.

The best parallel I can draw is the way the Democrats handled filibusters and reconciliation: Okay, fine, do it, but one day you may regret it.

I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that, if EV's are really up for grabs, both ends of the spectrum would do whatever it took to get their vote - do you?
.

So dirty tricks condensed down and focused on these individuals, many of whom are free to choose who they vote for, will be intense? Worse than on the delegates sent to the party's convention to choose the candidate? I don't think the actual politicians/movers/shakers who run in those circles would do that. I think it's a lot of sensationalizing by the 24/7 news media who have nothing else to talk about--they are pulling people out of the woodwork to talk about it, getting more extreme flakes by the day to do so. It is mostly harmless hot air balloons such as us (no criticism intended) on USMB making the noise and it's harmless. So I guess in answer to your question, no.

 

[Fang]

The popular just proved that California, Chicago and New York are full of liberal nutcases, many probably illegal. The EC did exactly what it was supposed to do and didn't allow a majority in 3 main urban areas rule the rest of the country.

Uh, dude, the cities are where PEOPLE ACTUALLY LIVE.

There's no reason why 500,000 sheep herders in Wyoming should have more influence than 6 million people in Chicago.

The EC is such that people in 3 main urban areas can't have more influence over coal minors in Ohio, steel workers (what's left if any) in PA, the middle class in Wisconsin and Michigan and retirees in Florida. All these groups have different needs than the 3 main urban areas. If enough of these states vote one way then the popular vote can be overridden. This form of government gives everybody a say, not just the cities with the most people.

The problem with Liberals is they can't see past today for the greater good of the country. For the past 8 years all we heard from Liberals was the Republican Party is dead. I always maintained that politics goes in cycles. Neither party will remain in power indefinitely. The Democrats may have won the popular vote today and lost the EC, but there will come a time when the reverse is true. Don't change the rules of a great system to fit your needs today, because the political environment will shift one day and you'll win with the current rules.

It's up to the candidates to gain influence not the states or regions to provide it. Each candidate has equal opportunity to gain influence wherever they need it. A vote in a lesser populated state should carry no more weight than a vote from a more densely populated state. A popular vote would require candidates on all sides to have a more populist and centrist position so as to appeal to the broadest possible block of America. The truth is there are more independent voters now than ever.

It doesn't. California 55 electoral votes to Wyoming's 3. But if enough of those smaller states vote with Wyoming then the majority in California can be overwritten. It means California needs buy in from other parts of the country, or Wyoming needs other parts to vote with them. It makes total sense to ensure smaller states don't always get ignored and to make sure the needs are being met across the country and not just in one or two areas.

When you pull yourself way from the hurt of losing in November and look at it objectively it makes total sense. To keep yelling "but majority rules" is futile and shows a general ignorance for the system.

 

[OKTexas]

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

Your choice of words is a bit confusing, but...

Could you define what obligations you believe electors have?

The Constitution does that, they are to carry out the will of their respective States.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The popular just proved that California, Chicago and New York are full of liberal nutcases, many probably illegal. The EC did exactly what it was supposed to do and didn't allow a majority in 3 main urban areas rule the rest of the country.

Uh, dude, the cities are where PEOPLE ACTUALLY LIVE.

There's no reason why 500,000 sheep herders in Wyoming should have more influence than 6 million people in Chicago.

The EC is such that people in 3 main urban areas can't have more influence over coal minors in Ohio, steel workers (what's left if any) in PA, the middle class in Wisconsin and Michigan and retirees in Florida. All these groups have different needs than the 3 main urban areas. If enough of these states vote one way then the popular vote can be overridden. This form of government gives everybody a say, not just the cities with the most people.

The problem with Liberals is they can't see past today for the greater good of the country. For the past 8 years all we heard from Liberals was the Republican Party is dead. I always maintained that politics goes in cycles. Neither party will remain in power indefinitely. The Democrats may have won the popular vote today and lost the EC, but there will come a time when the reverse is true. Don't change the rules of a great system to fit your needs today, because the political environment will shift one day and you'll win with the current rules.

It's up to the candidates to gain influence not the states or regions to provide it. Each candidate has equal opportunity to gain influence wherever they need it. A vote in a lesser populated state should carry no more weight than a vote from a more densely populated state. A popular vote would require candidates on all sides to have a more populist and centrist position so as to appeal to the broadest possible block of America. The truth is there are more independent voters now than ever.

It doesn't. California 55 electoral votes to Wyoming's 3. But if enough of those smaller states vote with Wyoming then the majority in California can be overwritten. It means California needs buy in from other parts of the country, or Wyoming needs other parts to vote with them. It makes total sense to ensure smaller states don't always get ignored and to make sure the needs are being met across the country and not just in one or two areas.

When you pull yourself way from the hurt of losing in November and look at it objectively it makes total sense. To keep yelling "but majority rules" is futile and shows a general ignorance for the system.

I simply don't agree and I'm not hurt. I've gone out of my way in this thread to be non partisan.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

Your choice of words is a bit confusing, but...

Could you define what obligations you believe electors have?

The Constitution does that, they are to carry out the will of their respective States.

The problem is that not all states require them to vote as their state did. It needs to be addressed nation wide to preclude any post election foolery.

 

[Rustic]

Maybe they should have the electors vote according percentage of the states vote… Trump would've even won by more…