Arizona's presidential electors being harassed, urged not to cast vote for Trump

[Richard-H]

According to the Constitution electors are free to vote their conscience.

Does that include threatening to kill them if they don't vote your way.

No, of course not. Silly question. How do you get that out of "According to the Constitution electors are free to vote their conscience."?

 

[jc456]

Trump is a narcissist, a pathological liar and a borderline sociopath. That should be enough to convince the electors not to vote for him.

no, this is funny and stupid.

What is really funny is that so many Trump supporters actually believe the things he said. They believe that he's some anti-establishment hero that will 'drain the swamp'.

Trump is a New York con man..he just sold you all the Brooklyn Bridge. He stands for NONE of the things he claimed to. He's as elitist as elitist gets.

I would be happy if congress impeached Trump. I may disagree with Pence's politics, but at least he's a psychologically stable and well meaning man.

well me personally, I'd like to see him take office ahead of someone asking for him to be impeached so there was some evidence of wrong doing. but today, all you got is more hate spewing.

I have no doubt that it will not be long before Trump commits an impeachable offense. I do not think he has the capability of acting within the law as President. He is used to dictatorial powers running his businesses - he seems to be combining the two already. The question will be whether congress has the political will to do so.

If he does get impeached, that'd be great.

yeah, I had eight years with that thought.

 

[Richard-H]

According to the Constitution electors are free to vote their conscience.

True, to a point...usually, political parties nominate electors at their state conventions. Sometimes that process occurs by a vote of the party’s central committee. The electors are usually state-elected officials, party leaders, or people with a strong affiliation with the Presidential candidates. While the Constitution nor Federal election laws compel electors to vote for their party’s candidate, twenty-seven states have laws on the books that require electors to vote for their party’s candidate if that candidate gets a majority of the state’s popular vote. In 24 states, no such laws apply, but common practice is for electors to vote for their party’s nominee.

Those state laws Constitutionality is highly questionable. According to the U.S. Constitution and clearly by the intention of the founding Fathers, electors are free to vote their conscience. That being said, they almost always vote for their party's candidate.

 

[hadit]

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

Not in Arizona, it wasn't.

 

[hadit]

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

Over 1.1 million votes ahead atm

If that mattered, we wouldn't be seeing the desperate attempts to overrule the will of the people in the states she lost.

 

[Richard-H]

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

Not in Arizona, it wasn't.

Your right, it was only the will of the sane people of Arizona.

 

[jc456]

According to the Constitution electors are free to vote their conscience.

that's why on election night they show the votes per person and call it based on the majority. here from wikipedia:

"All states except Maine and Nebraska have chosen electors on a "winner-take-all" basis since the 1880s.[5] Under the winner-take-all system, the state's electors are awarded to the candidate with the most votes in that state"

 

[jc456]

and he won 306 to 232, it's a great thingy!!!

 

[hadit]

According to the Constitution electors are free to vote their conscience.

True, to a point...usually, political parties nominate electors at their state conventions. Sometimes that process occurs by a vote of the party’s central committee. The electors are usually state-elected officials, party leaders, or people with a strong affiliation with the Presidential candidates. While the Constitution nor Federal election laws compel electors to vote for their party’s candidate, twenty-seven states have laws on the books that require electors to vote for their party’s candidate if that candidate gets a majority of the state’s popular vote. In 24 states, no such laws apply, but common practice is for electors to vote for their party’s nominee.

Those state laws Constitutionality is highly questionable. According to the U.S. Constitution and clearly by the intention of the founding Fathers, electors are free to vote their conscience. That being said, they almost always vote for their party's candidate.

Let's put a little logical thought into this whole thing. If electors set the precedent of ignoring the popular vote in their state(s), they would render the popular vote meaningless. After all, why vote when a handful of electors can completely disenfranchise your entire state? Then in a future election cycle, a democrat loses because of faithless electors and the whiny butts reverse themselves. Naturally, this is not being acknowledged by the whiny butts who are demanding such a thing happen this time.

 

[jc456]

According to the Constitution electors are free to vote their conscience.

True, to a point...usually, political parties nominate electors at their state conventions. Sometimes that process occurs by a vote of the party’s central committee. The electors are usually state-elected officials, party leaders, or people with a strong affiliation with the Presidential candidates. While the Constitution nor Federal election laws compel electors to vote for their party’s candidate, twenty-seven states have laws on the books that require electors to vote for their party’s candidate if that candidate gets a majority of the state’s popular vote. In 24 states, no such laws apply, but common practice is for electors to vote for their party’s nominee.

Those state laws Constitutionality is highly questionable. According to the U.S. Constitution and clearly by the intention of the founding Fathers, electors are free to vote their conscience. That being said, they almost always vote for their party's candidate.

ever hear they didn't?

 

[Richard-H]

According to the Constitution electors are free to vote their conscience.

True, to a point...usually, political parties nominate electors at their state conventions. Sometimes that process occurs by a vote of the party’s central committee. The electors are usually state-elected officials, party leaders, or people with a strong affiliation with the Presidential candidates. While the Constitution nor Federal election laws compel electors to vote for their party’s candidate, twenty-seven states have laws on the books that require electors to vote for their party’s candidate if that candidate gets a majority of the state’s popular vote. In 24 states, no such laws apply, but common practice is for electors to vote for their party’s nominee.

Those state laws Constitutionality is highly questionable. According to the U.S. Constitution and clearly by the intention of the founding Fathers, electors are free to vote their conscience. That being said, they almost always vote for their party's candidate.

ever hear they didn't?

I read someplace (you can google it yourself) that there have been about 140 who did not vote for their intended candidate, but half of those were because the candidate died between the time of the election and the time the electoral college met.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

The will of California anyway.

You're an idiot. More Americans voted for Clinton than Trump. If not for a 'loser wins' relic of an electoral system,
democracy would have prevailed.

 

[jc456]

According to the Constitution electors are free to vote their conscience.

True, to a point...usually, political parties nominate electors at their state conventions. Sometimes that process occurs by a vote of the party’s central committee. The electors are usually state-elected officials, party leaders, or people with a strong affiliation with the Presidential candidates. While the Constitution nor Federal election laws compel electors to vote for their party’s candidate, twenty-seven states have laws on the books that require electors to vote for their party’s candidate if that candidate gets a majority of the state’s popular vote. In 24 states, no such laws apply, but common practice is for electors to vote for their party’s nominee.

Those state laws Constitutionality is highly questionable. According to the U.S. Constitution and clearly by the intention of the founding Fathers, electors are free to vote their conscience. That being said, they almost always vote for their party's candidate.

ever hear they didn't?

I read someplace (you can google it yourself) that there have been about 140 who did not vote for their intended candidate, but half of those were because the candidate died between the time of the election and the time the electoral college met.

ok, funny.

 

[jc456]

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

The will of California anyway.

You're an idiot. More Americans voted for Clinton than Trump. If not for a 'loser wins' relic of an electoral system,
democracy would have prevailed.

she lost 306 to 232, what is it you aren't seeing?

 

[Rustic]

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

Crazys

 

[jc456]

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

and yet the will went to trump 306 to 232. how did that happen?

 

[Rustic]

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

Over 1.1 million votes ahead atm

This is not a shit eating democracy, most people learn that this is a republic in grade school… Dip shit

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I thought you muppets liked the idea of the electors, and not the voters,

electing the President.

The majority of voters in AZ chose Trump.

What don't you understand about that ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

No, it wasn't.

And there is no case to be made there.

If this were a popular vote, people might behave differently.

I am sure there are many on both sides in sure states like Nebraska (where there were no close down ballot elections) who simply stayed home knowing it would be fine. I am sure there are folks in CA who did the same.

 

[easyt65]

p.

It's fitting that Democrats are urging those in / with power to ignore the will of the people

The will of the People was to elect Hillary Clinton.

The will of California anyway.

You're an idiot. More Americans voted for Clinton than Trump. If not for a 'loser wins' relic of an electoral system,
democracy would have prevailed.

A sore LOSER keeps quoting a Popular vote that was bloated and skewed by 3 million illegal votes snd that doesn't count for shit, ignoring the official Electoral College win by Trump.