OK, I need help on this

[tyroneweaver]

It's back to the drawing board for me! I thought each State's Electoral College HAD to vote according to the State's popular vote. Now I see some are suing to change the process. I guess I need a primer reset on the EC all over again.


Judge orders Colorado electors to vote for Hillary Clinton

Always funny when the left tries to do what they preach against.
Irony here is when the gop candidate could gain the left can always find a left leaning judge..

Judge? What about the people who sued to change the Constitutional direction for the EC you so stridently defend when it opposes the popular vote? You see no irony there? Of course not!

Thinking Error:Hopover

 

[gipper]

I remember Hitlery saying she was "HORRIFIED" that Trump wouldn't unconditionally accept the election results if "SHE" won.

Now look at the dems. The hypocrisy is mind numbing. They are truly, the SHIT PILE of America.

Why did you have to turn a sincere question into a RW rant? Hillary conceded on election night, Stein started the recounts and you just gotta keep turning 1/2 this country into demons to make yourself look good. What is so lacking in your life that you have to do this?

Apparently you didn't know that Cankles supported Jill's recount effort.

Get informed before posting...PLEASE.

Hillary Clinton’s Team to Join Wisconsin Recount Pushed by Jill Stein
By DAVID E. SANGERNOV. 26, 2016

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

Where is my thank you???????

Thank you, gipper!

Well look at that.

Thank YOU, bullwinkle.

 

[owebo]

It's back to the drawing board for me! I thought each State's Electoral College HAD to vote according to the State's popular vote. Now I see some are suing to change the process. I guess I need a primer reset on the EC all over again.


Judge orders Colorado electors to vote for Hillary Clinton

Always funny when the left tries to do what they preach against.
Irony here is when the gop candidate could gain the left can always find a left leaning judge..

Judge? What about the people who sued to change the Constitutional direction for the EC you so stridently defend when it opposes the popular vote? You see no irony there? Of course not!

Heavy flow day snowflake?

 

[gipper]

I remember Hitlery saying she was "HORRIFIED" that Trump wouldn't unconditionally accept the election results if "SHE" won.

Now look at the dems. The hypocrisy is mind numbing. They are truly, the SHIT PILE of America.

Why did you have to turn a sincere question into a RW rant? Hillary conceded on election night, Stein started the recounts and you just gotta keep turning 1/2 this country into demons to make yourself look good. What is so lacking in your life that you have to do this?

Apparently you didn't know that Cankles supported Jill's recount effort.

Get informed before posting...PLEASE.

Hillary Clinton’s Team to Join Wisconsin Recount Pushed by Jill Stein
By DAVID E. SANGERNOV. 26, 2016

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

Gipper, FYI I have been against the recount from the gitgo. I do believe we should take another look at the EC, as care4all has suggested, for more clarity on the process and how to handle the popular vote, since the popular vote has lost the office twice in this century. But not post-election. This election is done, over, ended, final. The Clinton team that joined the recount expects no changes either, but the data could be of use in future clarification. The team has accepted the results as they now stand.

"Mr. Elias suggested in his essay that the Clinton campaign was joining the recount effort with little expectation that it would change the result. But many of the campaign’s supporters, picking up on its frequent complaints of Russian interference in the election, have enthusiastically backed Ms. Stein’s efforts, putting pressure on the Clinton team to show that it is exploring all options."

OT, sort of: How do you feel about the investigation into Russian influence? Do you want to know, or do you accept Trump's word on denying the claims of 17 government agencies about Russian hacking and influence?

I do think we should find out if Russia influenced our election. However, I have little faith in our government or media actually doing the right thing.

 

[tyroneweaver]

I remember Hitlery saying she was "HORRIFIED" that Trump wouldn't unconditionally accept the election results if "SHE" won.

Now look at the dems. The hypocrisy is mind numbing. They are truly, the SHIT PILE of America.

Why did you have to turn a sincere question into a RW rant? Hillary conceded on election night, Stein started the recounts and you just gotta keep turning 1/2 this country into demons to make yourself look good. What is so lacking in your life that you have to do this?

Apparently you didn't know that Cankles supported Jill's recount effort.

Get informed before posting...PLEASE.

Hillary Clinton’s Team to Join Wisconsin Recount Pushed by Jill Stein
By DAVID E. SANGERNOV. 26, 2016

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

Gipper, FYI I have been against the recount from the gitgo. I do believe we should take another look at the EC, as care4all has suggested, for more clarity on the process and how to handle the popular vote, since the popular vote has lost the office twice in this century. But not post-election. This election is done, over, ended, final. The Clinton team that joined the recount expects no changes either, but the data could be of use in future clarification. The team has accepted the results as they now stand.

"Mr. Elias suggested in his essay that the Clinton campaign was joining the recount effort with little expectation that it would change the result. But many of the campaign’s supporters, picking up on its frequent complaints of Russian interference in the election, have enthusiastically backed Ms. Stein’s efforts, putting pressure on the Clinton team to show that it is exploring all options."

OT, sort of: How do you feel about the investigation into Russian influence? Do you want to know, or do you accept Trump's word on denying the claims of 17 government agencies about Russian hacking and influence?

I do think we should find out if Russia influenced our election. However, I have little faith in our government or media actually doing the right thing.

I'll make a deal. I'll let you investigate Russian influence if you let me investigate the Clinton Foundation.

 

[kaz]

I thought Hillary won Colorado. Maybe I'm wrong. But I'm pretty sure she did win it. The rules re different from state to state but usually the electoral college is chosen by the party that wins the state's popular votes. The party usually won't pick someone that is wishy-washy on the subject. Not really brain surgery here. Seems like a waste of time and Hillary lost anyway.

Yes, they are typically activists and they pledge to support the winning candidate. If they don't, their involvement in the party is typically over

 

[kaz]

It's back to the drawing board for me! I thought each State's Electoral College HAD to vote according to the State's popular vote. Now I see some are suing to change the process. I guess I need a primer reset on the EC all over again.


Judge orders Colorado electors to vote for Hillary Clinton

No, each state electors do not HAVE to vote for the candidate that won the popular vote in the State....

Only 28 states have written laws to STOP the electors from choosing the President...

the other State electors are unbound....at least as far as penalties the states have issued like a fine if they vote for someone other than what their State dictates.

My State of Maine, and Nebraska, have our electors set up as the FOUNDERS intended and also as electors were for our Nation in the first 4 Presidential elections...

Each elector given to each state for each congressmen that they have, vote in the manner that supports their own congressional district...states get 1 elector for each congressional voting district, and all states get 2 electors, representing their 2 Senators which is what gives the small states more power and favors the small states, because a small state has the exact same power as the large state who also only gets 2 electors to represent their senators.

Basically, the problem with the electoral college now, BECAUSE States have manipulated it and changed it from our founders day and intent, have set up WINNER TAKES ALL electors, and THAT is what is WRONG.....electors should vote individually...if the district they represent voted for Hillary, then their vote should go to Hillary, if the district the elector represents voted for Donald Trump, then their vote goes to Donald, THEN whomever won the State's Popular vote, gets the vote of the 2 extra electors the State gets to represent their Senators.

this way, voters in the election won't feel shafted and disenfranchised...it's also how democrats do their delegates in the Primary, winner does not take all delegates, each candidate gets the delegates they won, proportionally in the citizen vote.

Anyway, I want the electoral college, they just should go back to each elector voting for who their citizens wanted...

In my state of Maine, we have 2 congressional voting districts....yes, we are a low populated state...

one district's popular vote went to Trump, and the other district's popular vote went to Clinton.

So clinton got one elector, and Trump got one elector,

Clinton won the popular vote overall in the State

So she got the 2 extra electors representing two US senators
-----------------------------------------

Now, back to this in Colorado
electors are suppose to vote for who they feel and think and know, would be the best President for the NATION...the popular vote is suppose help the electors in their choice, but ultimately, when the electors vote on the 19th, the founders wanted them to be able to vote, individually, their conscience.

The founding fathers wrote that it's up to the State. I've repeatedly asked you to back up your claim that they did not intend that, and you continue to parrot your strawman and repeat the lie.

You're pathetic. Again, back it up. I've asked you to do that at least a half dozen times. How do you know what they think if you have zero documentation to back it up and I'm thinking you weren't there?

 

[hadit]

It's back to the drawing board for me! I thought each State's Electoral College HAD to vote according to the State's popular vote. Now I see some are suing to change the process. I guess I need a primer reset on the EC all over again.


Judge orders Colorado electors to vote for Hillary Clinton

No, each state electors do not HAVE to vote for the candidate that won the popular vote in the State....

Only 28 states have written laws to STOP the electors from choosing the President...

the other State electors are unbound....at least as far as penalties the states have issued like a fine if they vote for someone other than what their State dictates.

My State of Maine, and Nebraska, have our electors set up as the FOUNDERS intended and also as electors were for our Nation in the first 4 Presidential elections...

Each elector given to each state for each congressmen that they have, vote in the manner that supports their own congressional district...states get 1 elector for each congressional voting district, and all states get 2 electors, representing their 2 Senators which is what gives the small states more power and favors the small states, because a small state has the exact same power as the large state who also only gets 2 electors to represent their senators.

Basically, the problem with the electoral college now, BECAUSE States have manipulated it and changed it from our founders day and intent, have set up WINNER TAKES ALL electors, and THAT is what is WRONG.....electors should vote individually...if the district they represent voted for Hillary, then their vote should go to Hillary, if the district the elector represents voted for Donald Trump, then their vote goes to Donald, THEN whomever won the State's Popular vote, gets the vote of the 2 extra electors the State gets to represent their Senators.

this way, voters in the election won't feel shafted and disenfranchised...it's also how democrats do their delegates in the Primary, winner does not take all delegates, each candidate gets the delegates they won, proportionally in the citizen vote.

Anyway, I want the electoral college, they just should go back to each elector voting for who their citizens wanted...

In my state of Maine, we have 2 congressional voting districts....yes, we are a low populated state...

one district's popular vote went to Trump, and the other district's popular vote went to Clinton.

So clinton got one elector, and Trump got one elector,

Clinton won the popular vote overall in the State

So she got the 2 extra electors representing two US senators
-----------------------------------------

Now, back to this in Colorado
electors are suppose to vote for who they feel and think and know, would be the best President for the NATION...the popular vote is suppose help the electors in their choice, but ultimately, when the electors vote on the 19th, the founders wanted them to be able to vote, individually, their conscience.

Good explanation of how it should work.

 

[bullwinkle]

I remember Hitlery saying she was "HORRIFIED" that Trump wouldn't unconditionally accept the election results if "SHE" won.

Now look at the dems. The hypocrisy is mind numbing. They are truly, the SHIT PILE of America.

Why did you have to turn a sincere question into a RW rant? Hillary conceded on election night, Stein started the recounts and you just gotta keep turning 1/2 this country into demons to make yourself look good. What is so lacking in your life that you have to do this?

Apparently you didn't know that Cankles supported Jill's recount effort.

Get informed before posting...PLEASE.

Hillary Clinton’s Team to Join Wisconsin Recount Pushed by Jill Stein
By DAVID E. SANGERNOV. 26, 2016

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

Gipper, FYI I have been against the recount from the gitgo. I do believe we should take another look at the EC, as care4all has suggested, for more clarity on the process and how to handle the popular vote, since the popular vote has lost the office twice in this century. But not post-election. This election is done, over, ended, final. The Clinton team that joined the recount expects no changes either, but the data could be of use in future clarification. The team has accepted the results as they now stand.

"Mr. Elias suggested in his essay that the Clinton campaign was joining the recount effort with little expectation that it would change the result. But many of the campaign’s supporters, picking up on its frequent complaints of Russian interference in the election, have enthusiastically backed Ms. Stein’s efforts, putting pressure on the Clinton team to show that it is exploring all options."

OT, sort of: How do you feel about the investigation into Russian influence? Do you want to know, or do you accept Trump's word on denying the claims of 17 government agencies about Russian hacking and influence?

I do think we should find out if Russia influenced our election. However, I have little faith in our government or media actually doing the right thing.

I'll make a deal. I'll let you investigate Russian influence if you let me investigate the Clinton Foundation.

Tyrone, I'll take that deal in a New York Minute. Note: definition of a New York Minute is the time that lapses between the traffic light turning green and the car behind you honking it's horn.

Anyway, your acceptance of Trump's monumental conflicts of interest as President/Hotelier/TV anchor as OK kinda dilutes the effect of your 'outrage' at the unproven pay-to-play accusation against Clinton. However, I'm pretty sure you've worked out an scenario you can find acceptable for Trump.

 

[gipper]

Why did you have to turn a sincere question into a RW rant? Hillary conceded on election night, Stein started the recounts and you just gotta keep turning 1/2 this country into demons to make yourself look good. What is so lacking in your life that you have to do this?

Apparently you didn't know that Cankles supported Jill's recount effort.

Get informed before posting...PLEASE.

Hillary Clinton’s Team to Join Wisconsin Recount Pushed by Jill Stein
By DAVID E. SANGERNOV. 26, 2016

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

Gipper, FYI I have been against the recount from the gitgo. I do believe we should take another look at the EC, as care4all has suggested, for more clarity on the process and how to handle the popular vote, since the popular vote has lost the office twice in this century. But not post-election. This election is done, over, ended, final. The Clinton team that joined the recount expects no changes either, but the data could be of use in future clarification. The team has accepted the results as they now stand.

"Mr. Elias suggested in his essay that the Clinton campaign was joining the recount effort with little expectation that it would change the result. But many of the campaign’s supporters, picking up on its frequent complaints of Russian interference in the election, have enthusiastically backed Ms. Stein’s efforts, putting pressure on the Clinton team to show that it is exploring all options."

OT, sort of: How do you feel about the investigation into Russian influence? Do you want to know, or do you accept Trump's word on denying the claims of 17 government agencies about Russian hacking and influence?

I do think we should find out if Russia influenced our election. However, I have little faith in our government or media actually doing the right thing.

I'll make a deal. I'll let you investigate Russian influence if you let me investigate the Clinton Foundation.

Tyrone, I'll take that deal in a New York Minute. Note: definition of a New York Minute is the time that lapses between the traffic light turning green and the car behind you honking it's horn.

Anyway, your acceptance of Trump's monumental conflicts of interest as President/Hotelier/TV anchor as OK kinda dilutes the effect of your 'outrage' at the unproven pay-to-play accusation against Clinton. However, I'm pretty sure you've worked out an scenario you can find acceptable for Trump.

Conflicts of interest...now that is a novel concept. If only it were equally applied to Big Ears and Cankles.

 

[Care4all]

It's back to the drawing board for me! I thought each State's Electoral College HAD to vote according to the State's popular vote. Now I see some are suing to change the process. I guess I need a primer reset on the EC all over again.


Judge orders Colorado electors to vote for Hillary Clinton

No, each state electors do not HAVE to vote for the candidate that won the popular vote in the State....

Only 28 states have written laws to STOP the electors from choosing the President...

the other State electors are unbound....at least as far as penalties the states have issued like a fine if they vote for someone other than what their State dictates.

My State of Maine, and Nebraska, have our electors set up as the FOUNDERS intended and also as electors were for our Nation in the first 4 Presidential elections...

Each elector given to each state for each congressmen that they have, vote in the manner that supports their own congressional district...states get 1 elector for each congressional voting district, and all states get 2 electors, representing their 2 Senators which is what gives the small states more power and favors the small states, because a small state has the exact same power as the large state who also only gets 2 electors to represent their senators.

Basically, the problem with the electoral college now, BECAUSE States have manipulated it and changed it from our founders day and intent, have set up WINNER TAKES ALL electors, and THAT is what is WRONG.....electors should vote individually...if the district they represent voted for Hillary, then their vote should go to Hillary, if the district the elector represents voted for Donald Trump, then their vote goes to Donald, THEN whomever won the State's Popular vote, gets the vote of the 2 extra electors the State gets to represent their Senators.

this way, voters in the election won't feel shafted and disenfranchised...it's also how democrats do their delegates in the Primary, winner does not take all delegates, each candidate gets the delegates they won, proportionally in the citizen vote.

Anyway, I want the electoral college, they just should go back to each elector voting for who their citizens wanted...

In my state of Maine, we have 2 congressional voting districts....yes, we are a low populated state...

one district's popular vote went to Trump, and the other district's popular vote went to Clinton.

So clinton got one elector, and Trump got one elector,

Clinton won the popular vote overall in the State

So she got the 2 extra electors representing two US senators
-----------------------------------------

Now, back to this in Colorado
electors are suppose to vote for who they feel and think and know, would be the best President for the NATION...the popular vote is suppose help the electors in their choice, but ultimately, when the electors vote on the 19th, the founders wanted them to be able to vote, individually, their conscience.

The founding fathers wrote that it's up to the State. I've repeatedly asked you to back up your claim that they did not intend that, and you continue to parrot your strawman and repeat the lie.

You're pathetic. Again, back it up. I've asked you to do that at least a half dozen times. How do you know what they think if you have zero documentation to back it up and I'm thinking you weren't there?

you need to back up that they did not want the electors to vote their conscience....

the founders were sooooo upset that the States after 4 presidents, decided to change it to a winner takes all electors in a state....that they seriously contemplated making a constitutional amendment to what they wrote in to the constitution because the States began doing the exact opposite of their intent with creating electors instead of just allowing the House and the Senate choose the President..

The WHOLE PURPOSE the founders even created electors to replace each state congressmen and each states's us senators was because they felt that if we left it up to the congressmen and senators to vote, the congressmen would COLLUDE with each other and vote in blocks, and coerce the congress critters within their state to vote for the same candidate in order to secure their political party's power....the founders DID NOT WANT THIS to happen, so they created electors, to represent each congress critter's district, and they created two electors to represent each state's senators, who were suppose to be individuals who were the smartest and the brightest in their regions....who DID NOT HOLD a position in the government... so that they could NOT be influenced by the political parties...to vote for just their "Party Candidate"...

Electors, the founders thought, would put a WALL between the citizens/electors and the Political Parties, and would choose who the best person to run our Nation was going to be without political party influence.

If YOU can show that this was NOT our founders intent, then by all means, please explain how the electoral process was created and why....

to support your contention.

 

[bullwinkle]

Apparently you didn't know that Cankles supported Jill's recount effort.

Get informed before posting...PLEASE.

Hillary Clinton’s Team to Join Wisconsin Recount Pushed by Jill Stein
By DAVID E. SANGERNOV. 26, 2016

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

Gipper, FYI I have been against the recount from the gitgo. I do believe we should take another look at the EC, as care4all has suggested, for more clarity on the process and how to handle the popular vote, since the popular vote has lost the office twice in this century. But not post-election. This election is done, over, ended, final. The Clinton team that joined the recount expects no changes either, but the data could be of use in future clarification. The team has accepted the results as they now stand.

"Mr. Elias suggested in his essay that the Clinton campaign was joining the recount effort with little expectation that it would change the result. But many of the campaign’s supporters, picking up on its frequent complaints of Russian interference in the election, have enthusiastically backed Ms. Stein’s efforts, putting pressure on the Clinton team to show that it is exploring all options."

OT, sort of: How do you feel about the investigation into Russian influence? Do you want to know, or do you accept Trump's word on denying the claims of 17 government agencies about Russian hacking and influence?

I do think we should find out if Russia influenced our election. However, I have little faith in our government or media actually doing the right thing.

I'll make a deal. I'll let you investigate Russian influence if you let me investigate the Clinton Foundation.

Tyrone, I'll take that deal in a New York Minute. Note: definition of a New York Minute is the time that lapses between the traffic light turning green and the car behind you honking it's horn.

Anyway, your acceptance of Trump's monumental conflicts of interest as President/Hotelier/TV anchor as OK kinda dilutes the effect of your 'outrage' at the unproven pay-to-play accusation against Clinton. However, I'm pretty sure you've worked out an scenario you can find acceptable for Trump.

Conflicts of interest...now that is a novel concept. If only it were equally applied to Big Ears and Cankles.

I'm all eyes. Key your thoughts about Big Ears and Cankles' action of conflict.There must be more reason than campaign speeches and rumor for a person like you to believe it. I'll thank you for it!

 

[gipper]

Why did you have to turn a sincere question into a RW rant? Hillary conceded on election night, Stein started the recounts and you just gotta keep turning 1/2 this country into demons to make yourself look good. What is so lacking in your life that you have to do this?

Apparently you didn't know that Cankles supported Jill's recount effort.

Get informed before posting...PLEASE.

Hillary Clinton’s Team to Join Wisconsin Recount Pushed by Jill Stein
By DAVID E. SANGERNOV. 26, 2016

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

Gipper, FYI I have been against the recount from the gitgo. I do believe we should take another look at the EC, as care4all has suggested, for more clarity on the process and how to handle the popular vote, since the popular vote has lost the office twice in this century. But not post-election. This election is done, over, ended, final. The Clinton team that joined the recount expects no changes either, but the data could be of use in future clarification. The team has accepted the results as they now stand.

"Mr. Elias suggested in his essay that the Clinton campaign was joining the recount effort with little expectation that it would change the result. But many of the campaign’s supporters, picking up on its frequent complaints of Russian interference in the election, have enthusiastically backed Ms. Stein’s efforts, putting pressure on the Clinton team to show that it is exploring all options."

OT, sort of: How do you feel about the investigation into Russian influence? Do you want to know, or do you accept Trump's word on denying the claims of 17 government agencies about Russian hacking and influence?

I do think we should find out if Russia influenced our election. However, I have little faith in our government or media actually doing the right thing.

I'll make a deal. I'll let you investigate Russian influence if you let me investigate the Clinton Foundation.

Tyrone, I'll take that deal in a New York Minute. Note: definition of a New York Minute is the time that lapses between the traffic light turning green and the car behind you honking it's horn.

Anyway, your acceptance of Trump's monumental conflicts of interest as President/Hotelier/TV anchor as OK kinda dilutes the effect of your 'outrage' at the unproven pay-to-play accusation against Clinton. However, I'm pretty sure you've worked out an scenario you can find acceptable for Trump.

Every first world nation is involved in hacking. Did you know the Pentagon is cyber attacked 100,000 times a day? Seems to me if there was any honesty and fairness in our central government and MSM, Hillary would be in jail by now.

Ex-Pentagon chief: Iran, China or Russia may have gotten to Clinton server
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates says he believes foreign countries like Russia, China and Iran may have hacked the private email server Hillary Clinton used while secretary of State.

“Given the fact that the Pentagon acknowledges that they get attacked about 100,000 times a day, I think the odds are pretty high,” he said Thursday during an interview on “The Hugh Hewitt Show.”

Gates said he agreed with former acting CIA Director Mike Morell’s claim that the server had probably been hacked by either Russia, China or Iran.
Ex-Pentagon chief: Iran, China or Russia may have gotten to Clinton server

 

[kaz]

It's back to the drawing board for me! I thought each State's Electoral College HAD to vote according to the State's popular vote. Now I see some are suing to change the process. I guess I need a primer reset on the EC all over again.


Judge orders Colorado electors to vote for Hillary Clinton

No, each state electors do not HAVE to vote for the candidate that won the popular vote in the State....

Only 28 states have written laws to STOP the electors from choosing the President...

the other State electors are unbound....at least as far as penalties the states have issued like a fine if they vote for someone other than what their State dictates.

My State of Maine, and Nebraska, have our electors set up as the FOUNDERS intended and also as electors were for our Nation in the first 4 Presidential elections...

Each elector given to each state for each congressmen that they have, vote in the manner that supports their own congressional district...states get 1 elector for each congressional voting district, and all states get 2 electors, representing their 2 Senators which is what gives the small states more power and favors the small states, because a small state has the exact same power as the large state who also only gets 2 electors to represent their senators.

Basically, the problem with the electoral college now, BECAUSE States have manipulated it and changed it from our founders day and intent, have set up WINNER TAKES ALL electors, and THAT is what is WRONG.....electors should vote individually...if the district they represent voted for Hillary, then their vote should go to Hillary, if the district the elector represents voted for Donald Trump, then their vote goes to Donald, THEN whomever won the State's Popular vote, gets the vote of the 2 extra electors the State gets to represent their Senators.

this way, voters in the election won't feel shafted and disenfranchised...it's also how democrats do their delegates in the Primary, winner does not take all delegates, each candidate gets the delegates they won, proportionally in the citizen vote.

Anyway, I want the electoral college, they just should go back to each elector voting for who their citizens wanted...

In my state of Maine, we have 2 congressional voting districts....yes, we are a low populated state...

one district's popular vote went to Trump, and the other district's popular vote went to Clinton.

So clinton got one elector, and Trump got one elector,

Clinton won the popular vote overall in the State

So she got the 2 extra electors representing two US senators
-----------------------------------------

Now, back to this in Colorado
electors are suppose to vote for who they feel and think and know, would be the best President for the NATION...the popular vote is suppose help the electors in their choice, but ultimately, when the electors vote on the 19th, the founders wanted them to be able to vote, individually, their conscience.

The founding fathers wrote that it's up to the State. I've repeatedly asked you to back up your claim that they did not intend that, and you continue to parrot your strawman and repeat the lie.

You're pathetic. Again, back it up. I've asked you to do that at least a half dozen times. How do you know what they think if you have zero documentation to back it up and I'm thinking you weren't there?

you need to back up that they did not want the electors to vote their conscience....

the founders were sooooo upset that the States after 4 presidents, decided to change it to a winner takes all electors in a state....that they seriously contemplated making a constitutional amendment to what they wrote in to the constitution because the States began doing the exact opposite of their intent with creating electors instead of just allowing the House and the Senate choose the President..

The WHOLE PURPOSE the founders even created electors to replace each state congressmen and each states's us senators was because they felt that if we left it up to the congressmen and senators to vote, the congressmen would COLLUDE with each other and vote in blocks, and coerce the congress critters within their state to vote for the same candidate in order to secure their political party's power....the founders DID NOT WANT THIS to happen, so they created electors, to represent each congress critter's district, and they created two electors to represent each state's senators, who were suppose to be individuals who were the smartest and the brightest in their regions....who DID NOT HOLD a position in the government... so that they could NOT be influenced by the political parties...to vote for just their "Party Candidate"...

Electors, the founders thought, would put a WALL between the citizens/electors and the Political Parties, and would choose who the best person to run our Nation was going to be without political party influence.

If YOU can show that this was NOT our founders intent, then by all means, please explain how the electoral process was created and why....

to support your contention.

I'm not asking you to make up more shit, I'm asking you to back it up. All you've provided so far is a link to what I already said, the Founders left it up to the States. You make up more and more stories. Links? Not so much, just the one that supported what I told you

 

[percysunshine]

It's back to the drawing board for me! I thought each State's Electoral College HAD to vote according to the State's popular vote. Now I see some are suing to change the process. I guess I need a primer reset on the EC all over again.


Judge orders Colorado electors to vote for Hillary Clinton

Each state is different. It is up to the individual states, determined by laws passed in state legislatures and by state Constitutions, as to how to proportion electors. Some are all in, some are proportional. Penalties and proceedures for electors not following state law vary.

All things considered, it is a good system. The alternative of having California and New York always selecting the President is beyond pale....

 

[ChrisL]

I think you are going to have accept that Donald Trump is the new POTUS and move on.

 

[BluesLegend]

If they left can't win under the current rules, then they change the rules. And as soon as this works against them they change the rules back. The nuclear option for example. They will wail like a stuck pig if the GOP now uses that rule change against the Dem's.

 

[bullwinkle]

Apparently you didn't know that Cankles supported Jill's recount effort.

Get informed before posting...PLEASE.

Hillary Clinton’s Team to Join Wisconsin Recount Pushed by Jill Stein
By DAVID E. SANGERNOV. 26, 2016

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

Gipper, FYI I have been against the recount from the gitgo. I do believe we should take another look at the EC, as care4all has suggested, for more clarity on the process and how to handle the popular vote, since the popular vote has lost the office twice in this century. But not post-election. This election is done, over, ended, final. The Clinton team that joined the recount expects no changes either, but the data could be of use in future clarification. The team has accepted the results as they now stand.

"Mr. Elias suggested in his essay that the Clinton campaign was joining the recount effort with little expectation that it would change the result. But many of the campaign’s supporters, picking up on its frequent complaints of Russian interference in the election, have enthusiastically backed Ms. Stein’s efforts, putting pressure on the Clinton team to show that it is exploring all options."

OT, sort of: How do you feel about the investigation into Russian influence? Do you want to know, or do you accept Trump's word on denying the claims of 17 government agencies about Russian hacking and influence?

I do think we should find out if Russia influenced our election. However, I have little faith in our government or media actually doing the right thing.

I'll make a deal. I'll let you investigate Russian influence if you let me investigate the Clinton Foundation.

Tyrone, I'll take that deal in a New York Minute. Note: definition of a New York Minute is the time that lapses between the traffic light turning green and the car behind you honking it's horn.

Anyway, your acceptance of Trump's monumental conflicts of interest as President/Hotelier/TV anchor as OK kinda dilutes the effect of your 'outrage' at the unproven pay-to-play accusation against Clinton. However, I'm pretty sure you've worked out an scenario you can find acceptable for Trump.

Every first world nation is involved in hacking. Did you know the Pentagon is cyber attacked 100,000 times a day? Seems to me if there was any honesty and fairness in our central government and MSM, Hillary would be in jail by now.

Ex-Pentagon chief: Iran, China or Russia may have gotten to Clinton server
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates says he believes foreign countries like Russia, China and Iran may have hacked the private email server Hillary Clinton used while secretary of State.

“Given the fact that the Pentagon acknowledges that they get attacked about 100,000 times a day, I think the odds are pretty high,” he said Thursday during an interview on “The Hugh Hewitt Show.”

Gates said he agreed with former acting CIA Director Mike Morell’s claim that the server had probably been hacked by either Russia, China or Iran.
Ex-Pentagon chief: Iran, China or Russia may have gotten to Clinton server

Y'know, gipper, according to your link it seems like Hillary's chances of getting hacked were about 100,000 times greater when she used the State Dept server than when she used a private one. But again, I have to point out that so far all the proof we have is what educated people think the odds are. I certainly respect Gates very much, and trust his judgement, but he is wise enough to put a caveat on his opinion. Notice he is quoted as saying "may have" and the article author says "probably". This is why Comey cannot act. And this is why I will not definitively deny the charge. And I intend to use the same kind of judgement with Trump too even though I think he looks shady and more corrupt than you-know-who.

Thank you for a cogent argument.

 

[Contumacious]

It's back to the drawing board for me! I thought each State's Electoral College HAD to vote according to the State's popular vote. Now I see some are suing to change the process. I guess I need a primer reset on the EC all over again.


Judge orders Colorado electors to vote for Hillary Clinton

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/11/allan-stevo/electoral-college-can-stolen/
The Electoral College Can Be Stolen, But It Won't

A public servant in America will not successfully betray such a trusted confidence as the Electoral College, and get away with it.

Maybe one or two electors defect and no one bats an eye.

If more defected, enough to change the outcome of the election, a protest from the right would almost certainly take place. It wouldn’t be about crying on YouTube or knocking over garbage cans

No. Nothing like that. No one will see the protest coming from the right when the right stands up. The faithless electors in that situation won’t survive through Christmas. That’s how protests on the right really look.

.

 

[koshergrl]

It's back to the drawing board for me! I thought each State's Electoral College HAD to vote according to the State's popular vote. Now I see some are suing to change the process. I guess I need a primer reset on the EC all over again.


Judge orders Colorado electors to vote for Hillary Clinton

Don't mind them, they're just the criminal leftists agitating to overthrow our government.

They are conveniently located in our biggest cities, so when we go to war, we just have to wipe out those rat holes and we're golden.