Skip to comments.3 GOP Electoral College members say they may not vote for Republican ticket of Romney/Ryan
Posted on 09/13/2012 10:03:08 PM PDT by JerseyanExile
At least three Republican electors say they may not support their partys presidential ticket when the Electoral College meets in December to formally elect the next president, escalating tensions within the GOP and adding a fresh layer of intrigue to the final weeks of the White House race.
The electors all supporters of former GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul told The Associated Press they are exploring options should Mitt Romney win their states. They expressed frustration at how Republican leaders have worked to suppress Pauls conservative movement and his legion of loyal supporters.
Theyve never given Ron Paul a fair shot, and Im disgusted with that. Id like to show them how disgusted I am, said Melinda Wadsley, an Iowa mother of three who was selected as a Republican elector earlier this year. She said Paul is the better choice and noted that the Electoral College was founded with the idea that electors wouldnt just mimic the popular vote.
The defection of multiple electors would be unprecedented in the last 116 years of U.S. politics. It also would raise the remote possibility that the country could even end up with a president and vice president from different parties.
Because so-called faithless electors are rare, the position of elector is largely viewed as symbolic. Each party chooses people to serve as electors in the 50 states, and electors from the winning party convene in each state capital in December to officially select the president and vice president.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The clown from Iowa has been replaced. Funny how nakedly Fascist the Paul bots are. “Screw what the voters say, I am voting for who I want”.
There is NO Ron Paul conservative movement, Ron Paul is not a conservative.
The Ron Paul cult is nothing but liberals who have no friends.
Really an empty grandstand play. Even if the election was close enough for this to matter, all it would do is throw it to the GOP controlled US House.
The Iowa Paul-bot is gone, and the Texas guy needs to be removed quickly. I will NOT let Ron Paul-tards give Obama another four years
Throw their goatsmellin’ ‘RAT asses back across the aisle with their ‘RAT comrades. Now is no time for moronic and childish antics. We have an election to win. America cannot afford four more years of Soetoro.
PaulBots are agents of Code Pink.
True, but neither is Romney.
Ron Paul has an uncanny ability to attract some outhouse rat crazy folk around him.
With the state things are, the only thing that matters is that Romney isn’t Obama.
Sometimes your only choices are the bad choice, and the even worse choice, Romney is the bad choice.
We must work to get Republican members of the Electoral College from Blue and Swing States to vote against Obama even if their states vote for Obama.
That would just add ammo to the claim that the Republicans stole the election if Romney wins. And they’ll be crying that from every rooftop.
R-U-N Paul a conservative? Not! He is, however, a joke!
great..that means they elect obama and the next few supremes are left wing ..
They are just angling for pay offs.
how do you plan that?
Limited Constitutional Government? Can’t get more Conservative than that.
If the outcome is really close, a Paul supporter could vote for Obama instead of Paul. But if Romney wins by just a few votes, expect the Democrats to try to bribe or blackmail Republican electors into switching their votes.
Ron Paul people are Occupy Wall Street people who know the Constitution.
I can't write what I'd like to do to these Ron Paul people if they throw the election to Obama.
Give them to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Tell the hood they made the movie.
What does that even mean? Paul had the same shot in the primaries as everyone else.
Let me propose one. Tar and feathering.
They should be tarred and feathered.
That would be entirely appropriate, considering that the person they follow has, on Iranian TV, apologized for terrorist bombers and has condemned Israel for operating what amounts to concentration camps. If Paul is right, then they have nothing to worry about.
You need to study the Electoral College and how its members are selected.
It’s certainly not unprecedented.
A Nixon elector voted for the libertarian ticket in 1972.
I suppose what is meant is that the faithless elector voted for the opponent rather than a 3rd choice?
In 1892, North Dakota cast one vote for Weaver-Field (49.0% popular), one vote for Harrison-Reid (48.5%), and one vote for Cleveland-Stevenson (0%). I don’t know what the law was at the time — whether that was one faithless elector or two.
I will never respect Ron Paul until he comes out and tells his supporters, “I won’t defeat Obama. You need to support the person who can.” He can put a stop to this, and if he doesn’t he is just a grandstanding attention whore.
the republicans need to unite behind one candidate. romney is not perfect, but we need to get behind him.
IIRC, it only goes to the House if the electors don't have a majority for any one candidate.
I stand by my statement.
Certainly not a Ron Paul supporter or booster but just gotta love it seeing the Romneybots get their panties all in a bunch over such nonsensical BS as this article. They’re such a riot.
That is their right as Electors. In fact, that is part of the reason for the Electoral College.
Fortunately, they CAN be replaced.
The founders despised pure democracy because it inevitably leads to dictatorship and a loss of freedom. That's why they created the electoral college to prevent the direct popular election of a president. However, despite these efforts, the current electoral college system has been essentially reduced to a slightly skewed form of pure democracy since the college members have to vote exactly as the people do. You may as well not even go through the motions of electing electoral college voters. You may as well, just assign each state a point value and say, whoever carries the most points wins the presidency outright without any need to have the Electoral College vote. The electoral college electors don't play a role in the election anyway if they're forced to vote in a predetermined way.
At this rate, the electoral college may as well be abolished. The difference from pure democracy is almost negligible under the current system.
Is there a statutory penalty in that law? A law without an enforcement mechanism is only a suggestion.
Read Federalist Paper 68. The entire point of the electoral college is to prevent the popular vote from electing the president. The people are supposed to elect people whose judgement they trust to be electors with the independence to cast a vote for whomever they think best suited to the presidency. The Founders did NOT want the people to elect the president directly. By forcing duly elected electors to mirror the popular vote, we are basically allowing direct democracy which the Constitution sought to prevent. However, the progressive media and schools have taught children to worship pure democracy and direct election of EVERY office in the land as an unquestionable dogma, and it is political heresy to teach otherwise.
You may disagree with the Founders design of our Constitutional system and you are free to advocate to change it in anyway you want, but it is not fascism. Fascism is forcing an elected elector to vote for someone for whom they do not wish to vote. Binding the electoral college electors to vote for the winner of the popular vote in each state subverts the Founders vision for our republic and the constitution they designed to protect our liberties. You may as well abolish the electoral college entirely and let the popular vote rule the day. There is almost no significant difference between direct election and the current structuring of the electoral college any way.
Apparently the last time there was more than one faithless elector was in the 1896 Vice Presidential vote. Four electors pledged to Bryan-Watson instead voted for Bryan-Sewell.
Furthermore, the 1892 result is not mentioned among the faithless electors. So it would appear that North Dakota chose its electors differently back then — not by popular vote. Also that year, 1 Oregon elector voted for Weaver and 1 Ohio elector voted for Cleveland (with Harrison winning the popular vote in both states).
I was thinking the exact same thing, there is nothing conservative about the Ron Paul movement. Their goal is to destroy the Republican party, if Obama wins re-election in the meantime, so much the better, as far as the Paulers are concerned.
There’s not much conservative about the Republican party either, so how can it be all that un-conservative to destroy it? Please don’t confuse “Republican” with conservative.
You won’t just destroy the Republican Party, you will destroy the country. There is nothing conservative about Ron Paulers. Paulers hate the social conservatives as much as they hate the Republican big spending elite. Paulers are closers to George Soros on foreign policy than they are even the big spending Republicans and no where close to the conservative Republicans.
Libertarians, including Ron Paul supporters like John Stossel, are ultra-conservative on economics and states’ rights, far moreso than the Republicans. On foreign policy they are isolationist. Where they stand on social conservatism probably varies and depends on the point-of-view. They’d be for repealing Roe vs. Wade and returning the abortion question to the states. But they might not support banning abortion in their own states.
The Libertarians have no set agenda other than destroying and taking over the Republican party. The Libertarian/ Republicans in WA are more interested in legalized marijuana than anything else. A good percentage of the so-called libertarians in WA are union members, public union members. Reconcile that with being a libertarian, if you can.
They stand for nothing and have no set ideology, other than anti-Republican establishment. John Stossel and a few others might know what they are all about, but not the rest of the supporters.
Our Nevada electors will not embarrass us again.
We keep putting them in the box, but like rats, they chew through the cardboard.
The fact that someone would even say they would disenfranchise the votes of the people is not Battle Born thinking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.