Is this legal???!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-87 next last
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
If Republicans had done this, the outcry would be all the way to the UN.
2 posted on
11/22/2016 8:59:24 AM PST by
I want the USA back
(Lying Media: completely irresponsible. Complicit in the destruction of this country.)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
With at least six electors already vowing to become "faithless," the defection could be the most significant since 1808, when six Democratic-Republican electors refused to vote for James Madison, choosing vice presidential candidate George Clinton instead. Figures there was a Clinton involved...............
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
It’s a Lexington and Concord moment if so.
4 posted on
11/22/2016 9:00:00 AM PST by
ealgeone
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
No. Electors voting against their state will by law be replaced with an Elector that votes according to how the state voted.
5 posted on
11/22/2016 9:00:02 AM PST by
Hostage
(Article V)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
The ‘Rats never want to leave anyone alone, especially self sufficient makers.
6 posted on
11/22/2016 9:00:20 AM PST by
Paladin2
(No spellcheck. It's too much work to undo the auto wrong word substitution on mobile devices.)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
Jeezy—The media is really flogging this scenario.
7 posted on
11/22/2016 9:00:27 AM PST by
Arm_Bears
(Rope. Tree. Politician/Journalist. Some assembly required.)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
"A number of Democratic Electoral College electors are planning to use their votes to undermine the election process"Trying to undermine the electoral process is insurrection.
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
the chances of 36 electors bailing on trump is as close to zero as it can possibly be without actually being zero.
9 posted on
11/22/2016 9:01:59 AM PST by
wny
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
More clickbait from The Hill. Yes, the electors could technically vote who they want, but 29 states have faithless elector laws.
Even if a huge number defect, Congress can object to them.
A few defections won’t change the outcome either way.
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
I think Congress should be able to do something about it and each state could change the electors they are sending.
This is thwarting the US election laws.
11 posted on
11/22/2016 9:02:52 AM PST by
Innovative
("Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." -- Vince Lombardi)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
Won’t happen, just noise from agitprop sore losers
13 posted on
11/22/2016 9:03:43 AM PST by
bigbob
(We have better coverage than Verizon - Can You Hear Us Now?)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
14 posted on
11/22/2016 9:03:51 AM PST by
Paladin2
(No spellcheck. It's too much work to undo the auto wrong word substitution on mobile devices.)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
15 posted on
11/22/2016 9:04:13 AM PST by
A CA Guy
(God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
Democrat electors are not relevant.
16 posted on
11/22/2016 9:04:30 AM PST by
fortheDeclaration
(Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
Conspiracy Question again: What if ISIS blows up everyone in the state capital of say Florida with all its electors prior to their vote?
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
... they are optimistic that their effort will raise enough questions about the Electoral College to reform or abolish it. They can be 'optimistic' all they want, but it requires a Constitutional Amendment to change it and that's not easy. The Congress has to draft the amendment, pass it by 2/3 (66%) majority in BOTH houses, then submit it to the States for ratification, either by their legislatures or referendum, and they are mostly controlled by Republicans. It takes 3/4 of the states to approve, or 38 out of 50...........so it ain't gonna happen............
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
Some states have laws that prevent a “faithless” elector vote. But the penalty is only civil -— a fine. Keep in mind that the slate of electors for whom you vote is a slate of party partisans who are not likely to turn against their party.
19 posted on
11/22/2016 9:05:36 AM PST by
doug from upland
(time to bring down the Clinton money laundering foundation)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
There are liberals who have gotten into the Republican Party to try this.
20 posted on
11/22/2016 9:05:36 AM PST by
A CA Guy
(God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
This ploy didn’t work in 2000 when only 2 electors needed to switch the results from George W Bush to Al Gore. How likely will it be with 35 electors? Whether President-Elect Trump wins by 1 electoral vote or 35, he still wins, according to the law of the land.
Besides, if the Dem electors want to change, who would they change to. Changing FROM Hillary, would defeat the point, wouldn’t it?
Anyway, it’s good to take this ploy to God in prayer.
21 posted on
11/22/2016 9:05:39 AM PST by
plushaye
("I will raise up Trump to be a Trumpet, says the Lord." - Prophet Kim Clement (2007))
To: BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
>>The electors acknowledge that it is unlikely that they will be able to block Trump from gaining office, Politico reported, but they are optimistic that their effort will raise enough questions about the Electoral College to reform or abolish it.<<
Are these people that stupid?/r They neither know the Constitution and the amendment process nor the history of why we have an Electoral College. People that stupid should be institutionalized to prevent them from hurting themselves and others.
22 posted on
11/22/2016 9:06:13 AM PST by
NTHockey
(Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners. And to the NSA trolls, FU)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-87 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson