Posted on 12/07/2016 11:24:34 PM PST by granada
If you thought Donald Trump was the face of America’s anti-establishment movement, hold on to your chapeaus: A wild wind is rising.
Want to know what’s more anti-establishment than a president-elect who refuses to play by the rules? How about similarly spirited electors going AWOL and sending someone else to the Oval Office?
Could it happen? Might.
A movement headed by a mostly Democratic group calling itself Hamilton Electors is trying to persuade Republican electors to defect — not to cede the election to Hillary Clinton but to join with Democrats in selecting a compromise candidate, such as Mitt Romney or John Kasich. It wouldn’t be that hard to do.
Mathematically, only 37 of Trump’s 306 electors are needed to bring his number down to 269, one less than the 270 needed to secure the presidency.
On the Hamilton Electors’ Facebook page, elector Bret Chiafalo, a Democrat from Washington, explains the purpose of the electoral college. If you haven’t previously been a fan of the electoral system, you might become one.
Bottom line: The Founding Fathers didn’t fully trust democracy, fearing mob rule, and so created a republic. They correctly worried that a pure democracy could result in the election of a demagogue (ahem), or a charismatic autocrat (ahem), or someone under foreign influence (ditto), hence the rule that a president must have been born in the United States. We know how seriously Trump takes the latter.
Most important among the founders’ criteria for a president was that he (or now she) be qualified. Thus, the electoral college was created as a braking system that would, if necessary, save the country from an individual such as, frankly, Trump.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
What...this bi*tch opens her maw and spews crap, again?
If they do, I will hunt down a Democrat and **** ****
If the electors choose someone other than what their states voters chose then the American people will hold a vote.
It’s called last group standing.
This is crap even by the Washington Post’s sorry standards.
Unfaithful electors, to many? Recipe for Civil war
The rules are: Whatever the left says they are.
Those rules.
Unfaithful electors, too many? Recipe for Civil war
Liberal hypocrisy. They would execute their own unfaithful electors.
And they laid out those qualifications and they say NOTHING about being a career politician.
Is Trump over 35 years old? Check.
Is he a natural born citizen of this country? Check.
Has he lived in the US for 14 years prior to being elected? Check.
Then your opinion of how you think he's going to do is irrelevant.
The elector's job is to vote for who their state elected.
Unless there's a career criminal running for president I see no reason to disqualify anyone. And even then, being a career criminal doesn't seem to even stop some.
Anyone remember when the left fretted over whether or not Trump would accept the election results?
LOL at “The Wapoo”
Now that they’ve given up hope on flipping the states with the recount, they’ve gone back full swing to wishfully thinking the electors will do their bidding. And what is this “only 37” this author speaks of?? 37 electors is a LOT to try to get to turn turncoat.
The really sad thing is, they never see the irony of listing all those reasons they think Trump Electors should vote for somebody else as being factual reasons nobody should have voted for Clinton.
Demagogue: Obama
Charismatic autocrat: Kennedy
Under foreign influence: Clintons (both)
The rules are: Whatever the left says they are.
Those rules.
Oh, right. How intolerant of me to forget.
I believe most states have rules against voting other than the person the voters elected.
Some states, for instance, will not allow an elector to vote other than what the voters want; and if they do, the vote will be voided and a new elector will take that place and vote according to the wishes of the voters.
I don’t know how it will come out, but I don’t see the LEFT being able to change the election even if they might really want to.
If people would just learn what the Electoral Rules are (which they purport are so important), they would know that most states do not allow for such treachery from the electors.
Demagogue: Obama
Charismatic autocrat: Kennedy
Under foreign influence: Clintons (both)
Narcissistic faggot America hater: Obama
Dead Camelot fornicator: Kennedy
China-traitor sociopathic grifters: Clintons (both)
meh. It’s Karhleen Parker
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.