Posted on 01/17/2020 12:57:48 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
That isn't the case at all. Electors are the only ones that determine the election. There is no constitutional 'right to vote'. The individual citizen has no say, merely each elector determined by each state.
That happens as long as the economy works. The economy will collapse once the communists take hold of this Nation.
Just like Senators were free to vote how they wished despite being appointed by the states before they became popularly elected.
If SCOTUS finds they are free to be unfaithful then we may as well quit having elections.
aren’t you glad Roberts is a swing vote?
Otherwise, he WOULD BE VOTING twice.
As 2016 proved unequivocally, putatively “legally” bound Electors represent the only protection we the people have against tyranny!!!
I believe that our Constitution should be interrupted as written—not as some text to be revised to accommodate those who seek to gain power by any means necessary!!!
Praying that Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh stand guard to ensure we have the same bulwark in 2020!!!
How cool so we might have a representative Republic without the representation!
Isn’t this really about that compact of states to have their electors vote for the popular vote winner regardless of how their state votes?
Yes you do, you vote in your state for your electors, in 2016 the r’s sent a list of your electors and who to vote for, I think there were 3 or 4, I am in suburban Philly.
Thomas & Alito are the only two I have complete faith in.
You do vote for your electors, you go to the polls and vote.
Yes you do elect elect electors.
No, because he holds a position which involves casting a vote. Same as any other elected official like a Senator or Councilman. Casting this vote is what the elector is for.
“Isn’t this really about that compact of states to have their electors vote for the popular vote winner regardless of how their state votes?”
“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government....”
I would make the argument that a compact of the States to have the EVs of each participating state be given to the winner of the popular vote nationwide is violative of Article IV, Section 4.
Really? Name the elector you voted for. Any election.
And even if they get it changed, it’d blow up in their face. God only knows how many people in California, New Yorker, Illinois, Oregon, etc don’t even bother to vote in Presidential elections because in one party states it’s basically pointless. How many people in Texas or Oklahoma don’t worry if they are busy on election day because they know their state is safe.
If the communists change the rules to a national vote total, they’ll still lose. HARD
That’s your state - most states, including mine, you don’t vote for your electors. Just for the President.
The point is that the electors act as party representatives.
In the event of any shenanigans or voting irregularities the reps - who were honor bound but not duty bound could change their vote, being the ultimate representatives in a republic.
This was intentionally chosen as math was available back then and a total vote count for president could be achieved even back then. This was one last check and balance on power.
That’s why electors are traditionally party appointees and the process is intended as a formality.
Would be good to hold that they can’t be faithless.
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.