Clinton electors lobbying for EC protest votes? *UPDATE* 29 electors want intel briefing

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Are these Democratic wannabe faithless electors a bit thick or something? How the hell is Democratic electors not voting for Hillary going to stop Trump being President?

probably hoping it'll encourage republicans to follow suit

not that it's at all likely to work ofc, but if there was ever a time to grasp at any last straw you can, that time is now.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

The Electoral College does not have to be abolished, and it won't.

What needs to happen is that the Electors have to be obligated, by law, to vote for the winner of the state for which they are an Elector.

And a 19 year Elector?

Wanting to make a statement?

How stupid is that?

I like this post a lot. My only quibble is that we can't speak in total certainty about the future of our country, let alone the EC.

Thank you.

You are, of course, correct that we cannot say anything about the future with absolute certainty.

However, I think we can all agree that the abolition of the Electoral College would be a very long, drawn out, bitter affair.

And constitutionally, I believe I can say that more likely than not, at least in the immediate future, and by that I mean a considerable length of time, that any attempt to abolish the Electoral College is more likely to fail than to succeed.   

Yep. Thanks for the naunce.
It can get lonely sometimes defending the EC on the internet. You're welcome, fellow EC supporter.

Indeed, I am a firm supporter of the Electoral College.

It gives smaller states more say in the election. 

If the election for President was based completely on the popular vote, by far most of the attention from the parties and the candidates would be spent on the large states, California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey.

The Electoral College system gives more influence to smaller states, and a better balance for Presidential elections.

this is often repeated, but it doesn't really make sense. media markets are generally cheaper per person reached in the smaller states and i can't imagine, e.g. republicans campaigning in san francisco when they could be getting much more of an advantage by campaigning in kentucky

plus i mean- under the current system, california, texas, and new york get zero attention, despite making up over a quarter of the population, so

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

While I obviously support abolishing the electoral college, we could start by getting rid of electors and just making it a numerical count. Surely we could have widespread agreement from both parties and practically every state that Faithless Electors are a bad thing.

eh.

i feel the main effect of that would be to forestall any real reform

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

How is something like that even possible? Every state should have laws against faithless electors and only the most loyal partisans should be chosen as electors.

This. We need to avoid crazy situations like what we may see later this month.
the electors need to be bound.

The whole point of the electoral college was to act as a check on the people, who have proven this year that they cannot be trusted in terms of choosing a president. If the founders didn't want the electors to be free to be faithless, they would have made the EC simply a numerical count, not an actual group of people. We need to respect the will of the founders, take all faithless elector laws off the books, and let the electors live up to their real job - acting as a check on a populace filled with low-information voters.

the fck do you mean, the people can't be trusted? the people voted for hillary clinton

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

the fck do you mean, the people can't be trusted? the people voted for hillary clinton

Actually, 51.8 percent of the people did not vote for Clinton.

nope. at least 10-20% of trump's voters were nazis, and nazis aren't people

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

All Russian hacking talk is strictly non-election rigging stuff right? As in they selectively hacked and leaked info, but didn't engage in actual vote manipulation to directly affect the outcome.

This is a key point.  Actual vote-count affecting hacking is worthy of thorough investigations.  Luckily we've seen no evidence of that so far.

Russians throwing their voice into the cacophonous noise of an election...meh, so what?  Is there something inherently threatening about Russian fake news than say, John Harwood's fake news?

But all of this talk has a sub-text of elitism that is so typical of the left.  "Voters are too stupid and easily swayed by Russian propaganda...therefore we must discredit or possibly overturn the election, because we're smart and the sheeple are dumb."  Well, remember the videos circulating of the Obama voters who thought dumb things (he's gonna pay my rent...from his 'stash')?  Did even one Republican suggest we need to get information to the electoral college about how so many Obama voters got misinformed in '08?

This whole line of thinking is poisonous.  Democrat projection ("Republicans won't accept legitimate election results!  Horrors!") all over again.

So, the Russians hacked the DNC and the RNC. They only aired the DNC's dirty laundry. Trump is going to nominate Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State.

You're saying all of this doesn't bother you, am I getting that right?

So they aired the DNC's dirty laundry that was in October and Dems didn't seem to care then. Why care now? Because  they lost the election that's why.

I am not for the Tillerson nomination but Trump is the President-Elect he can nominate who he wants for Secretary Of State.

the heck're you talking about? people were way angry about this back when it happened