Started By
Message
locked post

Faithless elector': Supreme Court will hear case

Posted on 1/17/20 at 2:59 pm
Posted by Redleg Guy
Member since Nov 2012
2536 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 2:59 pm
LINK
quote:

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to take up an issue that could change a key element of the system America uses to elect its president, with a decision likely in the spring just as the campaign heats up.

The answer to the question could be a decisive one: Are the electors who cast the actual Electoral College ballots for president and vice president required to follow the results of the popular vote in their states? Or are they free to vote as they wish?
Posted by TheFonz
Somewhere in Louisiana
Member since Jul 2016
20382 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:02 pm to
quote:

Are the electors who cast the actual Electoral College ballots for president and vice president required to follow the results of the popular vote in their states? Or are they free to vote as they wish?


I'm not all up on the legal mumbo jumbo on this stuff, but if they don't follow the will of the people of their state, then what's the fricking point? Just have these four hundred and something assclowns elect the President.
Posted by stat19
Member since Feb 2011
29350 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:03 pm to
quote:

Faithless elector


Some of that new world order communist shite.

If you don't have faith in the person you said you'd represent, you need to be removed and replaced by someone else.

Faithless electors remove the people from electing officials and place the election outcome in the hands of the cabal.
Posted by Turbeauxdog
Member since Aug 2004
23183 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:04 pm to
I mean they are asking for violence in their states
Posted by tketaco
Sunnyside, Houston
Member since Jan 2010
19491 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:05 pm to
If you tar/feather one the rest will follow suit.
Posted by stat19
Member since Feb 2011
29350 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:08 pm to
quote:

I mean they are asking for violence in their states


Damn good way to get your arse in a funk - be the deciding vote against the way swore an oath to vote.

60 million people would legitimately want to shoot you in the face.
Posted by bamarep
Member since Nov 2013
51806 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:09 pm to
Rope drag one down Main St on live tv and the other 399 will come around real quick.
Posted by Redleg Guy
Member since Nov 2012
2536 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:12 pm to
Why even have human beings designed as electors?
Posted by TigerRad
Columbia, SC
Member since Jan 2007
5354 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:25 pm to
of course they vote for who they want

its a check on democracy

people really need to stop trying to tear down stuff the framers built

they were righteous and brilliant

leave the EC the f alone
Posted by yatesdog38
in your head rent free
Member since Sep 2013
12737 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:31 pm to
The electoral college is outdated. We have computers and shite now. Just need to update the processes. No need for human to actually cast a ballot in behalf of the people that have already voted. Can't believe time is being wasted on this by the courts.
Posted by Redleg Guy
Member since Nov 2012
2536 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:35 pm to
The only reason to keep humans in the loop is because we want them to have the ability to go against the popular vote. Otherwise, remove them.

Going to be interesting how SC rules. If they rule that electors don’t have to follow their state popular vote, it will be an encouragement for more faithless electors.
Posted by VOR
Member since Apr 2009
63504 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:44 pm to
Faithless elector.

John David Souther should write a new song.
Posted by BoarEd
The Hills
Member since Oct 2015
38862 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:47 pm to
quote:

Damn good way to get your arse in a funk - be the deciding vote against the way swore an oath to vote.



Don't know about all of this. The Constitution doesn't talk about it much. I just went through the national archives rundown on it and the way it reads to me is that they don't even all take an oath. It says "some states require them to pledge" to vote the way the popular vote goes. Some states also have laws requiring them to vote with the will of the people, but not all. There is also a question about whether or not the Constitution provides a means to even levy any sort of punishment against an elector for acting in bad faith.

Definitely something the Supreme Court needs to weigh in on because near as I can tell the only time it has ever happened was in 2016.

I would also like it to be broken down a little better than all of that. The way I think it should go is that they should tie the electoral votes to the district and give each district a vote. If we are going to use computers in our election now we can handle dissecting the vote a little more and give the people within the states a more equal say. Then, each elector is assigned a district and they are required by law (state law it should be) to vote the way the people of their district votes.
Posted by Redleg Guy
Member since Nov 2012
2536 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:50 pm to
Assigning districts sounds a lot like the house. There will be insane outcry if each district doesn’t represent the same number of people.

Hell, it even gets closer to popular vote.
Posted by kingbob
Sorrento, LA
Member since Nov 2010
67083 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:54 pm to
That’s because a lot of states used to appoint electors just like U.S. Senators used to be appointed by state legislatures. The electoral college was designed to represent the interests of the state governments, not the people of those states. This makes sense in the context that when the Constitution was being drafted, the states were considered independent sovereign nations with a shared defense and free trade agreement between them. The National government was where the states themselves were represented, with the state governments’ representatives in the Senate and the peoples’ reps in the house. The president was thus elected by the states, not the people.

Over time, more and more states moved to having their senators and electors chosen based off of popular vote until it all became standard issue. The National government of the United States was very undemocratic at the time of its founding.
This post was edited on 1/17/20 at 3:57 pm
Posted by BoarEd
The Hills
Member since Oct 2015
38862 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 3:57 pm to
quote:

Hell, it even gets closer to popular vote


I get that.
I'm just thinking about a state like California. If I'm a Republican voter living in Northern California I have absolutely no voice. Because the liberals in Southern California overwhelm any number of me and my rural neighbors. You could have entire counties of people in places like that voting Republican and there is zero chance California will ever actually represent them in a presidential election. Like, zero percent chance ever.

And that's even before you consider any faithless elector shenanigans.
Posted by Ag Zwin
Member since Mar 2016
19943 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 4:01 pm to
The irony being that Hillary lost more electors than Trump did, even with the all out campaign to take his.
Posted by SirWinston
PNW
Member since Jul 2014
81704 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 4:02 pm to
I kind of feel like it should be allowed. It's up to the state parties to police that shite (and the populace of the state if it comes down to keeping its electors in line).
Posted by Ag Zwin
Member since Mar 2016
19943 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 4:06 pm to
quote:

I kind of feel like it should be allowed. It's up to the state parties to police that shite (and the populace of the state if it comes down to keeping its electors in line).


I get the spirit of what you’re saying, and it leaves room to “correct” things if something huge emerges the day after the election, but I am not comfortable with the idea of leaving this open to a well planned insurrection.

I just don’t trust people in stuff like this anymore.
Posted by BoarEd
The Hills
Member since Oct 2015
38862 posts
Posted on 1/17/20 at 4:08 pm to
quote:

I get that


I don't get it actually.

Either way, the electors should have to vote the same way as the people vote. Surely the Supreme Court will clarify the situation.

As far as the rest goes, I guess there's just no way to have a perfect system. Someone is always going to feel disaffected for one reason or another the way our system is set up.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram