Faithless electors.

[MegaPoke]

Prediction, one republican elector will vote for Kasich. The others will represent their state popular vote as directed.

These movements by so-called Hamilton voters to vote for Bernie instead of Hillary and efforts by celebrities among others to influence republican electors to vote for someone other than Trump are infuriating.



This kind of shit has a reverse effect, as it did for Hillary in the GE.

There is no upside. It won't work and will blow up in their face making a Trump look like the winner against exactly what he rails against. Again.

So ready for 1/20 so we can finally get past the crybaby bullshit over the election and focus on holding President Trump accountable for fulfilling his promises. The crybaby stuff has pushed me uncomfortably far into his defense vs the endless steam of baseless drek.

 

[davidallen]

Prediction, one republican elector will vote for Kasich. The others will represent their state popular vote as directed.

These movements by so-called Hamilton voters to vote for Bernie instead of Hillary and efforts by celebrities among others to influence republican electors to vote for someone other than Trump are infuriating.

View embedded media

This kind of shit has a reverse effect, as it did for Hillary in the GE.

There is no upside. It won't work and will blow up in their face making a Trump look like the winner against exactly what he rails against. Again.

So ready for 1/20 so we can finally get past the crybaby bullshit over the election and focus on holding President Trump accountable for fulfilling his promises. The crybaby stuff has pushed me uncomfortably far into his defense vs the endless steam of baseless drek.

It just gets started on 1/20. A lot has been taught by example last 8 years.... Starts in earnest post midterms.

 

[windriverrange]

This is such bullshit, the liberals/left are soooooooooooo tolerant. If they don't win its not their fault and immediately they move the goal posts to fabricate an argument that makes convince the gerbils they actually did win. Then the clown show falls into place, in the way of the media peddling the nonsense and bingo we have a "legitimate cause" in the eyes of the hypocrites.

Guess every state needs to pass a law that binds the elector to the winning candidate and that the harassment be made a crime (I'm in favor of a felony actually). Can anyone imagine what would have happened if electors been treated like this when the rodent in chief was elected? The people behind this are freakin low life scumbags and infantile little piss ants. Like your hero said "elections have consequences," so man up and quit acting like 12 year olds!

ELECTORS BEING HARASSED, THREATENED IN BID TO STOP TRUMP

Electors around the country are being harassed with a barrage of e-mails, phone calls and letters — and even death threats — in an effort to block Donald Trump from being voted in as president by the Electoral College Monday.

The bullying is overwhelming Sharon Geise’s tech devices, but not her resolve to support Trump.

The Mesa, Arizona grandmother woke up Wednesday morning to more than 1,500 emails demanding she not carry out her legal duty to vote for the president-elect.

“They just keep coming and coming,” Geise told The Post, estimating that she’s received more than 50,000 emails since the election. “They’re overpowering my iPad.”

Despite the avalanche, she said her decision to back Trump is stronger than ever.

“Obviously their minds are made up and they’re not going to change. I’m not either,” the soft-spoken Geise said.

Reports of GOP electors being badgered have been reported in numerous states, including Georgia, Idaho, Tennessee, Arizona, Utah and Michigan.

Like Geise, Republican Patricia Allen of Tennessee told The Post she’s been bombarded with 2,000 emails, 120 letters and five phone calls all urging her to switch and vote against Trump.
But Allen, 74, said despite the “siege” she’s not budging.

“This has never happened before … Do you know how long it takes to delete all those emails every day?” she asked.

She’s also been solicited by a Harvard University group backed by Constitutional law Prof. Lawrence Lessig, who has offered free legal aid to electors who change their vote.

“That borders on bribery,” said Allen. “Carried to this extreme, the day might come when an elector could be sold to the highest bidder.”

Lessig claims that 20 GOP electors are considering voting against Trump.

Even if true, that wouldn’t be enough to alter the outcome when the 538 members of the Electoral College gather to cast their official votes. Trump has 306 electoral votes, 36 more than the minimum required.

Electoral College voter changes mind, will vote against Trump
For Michael Banerian, a senior at Oakland University in Michigan and a Republican elector, the harassment comes with a dark side.

He said he’s been getting death threats via email, snail mail,Twitter and Facebook.

“Somebody threatened to put a bullet in the back of my mouth,” Banerian, 22, told The Post Wednesday.

In Utah, a group called Democracy and Progress PAC placed full-page ads in Salt Lake City’s daily newspapers telling electors they are “not bound” to vote for trump, who won the state.

But the Desert News reported that under Utah law, Trump must receive all the state’s Electoral College votes since he won the election in the state.

The paper said Utah’s six Republican electors are being inundated with emails pressing them not to support Trump.

One of them, Salt lake County Councilman Richard Snelgrove, said there’s no way he’ll cave to the pressure.

“No, Trump won the Electoral College fair and square,” he said.

The effort to deny the electoral vote to Trump was launched shortly after the Nov. 8 election.

The Clinton campaign came out in support of the effort on Monday backing an open letter from 10 Democratic electors to National Intelligence Director James Clapper calling for an intelligence briefing on what role Russian hackers may have played in the election.

 

[CowboyJD]

Prediction, one republican elector will vote for Kasich. The others will represent their state popular vote as directed.

These movements by so-called Hamilton voters to vote for Bernie instead of Hillary and efforts by celebrities among others to influence republican electors to vote for someone other than Trump are infuriating.

.....

So ready for 1/20 so we can finally get past the crybaby bullshit over the election and focus on holding President Trump accountable for fulfilling his promises. The crybaby stuff has pushed me uncomfortably far into his defense vs the endless steam of baseless drek.

I find it interesting when people defend the Electoral College when it comes to the issue of popular vote choosing our President, but the profess to finding the notion of "faithless electors" infuriating.

Trump is going to be our next President. It will be interesting to see what happens then. I personally believe it likely that most if not all of those reflexively defending him now will continue to do so and all of those reflexively attacking him now will also continue to do so post inauguration.

Politics, for the most part, really has come down to rooting for "your" team do or die, everything else be damned.

 

[07pilt]

So ready for 1/20

only have to wait for 12/19

 

[imprimis]

Trump is going to be our next President. It will be interesting to see what happens then. I personally believe it likely that most if not all of those reflexively defending him now will continue to do so and all of those reflexively attacking him now will also continue to do so post inauguration.

Very likely, however, Trump's defenders will pillory him if he strays like we saw when GWB and other GOP officials strayed. We've seen Ryan, Boehner, McConnell and others get both barrels for their spineless capitulations over the years. Very unlike democrat defenders who rarely, if ever, question their elected leaders.

 

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

It just gets started on 1/20. A lot has been taught by example last 8 years.... Starts in earnest post midterms.

No, I doubt there will be a bill passed by reconciliation process without even the appearance of having an opportunity to have been actually read, and built upon a foundation of lies by the President without a single minority party vote, to take over a substantial portion of the U.S. economy.

 

[windriverrange]

JD I will absolutely adondon him if he doesn't right the ship. I'm also realistic enough to see that he is going to have to make some deals, some of which I won't care for. Be that as it may though I expect him to not be influenced by anything other then what is great for America and Americans, to secure the borders, get rid of redundancy at the federal level, make sure as many children as possible get an opportunity at a good education, kill off useless regs and create jobs. He does most of that and I'll pull the lever for him in 2020, he doesn't and I won't. There is no more time for blind partisanship and business as usual.

 

[CowboyJD]

Very likely, however, Trump's defenders will pillory him if he strays like we saw when GWB and other GOP officials strayed. We've seen Ryan, Boehner, McConnell and others get both barrels for their spineless capitulations over the years. Very unlike democrat defenders who rarely, if ever, question their elected leaders.

We will see.

I'm not convinced that Trump supporters will pillory him if he "strays".

In fact, it seems to me he has already strayed on notable election statements....the Wall is now a fence in places....mass deportations now just deportation of career criminals and we'll see what we will do about the "families"...he's open to Global warming concerns...Goldman Sachs is now in the Cabinet after Trump attacking Hillary for influence peddling to them for big money speeches. No pillorying, yet.

We will see. I remain dubious and skeptical...but open to the possibility.

 

[CowboyJD]

JD I will absolutely adondon him if he doesn't right the ship. I'm also realistic enough to see that he is going to have to make some deals, some of which I won't care for. Be that as it may though I expect him to not be influenced by anything other then what is great for America and Americans, to secure the borders, get rid of redundancy at the federal level, make sure as many children as possible get an opportunity at a good education, kill off useless regs and create jobs. He does most of that and I'll pull the lever for him in 2020, he doesn't and I won't. There is no more time for blind partisanship and business as usual.

I believe you will.

I'm not sure you are representative of the average Trump supporter.

We will see.

 

[Ostatedchi]

The various states are free to handle their electors as they choose. If they want to bind them, fine. If not, fine.

The democrats are right in that the college is the last throttle point and are free to handle their vote how they choose. Now, harassing and threatening them to change their vote should (and probably is already) a crime. If I were the AG in a state then I'd prosecute people for it. If I were the AG of the US and people harassed electors across state lines, I'd prosecute them federally.


I do know that this harassment will just further the rigor the parties use while choosing their potential electors.

 

[CowboyJD]

The various states are free to handle their electors as they choose. If they want to bind them, fine. If not, fine.

The democrats are right in that the college is the last throttle point and are free to handle their vote how they choose. Now, harassing and threatening them to change their vote should (and probably is already) a crime. If I were the AG in a state then I'd prosecute people for it. If I were the AG of the US and people harassed electors across state lines, I'd prosecute them federally.


I do know that this harassment will just further the rigor the parties use while choosing their potential electors.

While I agree with your position, there is a fine line between unlawful harassment/threats and perfectly legitimate attempts to influence and convince.

 

[MegaPoke]

It just gets started on 1/20. A lot has been taught by example last 8 years.... Starts in earnest post midterms.

A lot getting taught, and a lot getting learned are two different things (exhibit A. Nancy Pelosi)

 

[MegaPoke]

I find it interesting when people defend the Electoral College when it comes to the issue of popular vote choosing our President, but the profess to finding the notion of "faithless electors" infuriating.

Trump is going to be our next President. It will be interesting to see what happens then. I personally believe it likely that most if not all of those reflexively defending him now will continue to do so and all of those reflexively attacking him now will also continue to do so post inauguration.

Politics, for the most part, really has come down to rooting for "your" team do or die, everything else be damned.

Faithless electors being recruited to overturn a legitimate election is unAmerican. Period. It's a safety valve to be a last resort preventative against something almost unthinkable - perhaps something that is revealed or occurs of actual national interest in the interim between the election and the EC vote (which is what the Russia hacking thing is fraudulently trying to do). Using it simply to taint a righteously elected candidate and potentially force congress to anoint him is nothing more than an attempt to delegitimize his presidency a'la George W. Bush's 'selected not elected' moniker.

It's an inappropriate abuse of the system that harms the legitimacy not of Trump as much as of the entire electorate process we are so proud of.

You know damned well what my politics are by the way, and that I was leaning toward him and then to Johnson and back again - but primarily I was anti-establishment and Never Hillary. I did wind up voting Trump and so far, I have been impressed. He's not my "team" and I think that is exactly how many of the people like me wound up voting for him - he wasn't on either establishment team, hated by both.

I would submit to you that if I am any example, I am not reflexively defending him - I am reflexively blasting the people trying to undermine an election. In fact, I think that his campaign platform creates a scenario by design where he either produces and keeps his promises or he isn't the guy we hoped he was.

He is basically the rookie hc Mike Gundy (at OSU, nowhere else does this analogy work) of presidents. High ceiling and low floor. He can bring legitimate change in the right direction - ushering in a new era of greatness and healthy national pride - Rushmore bust kind of stuff. OR he can be the biggest disaster in the history of the office. I'm not sure middle ground is realistic here, so I am absolutely guilty of being optimistic and hoping like hell that he delvers but no - I'm not and never will be a fan boy that makes excuses if he lets me down. I think a lot of his current defenders are just like me.

In fact, I would specifically hope that you - a fellow libertarian minded thinker - would hold me accountable not to be a fan boy of any politician.

Right now though, I am open minded and optimistic that this guy can overturn the establishment rot.

 

[CowboyJD]

Faithless electors being recruited to overturn a legitimate election is unAmerican. Period. It's a safety valve to be a last resort preventative against something almost unthinkable - perhaps something that is revealed or occurs of actual national interest in the interim between the election and the EC vote (which is what the Russia hacking thing is fraudulently trying to do). Using it simply to taint a righteously elected candidate and potentially force congress to anoint him is nothing more than an attempt to delegitimize his presidency a'la George W. Bush's 'selected not elected' moniker.

It's an inappropriate abuse of the system that harms the legitimacy not of Trump as much as of the entire electorate process we are so proud of.

You know damned well what my politics are by the way, and that I was leaning toward him and then to Johnson and back again - but primarily I was anti-establishment and Never Hillary. I did wind up voting Trump and so far, I have been impressed. He's not my "team" and I think that is exactly how many of the people like me wound up voting for him - he wasn't on either establishment team, hated by both.

I would submit to you that if I am any example, I am not reflexively defending him - I am reflexively blasting the people trying to undermine an election. In fact, I think that his campaign platform creates a scenario by design where he either produces and keeps his promises or he isn't the guy we hoped he was.

He is basically the rookie hc Mike Gundy (at OSU, nowhere else does this analogy work) of presidents. High ceiling and low floor. He can bring legitimate change in the right direction - ushering in a new era of greatness and healthy national pride - Rushmore bust kind of stuff. OR he can be the biggest disaster in the history of the office. I'm not sure middle ground is realistic here, so I am absolutely guilty of being optimistic and hoping like hell that he delvers but no - I'm not and never will be a fan boy that makes excuses if he lets me down. I think a lot of his current defenders are just like me.

A lot to unpack and respond to here.

1. We will just disagree on your comments about the electoral college. If you have an Electoral College system, the vote of the EC IS the legitimatizing/legitimate election. I see nothing wrong with attempting to influence them, and attempting to influence Electoral College delegates is as American as Apple pie since the Election of 1800 IMO. You don't see it in most elections because it has no shot of being successful because the EC vote isn't remotely close. When it is close, attempting to influence the Electors (whether personally, or by means of state law trying to compel them to be faithful and possibly sanctioning them criminally for being faithless) is fair game.

2. I do damn well know what your politics are. I also damn well know that I made a completely general statement about Trump supporters and even qualified that statement with "most if not all". I believe you also damn well know me and my posting well enough that if I was asserting you were reflexively defending Trump I would have explicitly and clearly accused you of that. I didn't. To the extent I was complicit or unclear in making it seem like I was, mea culpa.

3. You're not sure middle ground here is realistic. I'm pretty sure it is. I would contend that middle ground and a wait and see attitude is completely realistic. Maybe even the most appropriate and realistic attitude to have. Maybe that makes me a cuck in some people's eyes....I dunno.

And rest assured....I will hold you accountable for not being a fanboy and will call you out in the future....directly and explicitly...if I believe it is happening.

 

[MegaPoke]

you damned well are not a cuck, damn it.

I guess middle ground statistically is likely, but I do think the guy is going to do some things very differently and it's a dice roll. I am choosing to be optimistic and on the balance, I like the way things are going - but would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge there are some red flags. To me personally though, I am at the moment anyway, giving more weight to the way he is leveraging the GOP establishment (Trolling Romney, making Paul Ryan dance at Wisconsin speech), going around the MSM and avoiding their filters and agendas and giving zero f*cks about the trolls trying to undermine the validity of the election. The Rodney Dangerfield at Bushwood Country club feel of this is immensely pleasing to me - for now. We'll see if I feel that way after the first 100 days.

Damn it.

 

[07pilt]

giving zero f*cks about the trolls trying to undermine the validity of the election.

 

[CowboyJD]

you damned well are not a cuck, damn it.

I guess middle ground statistically is likely, but I do think the guy is going to do some things very differently and it's a dice roll. I am choosing to be optimistic and on the balance, I like the way things are going - but would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge there are some red flags. To me personally though, I am at the moment anyway, giving more weight to the way he is leveraging the GOP establishment (Trolling Romney, making Paul Ryan dance at Wisconsin speech), going around the MSM and avoiding their filters and agendas and giving zero f*cks about the trolls trying to undermine the validity of the election. The Rodney Dangerfield at Bushwood Country club feel of this is immensely pleasing to me - for now. We'll see if I feel that way after the first 100 days.

Damn it.

LOVE this response.

Thank you for it.

 

[Ostatedchi]

While I agree with your position, there is a fine line between unlawful harassment/threats and perfectly legitimate attempts to influence and convince.

I totally agree. Trying to persuade someone to be faithless is one thing. Harassing them, intimidating them, threatening them, or even bribing them should be aggressively pursued by the appropriate law enforcement agencies and criminal prosecution agents.

 

[CowboyJD]

I totally agree. Trying to persuade someone to be faithless is one thing. Harassing them, intimidating them, threatening them, or even bribing them should be aggressively pursued by the appropriate law enforcement agencies and criminal prosecution agents.

I would draw the line a bit thinner....because it's in my nature to do so as an asshole lawyer.

I would say that unlawfully harassing or intimidating...along with bribing them....should be aggressively pursued. Not all conduct we might generically/colloquially define as harassing or intimidating is contrary to law.

A subtle, but important point to make clear, IMO.

I believe we agree fundamentally. Any violation of the law when it comes to this type of conduct should be agressively pursue and prosecuted.

 

[MegaPoke]

...along with bribing them...

Surely the GoFundMe accounts set up for these faithless electors (google it) qualifies as bribery.

 

[CowboyJD]

Surely the GoFundMe accounts set up for these faithless electors (google it) qualifies as bribery.

Maybe....but not "surely".

They could be set up as legal defense funds should they be prosecuted for something.

That arguably wouldn't meet the legal definition of bribery in most states or under federal law.

 

[ctrawick]

We will see.

I'm not convinced that Trump supporters will pillory him if he "strays".

In fact, it seems to me he has already strayed on notable election statements....the Wall is now a fence in places....mass deportations now just deportation of career criminals and we'll see what we will do about the "families"...he's open to Global warming concerns...Goldman Sachs is now in the Cabinet after Trump attacking Hillary for influence peddling to them for big money speeches. No pillorying, yet.

We will see. I remain dubious and skeptical...but open to the possibility.

Not sure why this is even an issue, I would bet there only needs to be a fence in some spots because of current border security.

In regards to deportations, where do you think we should start?

 

[07pilt]

Not sure why this is even an issue, I would bet there only needs to be a fence in some spots because of current border security.

In regards to deportations, where do you think we should start?

Because the American people voted for the guy promising to build a 20 foot wall and to deport 11 million people. If people wanted someone who would do things like build fences and deport criminals, there were like 15 other people in the Republican primary.

 

[Medic007]

Because the American people voted for the guy promising to build a 20 foot wall and to deport 11 million people. If people wanted someone who would do things like build fences and deport criminals, there were like 15 other people in the Republican primary.

He better build a wall so YUUUUGE that the Great Wall of China becomes the Average Wall of China.

 

[imprimis]

Not sure why this is even an issue, I would bet there only needs to be a fence in some spots because of current border security.

In regards to deportations, where do you think we should start?

There are also some spots where building a wall or fence is unnecessary. I suggest there are several areas of the Big Bend where a natural wall already exists.

 

[CowboyJD]

Not sure why this is even an issue, I would bet there only needs to be a fence in some spots because of current border security.

In regards to deportations, where do you think we should start?

In the context of my post....this is exactly what I was talking about and would be the alternative to pillorying him for backing off.

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

The Rodney Dangerfield at Bushwood Country club

 

[ctrawick]

Because the American people voted for the guy promising to build a 20 foot wall and to deport 11 million people. If people wanted someone who would do things like build fences and deport criminals, there were like 15 other people in the Republican primary.

I dont think he said he was going to deport 11 million people, nor do I believe anyone really thinks that. I do, however, believe he needs to start with criminals and work out from there. I also believe that if we cut off all the money to illegals they will self deport. It is crazy that we give them free education and pay welfare benefits to them. I lived in the Czech Republic and I had to prove that I could support myself and there was no chance I would have been given money by the government.

 

[imprimis]

I dont think he said he was going to deport 11 million people, nor do I believe anyone really thinks that. I do, however, believe he needs to start with criminals and work out from there. I also believe that if we cut off all the money to illegals they will self deport. It is crazy that we give them free education and pay welfare benefits to them. I lived in the Czech Republic and I had to prove that I could support myself and there was no chance I would have been given money by the government.

Don't forget the Visa violators. There are enough of them to keep the INS busy 24/7 for years.

 

[07pilt]

I dont think he said he was going to deport 11 million people, nor do I believe anyone really thinks that. I do, however, believe he needs to start with criminals and work out from there. I also believe that if we cut off all the money to illegals they will self deport. It is crazy that we give them free education and pay welfare benefits to them. I lived in the Czech Republic and I had to prove that I could support myself and there was no chance I would have been given money by the government.

In an interview that aired in September 2015 on CBS’ 60 Minutes, Scott Pelley pressed Trump about what he would do with the population.

Pelley: "Eleven, 12 million illegal immigrants --"

Trump: "Or whatever the number is."

Pelley: "Still in the country, what do you do?"

Trump: "If they've done well, they're going out and they're coming back in legally. Because you said it--"

Pelley: "You're rounding them all up?"

Trump: "We're rounding 'em up in a very humane way, in a very nice way. And they're going to be happy because they want to be legalized. And, by the way, I know it doesn't sound nice. But not everything is nice."

Trump has also discussed having a "deportation force" to remove undocumented immigrants from the country, though he’s also said he would let some come back legally.

Trump stuck to the deportation plan for all undocumented immigrants in some of the GOP primary debates. During the CNN/Telemundo debate on Feb. 25, 2016, host Wolf Blitzer asked about his deportation force idea and whether his plan to let "good ones" back in amounted to amnesty. Trump said "we either have a country, or we don’t have a country."

"We have at least 11 million people in this country that came in illegally," he continued. "They will go out. They will come back -- some will come back, the best, through a process. They have to come back legally. They have to come back through a process, and it may not be a very quick process, but I think that's very fair, and very fine. They're going to get in line with other people."

 

[CBradSmith]

I dont think he said he was going to deport 11 million people, nor do I believe anyone really thinks that. I do, however, believe he needs to start with criminals and work out from there. I also believe that if we cut off all the money to illegals they will self deport. It is crazy that we give them free education and pay welfare benefits to them. I lived in the Czech Republic and I had to prove that I could support myself and there was no chance I would have been given money by the government.

Yeah, Pilt is building from a false place.

 

[CBradSmith]

Sept 2015?

Ancient history.

 

[07pilt]

lol

 

[ctrawick]

In an interview that aired in September 2015 on CBS’ 60 Minutes, Scott Pelley pressed Trump about what he would do with the population.

Pelley: "Eleven, 12 million illegal immigrants --"

Trump: "Or whatever the number is."

Pelley: "Still in the country, what do you do?"

Trump: "If they've done well, they're going out and they're coming back in legally. Because you said it--"

Pelley: "You're rounding them all up?"

Trump: "We're rounding 'em up in a very humane way, in a very nice way. And they're going to be happy because they want to be legalized. And, by the way, I know it doesn't sound nice. But not everything is nice."

Trump has also discussed having a "deportation force" to remove undocumented immigrants from the country, though he’s also said he would let some come back legally.

Trump stuck to the deportation plan for all undocumented immigrants in some of the GOP primary debates. During the CNN/Telemundo debate on Feb. 25, 2016, host Wolf Blitzer asked about his deportation force idea and whether his plan to let "good ones" back in amounted to amnesty. Trump said "we either have a country, or we don’t have a country."

"We have at least 11 million people in this country that came in illegally," he continued. "They will go out. They will come back -- some will come back, the best, through a process. They have to come back legally. They have to come back through a process, and it may not be a very quick process, but I think that's very fair, and very fine. They're going to get in line with other people."

Thanks, I dont watch much ABC, but I believe you. So if he does not "round them all up", but puts them through the process is that okay?

**sorry CBS

 

[07pilt]

sorry didn't see your edit.

 

[ctrawick]

I said you were right and that means I am wrong. Not the first time believe it or not. LOL.

What do you think about cutting off all of the illegals government money so they self deport?

 

[07pilt]

I said you were right and that means I am wrong. Not the first time believe it or not. LOL.

Sorry didn't see it.

What do you think about cutting off all of the illegals government money so they self deport?

That would probably work on all the immigrants receiving welfare.

 

[ctrawick]

Sorry didn't see it.

That would probably work on all the immigrants receiving welfare.

If you had to guess on the % what what would you say that is?

 

[07pilt]

If you had to guess on the % what what would you say that is?

0% of undocumented immigrants are legally on welfare.