Reply With Quote
crofl, after all the wining about faithless electors, clinton lost more votes than trump did
Texas had two: one voted for Ron Paul and another for Kasich. Washington had four: three for Colin Powell and one for Faith Spotted Eagle.
Eight Democrat electors have yet to vote. All the Republican electors have.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...e-results.html
crofl, after all the wining about faithless electors, clinton lost more votes than trump did
Reagan got one electoral vote in 1976.Texas had two: one voted for Ron Paul and another for Kasich. Washington had four: three for Colin Powell and one for Faith Spotted Eagle.
Eight Democrat electors have yet to vote. All the Republican electors have.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...e-results.html
Anyone remember that controversy?
Lib s
So...
Trump still wins 304 to 224 electoral votes.
And the percentage that matters... 56.9% vs. 41.9%.
One democrat elector voted for Faith Spotted Eagle.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christi...state-n2261602
At a 2:1 faithless democrat:republican, it could be said the democrats trying to push for faithless voters backfired on them.
or that the "controversy" was being massively overblown by networks like fox
What's with you Texans choosing electors who don't vote the will of the state :-) Hopefully they'll be blacklisted and never chosen again.
^He whooped that ass, Splits. Busted it wide open.
ha, ha.
LOL one of the Clinton pledged voters in Hawaii voted Sanders.
Probably a Rusky, tbh
Anyone clinging to any hope of an EC revolt was wasting way too much emotional energy.
Even if the 37 (?) needed electors switched votes, Clinton was never going to be the president.
does this qualify as irony
Yes, after the fact it's easy to ID a fake news item. Me? I was as nervous as a sissy at Boy's Town.
But, [we] were ignorant of the process/protocol of Electors. I was under the impression it was a permanent position only changed by a death certificate. Ipso facto someone could turn after 10 years. Ha. They're freshly hand picked by Republicans and Democrats. The margin for (error) is minuscule.
It's like that gd Deflate Gate in the NFL. I thought they were given brand new balls out of the box on the field. Jesus Christ, each QB has his own select balls.
Only if you're sitting in upstate New York on Huma's face.
True, but, what they wanted was delay. Enough time to get Trump's actual name linked to this hack scandal with a solid news carrier. A Watergate type situation. Put the election into the House would take time and provide delay. This link still may well be there. Nothing surprises me.
It was easy before the fact on this one.
I wouldn't vote for a ISIS supporter either.
Part of the Electoral College's original purpose was to protect slave-state power. Will it redeem its history now?
Born of Slavery, the Electoral College Could Stand Against Racism in 2016—and Stop Donald Trump
Slaves during slavery in the South. Photograph display on Gullah culture at Boone Hall Plantation.
History often comes full circle. It can be darkly ironic as well.
The Electoral College, an ins ution that helped to protect the white supremacist ignominy of black chattel slavery could now become the instrument used to stop Donald Trump, the avatar of contemporary white racism.
Politics and history are messy and complicated. Many people prefer simple stories about America’s past and present.
In the flat version of history, the Electoral College was created in the 18th century by the Framers as a council of elders who would serve as a check on the passions of the public, because they understood how such feelings could all too easily sweep through a democracy like a forest fire if left unchecked.
In reality, the Electoral College was part of a larger compromise that tried to balance the economic interests of different regions as well as the competing desires of various elites.
That compromise created a hybrid federal system of government that gave equal representation to each state (in the Senate) but also allowed for representation on the basis of population (the House of Representatives).
America was also a racialized “democracy” where several million black people would eventually be owned by whites as human property.
The enslavement, exploitation, rape, and destruction of black bodies were the economic engine that drove the American economy.
Thus, by both design and intent, the United States Cons ution was a pro-slavery and pro-Southern do ent.
The Electoral College was central to maintaining America’s white supremacist slavery regime.
[James] Madison knew that the North would outnumber the South, despite there being more than half a million slaves in the South who were their economic vitality, but could not vote.
His proposition for the Electoral College included the “three-fifths compromise,” where black people could be counted as three-fifths of a person, instead of a whole.
This clause garnered the state [of Virginia] 12 out of 91 electoral votes, more than a quarter of what a president needed to win.
“None of this is about slaves voting,” said [legal scholar Paul] Finkelman, who wrote a paper on the origins of the Electoral College for a symposium after Gore lost [in the 2000 election]. “
The debates are in part about political power and also the fundamental immorality of counting slaves for the purpose of giving political power to the master class.”
Time Magazine’s Akhil Reed Amar further details how the Electoral College helped to protect chattel slavery:
If the system’s pro-slavery tilt was not overwhelmingly obvious when the Cons ution was ratified, it quickly became so.
For 32 of the Cons ution’s first 36 years, a white slaveholding Virginian occupied the presidency.
Southerner Thomas Jefferson, for example, won the election of 1800-01 against Northerner John Adams in a race where the slavery-skew of the electoral college was the decisive margin of victory: without the extra electoral college votes generated by slavery, the mostly southern states that supported Jefferson would not have sufficed to give him a majority.
As pointed observers remarked at the time, Thomas Jefferson metaphorically rode into the executive mansion on the backs of slaves.
The 1796 contest between Adams and Jefferson had featured an even sharper division between northern states and southern states.
Thus, at the time the Twelfth Amendment tinkered with the Electoral College system rather than tossing it, the system’s pro-slavery bias was hardly a secret.
Indeed, in the floor debate over the amendment in late 1803, Massachusetts Congressman Samuel Thatcher complained that
“The representation of slaves adds thirteen members to this House in the present Congress, and eighteen Electors of President and Vice President at the next election.”
But Thatcher’s complaint went unredressed. Once again,
the North caved to the South by refusing to insist on direct national election.
This contradiction between slavery and freedom would require a civil war (which in many ways was a second founding) and the deaths of 750,000 Americans to partially resolve.
For various reasons, the relationship between chattel slavery and the Electoral College is not widely understood by the American public.
http://www.alternet.org/election-201...p-donald-trump
Slavery and racism has been a huge, enduring STAIN on the "American Experiment" that continues today and foreseeably into a distant future.
And now the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the USA is a ing racist from Alabama.
Can't believe Bill ing Clinton was an elector, while his wife was on the ticket! Seems like a conflict of interest to me.
Who's picking these stupid ing electors? They are supposed to represent the people who voted, not the people in other parts of the country who just happen to be famous.
Which is fine, but if you're going to accept a role of representing the popular vote for your state, you need to live up to it or kill yourself. Why is your opinion more important than that of a million others?
I explained why. If you think the candidate is supporting the enemy, that would be a good reason to vote against the public. That would be the exception to be a faithless elector. But maybe pressure I would choke and still vote Clinton given the backlash. Lol
lol.. this mindset is pervasive among the same folks who swear that citizens have a right to vote.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
