Home | About | Donate

Electoral College Revolt? Dem Electors Seek to Reject Trump, Dismantle System


#1

Electoral College Revolt? Dem Electors Seek to Reject Trump, Dismantle System

Nika Knight, staff writer

As the right-wing specter of a Donald Trump presidency looms, Democratic electors are fomenting an unprecedented revolt in order to block Trump from taking a majority of Electoral College votes.

Politico reports that "at least a half-dozen Democratic electors" have agreed to the effort, which they also hope will serve to "undermine the legitimacy of the institution":


#2

Good to see any democrats actually respond to the nightmare they created. It's time the step in and pull a rabbit out of the hat and stop this from happening. Of course they never saw fit to dismantle the college before this but now will do.
In addition they need to address the many ways this election was a total fraud from the primary till now. They need to cry foul now and get the DOJ to investigate the rigging it took to put Trump in office. He was right, it was rigged, by Republicans. See GregPalast.com for numbers and tactics.


#3

I wish they would quit screwing around and abolish the obsolete, undemocratic EC.

Direct Democracy


#4

Not a bad idea on the face of it. Now, if the Dems had only been this worked up when W. Bush demonstrably stole the 2000 election (not to mention that the Electoral College, as usual, favored the red states), we wouldn't be in the fix we're in today. Way too little, way too late.


#5

The electoral college cannot be abolished without a constitutional amendment which in the current environment is inconceivable. We have to live with it, nothing can be reasonably done to abolish it.

It can be sidestepped, however. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would require the electors from the signatory states to vote for whoever one the popular vote at the national level. While I have a hard time imagining this passing in the current environment one never knows.

See: http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/


#6

You do know that getting rid of the electoral college would require an amendment of Article 2 Section 1 of the Constitution. Constitutional amendments needs to be passed by 2/3 majorities in the House, and Senate and then ratified by 3/4 of the states.

So, blaming the Democratic party for not doing it is a but unfair, don't you think?


#7

There has not been anything close to a 2/3 Democrat majority in the US Congress, not to mention Democrat majority legislatures in 3/4 of the states, since 2000. So how exactly do you think the Democrats could have done this?


#8

Since 2000, you say. QED.


#9

So this is what it comes down to ,.. our planet's, our country's, our futures determined at the craps table and with all our chips on snake eyes.Would someone please kiss the dice?


#11

Nor prior to 2000. Your point? Are you really suggesting Democrats could have refused to accept the results and at the same immediately changed the constitution? I also must have missed the Green Party's deep, long term grass roots campaign to eleminate the Electoral College. It must have bee every bit as successful as Green Party efforts always are.


#12

Who's this "they" you speak of?


#13

It was taught that protecting the small was the guiding principal for the Electoral College.

If we elected solely on the basis of popular vote, this would send the attention and solicitation to the population centers only, leaving out the rural and economically insignificant of our nation. Government spending would also evolve in this direction.

Should one be able to win Michigan by taking only Detroit or Wisconsin by taking only Milwaukee?
While one may dislike the outcome of this election, it does indeed show the validity of the Electoral College.

If we add up all the little rural forgotten people, it will rival the elite of the cities centers and in this case, out number however slimly, thus winning the local election.

So is it truly valid to say that a simple majority wins? Or should elections be weighted against the curve so to speak, so that equal consideration be given to those millions of citizens that simply are overlooked in defining the "Necessary" of our nation.

Do we really take into account the needs of Kenosha WI, or do we simply respond to the Silicon Valleys.

If all one needs is the most votes, then we would only campaign in NY LA Miami Chicago etc. would the candidate ever go to Wyoming or the Dakotas?


#14

Hi,

Thought you would be interested in knowing about a significant lat-ditch effort to dump Trump inside the Electoral College--throw the baby out and keep the bathwater. (Possible guests?...)

This is from hamiltonelectors.com, a site where at least two Electors are mounting a campaign to persuade colleagues to use the College as intended:

"The process of [the Electoral College] affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications."

~ Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers #68

"HamiltonElectors are patriots participating in the electoral process who believe that Presidential Electors are responsible for safeguarding our nation’s futureand ensuring that the next President is the best person for the job. As Electors, we honor Alexander Hamilton’s vision that the Electoral College should act as a Constitutional failsafe against those lacking requisite qualifications, ability, and virtue from becoming President. Guided by the Framers’ original intent, we’re compelled this year to do our job as Electors, to put party aside, and to put America first. So we are encouraging Electors from both red and blue states to answer the Founding Fathers’ call, deliberate, and unite behind an alternative Republican Candidate: the Hamilton Candidate. Americans of all political persuasions are invited to join us and show their support online, in their communities, and at their statehouse on December 19 when the Electoral College officially meets."

This site and a Facebook page has been lanched by two Democratic elcectors. Even if they to garner 270 votes, it would require just 37 Republicacans to vote for any other candidate to move the matter to the House. While it's a Hail Mary for sure, the Hamilton arguement might be sufficient to give many electors who are already inclined to dump Trump permission to stand on principle and use the process as intended. Never mind the anti-Democratic history and practices of the College. For now, throwing the baby out while keeping the bathwater feels like a strategic win within the bigger picture; though, if the political shock were to abolish the College, that would certainly advance the cause of forming a more perfect government!

Evidentially electors are being swamped with emails and phone calls by action committees like the one I'm associated with, the North Coast Peoples Alliance, which is located Northern California , and created to support Bernie and the political revolution. In addition to contacting Electors, we have a group writing letters to editors.

On the other hand Thom Hartmann and many others are taking the position that the College is made up of party insiders who won't dare get out of line. But I would argue it's just because they are insiders that they have so strongly opposed the outsider. Surely many inside the Republican establishment haven't completely lost their minds?

But perhaps they're able to normalize Trump despite the evidence. Have they actually been able to shift their perception based on a desire to normalize Trump? If so, they're probably not going to be happy with the reality they co-create.

But, unless something changes we are watching the rise of a friendly fascism that parallels events in Italy and Germany.

Actually what we are looking at is what some are calling the rise of "inverted fascism"; instead of the government taking over our economic system, it's the economic system taking over our government. Which is perhaps the winning promise that seals the deal for the 1%.

Still, the number is just 38!

Sent from my iPad


#15

At least as far as election to office.


#16

Mentioned and linked in the OP. Read.


#17

Okay. Now the ripe ideas begin to surface.

Don't worry. Make it so. Congress is a gridlock waiting to happen.

Trump does not scare me. Thirty-five degrees above normal at the north pole does.

Go for the gridlocked congress and then a new one in two years. About the time the new congress gets organized it will notice that presidential campaigns for 2020 have already started,

Nobody for president from 2016 - 2020 will be a good wake up call.


#19

Yeah, pretty clearly disproven. First, see Akhil Reed Amar, The Constitution Today (2016) and the several essays it reprints and references, showing it was really about that 3/5 extra person for every slave. It was about protecting those less (White) populous states, and it's a big part of the reason half of the first 10 Presidents were from slave-holding Virginia.

See also, indeed, good ol' Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Papers No. 68:

It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture.

It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.

But note, as pointed out in the OP, that the EC is so far from a deliberative body of any kind that the electors don't even meet in one place on December 19th, but in their 50 state capitals. Only in Maine and ?Nebraska? is there any news to be reported even there. Totally out of date. Time for it to go.


#20

Yeah, but see there are women and people of color going to the EC meetings, even Native Americans, already violating "the process as intended."


#21

With each election in the modern era, the party that loses huffs and puffs and prepares to blow the house down. But tomorrow's another working day, at least for the more fortunate, and none of us can risk losing our jobs. We settle in and hope we get through it.

We have had the Electoral College system for a very long time. It was established by Article Two of the United States Constitution to select the President of the United States and Vice President. It's a permanent fixture.

The Democrats have a bigger problem. The Dem voting base had long consisted of the poor and middle class, workers and the jobless, for the common good. The Clinton wing split this base wide apart, and the past eight years confirmed that this split is permanent.


#22

Race had nothing to do with it. Really.