Hillary Clinton may still win the presidency. Here's how.

Buckly J. Ewer said:
maxresdefault.jpg
Click to expand...

you realize Hilliary's already conceded the election, right?.....
 
I signed the petition. The electoral college should cease in their attempt to undemocratically appoint an unelected leader in violation of the will of the American people.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
this idea, should it actually bear fruit, is one sure way to start the rebellion. down with the empire.
Click to expand...

Oh, you're trying to overturn the will of the American people and appoint and unelected despot, but we're wrong for actually trying to appoint the person the American people elected? What kind of nonsense is that?
 
anatta said:
electoral college functioned as designed. Small population states need protection from Florida/NY/CA -or they would overwhelm the vote.

The country is a federal republic.
Click to expand...

You're an idiot. That's a post-hoc rationalization which has nothing to do with what actually happened. The electoral college rewards people who have narrow majorities. Obama could easily have won the electoral college in 2012 without the popular vote because of his strong position there despite being popular mainly in large states. And Trump mainly won because of his narrow majorities in a small number of states (a small majority of Michigan was able to totally nullify the votes of hundreds of thousands who voted for Hillary), rather than because of his popularity in small states.

And small states are virtually irrelevant under the electoral college, it massively rewards large bloc votes like Ohio, while New Hampshire is virtually irrelevant even though it's more of a swing state. Fact is that the founders never expected the electoral college to cast a vote by rote anyway.
 
I'm pretty sure that back in the 1780's Alexander Hamilton and John Madison were just sitting back in their chair, thinking of the best way to appoint a fascist demagogue in violation of the will of the American people. You should really design a system to prevent against the election of fascist demagogues, not to ensure it. Somehow, some idiot out there is thinking that founders seriously had it in their head "Hey, how do we best shove Donald fucking Trump down the unwilling throats of the American people"?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you realize Hilliary's already conceded the election, right?.....
Click to expand...

You realize that a concession speech has no legal binding whatsoever.
Let me ask the good Pastor just what he believes the electoral was designed and implemented into the constitution for if not to provide protection and a buffer against an unqualified populist president who got a minority of the vote.

As I said Pastor THIS IS IT.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
I wouldn't have to supply all the ammo. Out of the 60 million that voted for trump, if 3% of them rebelled, you'd be dealing with 1.8 million violently pissed off individuals. that is double the number of total law enforcement in the US. good luck handling that.
Click to expand...

And if 3% of the people that voted for Hillary rebelled, you'd be dealing with even more people. Go figure.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
there's only a handful of states that allow the electors to vote for a candidate that wasn't popularly elected. Of those states, those electors that do so will be forced to pay a heavy fine. I doubt you liberals will be inclined to pay those fines for them.



don't care, especially as a johnson voter. i'm telling you now that those electors that vote the opposite of what the people intended better have their life insurance policies caught up.
Click to expand...

The electors that vote for Trump are voting opposite to what the people intended. So yes, they had better have their life insurance policies caught up.
 
Comrade Watermark said:
I'm pretty sure that back in the 1780's Alexander Hamilton and John Madison weren't thinking the best way to elect a fascist demagogue in violation of the will of the American people. You should really design a system to prevent against the election of fascist demagogues, not to ensure it. Somehow, some idiot out there is thinking that founders seriously had it in their head "Hey, how do we best shove Donald fucking Trump down the unwilling throats of the American people"?
Click to expand...

The framers saw this coming. The provision to protect us is there in the constitution...
The electoral college will do their job...

the-great-surprise-coming-soon.jpg
 
Buckly J. Ewer said:
Let me ask the good Pastor just what he believes the electoral was designed and implemented into the constitution for if not to provide protection and a buffer against an unqualified populist president who got a minority of the vote.
Click to expand...
it was proposed to get the smaller states to agree to participate in the Union......its purpose was to prevent the largest states from running roughshod over the smaller ones......it was not meant as a salve to butt hurt liberals......I will say this, however......I actually relish the devotion you have put into this issue......it means I get to lengthen the time I get to remind you that you lost until after mid December......
 
Comrade Watermark said:
I'm pretty sure that back in the 1780's Alexander Hamilton and John Madison were just sitting back in their chair, thinking of the best way to appoint a fascist demagogue in violation of the will of the American people. You should really design a system to prevent against the election of fascist demagogues, not to ensure it. Somehow, some idiot out there is thinking that founders seriously had it in their head "Hey, how do we best shove Donald fucking Trump down the unwilling throats of the American people"?
Click to expand...

we could have something like a primary system where people select the candidate over plenty of others. Of course that gets defeated when one party just selects theirs.
 
Buckly J. Ewer said:
There are sixteen states that allow the electors to vote their conscience as the constitution originally called for... 160 electors, many more than enough, especially when you consider that every vote taken from Trump would go to Hillary...
It really wouldn't take all that many "faithless electors" to turn the outcome...
The "heavy fine" you speak of is a whopping $1000. No doubt a lot of money in the 1770s, but the figure was never changed to keep up with inflation...
Clinton would be glad to help these republican "never trumpers" cover their expenses, I'm sure...
Click to expand...

if i understand it correctly the slate of electors comes from the campaign itself. Why would trump appoint nevertrumpers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top