• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Will every Republican delegate select Trump?

Foolmewunz said:
...Poor old Ruth. She's going to be wheeled in on life support rather than allowing Trump another appointment. He already gets to appoint the majority judge. America needs to prepare itself for a conservative court for the next generation.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is, several democrats a couple of years ago were trying to encourage her to retire, to allow Obama to replace her with a young, liberal judge, thereby ensuring that her seat would not be lost to the conservatives. She insisted that she saw absolutely no reason why she should step down, and regardless, she was certain that Obama's successor would be a democrat. I wonder if she would have stepped down if she had known a republican would be the next president. I also wonder why she felt so certain it would be a democrat. Seems foolish.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, all Hillary has to do is convince 38 Republican electors to back her. Piece of cake!
 
My answer is that, for the good of US democracy, all Republican electors should vote for Trump and any that do not should be heavily censured.

If the issue is one candidate won the popular vote and the other won the electoral college then it's hardly unique but if they want the system changing they should do it the right way - and good luck with that :rolleyes:

If the issue is that the Republican electors think that Trump is wholly unsuitable to be President then the GOP should never have selected him as their candidate - change the primaries process.

If the issue is that his policies are **** and he's appointing white supremacists to senior posts then the GOP and Democratic legislators should do their job and curb policies that are damaging.

Trump won fair and square* under the system that was in place at the time of the election. To deny him the Presidency would be churlish...


* - sure he lied - a lot - and has done and said things that would have disqualified any candidate in the past but the US electorate looked past that for whatever reason and elected him. Sure there have been vote suppression steps taken in some states but the truth is that if Hillary had managed to get the Democratic Party vote out then she would have won at a canter. The FBI pitching in 11 days from the election may also have been a factor but it *should* not have mattered. The only reason to not select Trump would be revelations of wide-scale voting irregularities either in person or by hacking. There is absolutely no evidence of such....
 
The Don said:
My answer is that, for the good of US democracy, all Republican electors should vote for Trump and any that do not should be heavily censured.

If the issue is one candidate won the popular vote and the other won the electoral college then it's hardly unique but if they want the system changing they should do it the right way - and good luck with that :rolleyes:

If the issue is that the Republican electors think that Trump is wholly unsuitable to be President then the GOP should never have selected him as their candidate - change the primaries process.

If the issue is that his policies are **** and he's appointing white supremacists to senior posts then the GOP and Democratic legislators should do their job and curb policies that are damaging.

Trump won fair and square* under the system that was in place at the time of the election. To deny him the Presidency would be churlish...


* - sure he lied - a lot - and has done and said things that would have disqualified any candidate in the past but the US electorate looked past that for whatever reason and elected him. Sure there have been vote suppression steps taken in some states but the truth is that if Hillary had managed to get the Democratic Party vote out then she would have won at a canter. The FBI pitching in 11 days from the election may also have been a factor but it *should* not have mattered. The only reason to not select Trump would be revelations of wide-scale voting irregularities either in person or by hacking. There is absolutely no evidence of such....
Click to expand...

As to the "He's So Reprehensible" or "He's Such a Crook/Liar/Whatever" sentiment:

It is my duty as a voter to figure this out. The fact that he conned his way into the job is not a viable reason to negate the vote. The Dems and other opponents, even those in the GOP, fell short in the job of educating the voters, if that indeed is the problem.

I hate the Electoral College and the system surrounding it. But Trump won according to the rules laid down before the cards were dealt. We don't wait until he's scooped up the chips on the table to say, "Ah, but if this was Deuces and One-Eyed Jacks Wild, we have five aces so would win."

I can live with the occasional maverick elector. A concerted effort to turn them just based on the fact that they disagree with me? No. A truly YUGE scandal would have to break before I'd agree that they should change their votes.
 
lionking said:
What if we see more appalling news about Trump's previous behaviour? Like a credible rape allegation? This is entirely hypothetical, but if a rape charge were to be laid, wouldn't delegates think twice?
Click to expand...

Yeah, or it might turn out that Donald Trump is a cannibal. Or Donald Trump was the second gunman on the grassy knoll. Or that he's an alien and therefore not a natural born American citizen. I suppose any of these things could happen just as they could have been true of Hillary Clinton. While there may possibly be a few faithless electors I think this scenario is highly unlikely.
 
lionking said:
What if we see more appalling news about Trump's previous behaviour? Like a credible rape allegation? This is entirely hypothetical, but if a rape charge were to be laid, wouldn't delegates think twice?
Click to expand...

No. He could do anything he wants.
 
timhau said:
I hope not. A stable democracy like the US can survive a bad president. I'm not sure it can survive if those dissatisfied with election results start tinkering with the process after the results are in.
Click to expand...

It can if the result is a swift electoral reform.

That said, the rules are clear: the president is elected by the Electoral college alone. Votes in various states are advisory as far as the Federal law is concerned. It's a very thin ice though, I agree.

McHrozni
 
lionking said:
What if we see more appalling news about Trump's previous behaviour? Like a credible rape allegation? This is entirely hypothetical, but if a rape charge were to be laid, wouldn't delegates think twice?
Click to expand...

Come on. That stuff doesn't matter anymore.

He could RAPE someone in the oval office and it wouldn't matter to these sycophants he's brainwashed.
 
NoahFence said:
...
He could RAPE someone in the oval office and it wouldn't matter to these sycophants he's brainwashed.
Click to expand...

Bil Clinton proved that a President can take advantage of a very junior employee, so I guess you are probably right. It worked on the Democrat sycophants.
 
But what if the republican electors all got together and elected Carson?

Or Carson as a 'third party', leaving Hilary with less than 270, but highest score?
 
Foolmewunz said:
I hate the Electoral College and the system surrounding it. But Trump won according to the rules laid down before the cards were dealt. We don't wait until he's scooped up the chips on the table to say, "Ah, but if this was Deuces and One-Eyed Jacks Wild, we have five aces so would win."
Click to expand...
Normally I would agree with you, but consider that the biggest objection to a Trump presidency (the SC justice seat) is only an issue because the GOP has been abusing just such a technicality for, what, a year now?

So while I don't think it'll happen, I'd love to see them try. Munchkins getting munchkined is the sweetest kind of irony.
 
casebro said:
Bil Clinton proved that a President can take advantage of a very junior employee, so I guess you are probably right. It worked on the Democrat sycophants.
Click to expand...

A was unaware that Bill Clinton was proved to have had unconsentual sex....:rolleyes:
 
Why do nearly all states give all of their electors to one candidate?

I can see how once that system is in place the current majority in any state won't be inclined to change it. But what was the thinking behind choosing that setup in the first place?
 
lionking said:
What if we see more appalling news about Trump's previous behaviour? Like a credible rape allegation? This is entirely hypothetical, but if a rape charge were to be laid, wouldn't delegates think twice?
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the GOP leadership would love to impeach Trump and install Pence.
 
casebro said:
You do realize that Hawaii is extremely Democrat.
Click to expand...
You do realize Democrat is a noun and not an adjective. :rolleyes:

Your sentence sounds as awkward as it gets.

As for HI being a blue state, chances are good those folks in the bar were tourists.
 
Last edited:
lionking said:
What if we see more appalling news about Trump's previous behaviour? Like a credible rape allegation? This is entirely hypothetical, but if a rape charge were to be laid, wouldn't delegates think twice?
Click to expand...

No, they would rather put him in then remove him right away so pence can be president. They are not going to give the presidency to some other party.
 
mbp said:
Why do nearly all states give all of their electors to one candidate?

I can see how once that system is in place the current majority in any state won't be inclined to change it. But what was the thinking behind choosing that setup in the first place?
Click to expand...

Two..Nebraska and Maine...don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom