Technically Hillary Clinton could still be elected President.

Rainman16

On December 19, The Electors of the Electoral College will meet and cast their ballots for the next President of the United States.

If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win.
However, they have the right to vote anyway they want, for Hillary Clinton if they choose.

The Electors can ignore their states' votes and cast their own ballots for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

It has never been done before, It is unprecedented. But so is the outcome of this election

There is currently a petition on Change.org with close to 3 million signatures of people urging the members of the Electoral College to do the right thing. On December 19th, they can save Americans from themselves.

godtabh

Yeah that's not going to happen.

In the same way Trump was not worried about his nomination and how the party could have blocked it he isnt worried about this.

keano25

Yawn.

StupidLikeAFox

They have already started the transition - hillary has conceded, obama is talking in conciliatory tones - there is no political will for this to happen

Donal55

Rainman16 wrote: »

On December 19, The Electors of the Electoral College will meet and cast their ballots for the next President of the United States.

If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win.
However, they have the right to vote anyway they want, for Hillary Clinton if they choose.

The Electors can ignore their states' votes and cast their own ballots for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

It has never been done before, It is unprecedented. But so is the outcome of this election

There is currently a petition on Change.org with close to 3 million signatures of people urging the members of the Electoral College to do the right thing. On December 19th they can save Americans from themselves.

So democracy for the little darlings means running to change. org every time a vote goes against them.
Gobsh1tes the lot of them.

Hank Scorpio

Electoral college to "Do the right thing".

Rainman16

godtabh wrote: »

Yeah that's not going to happen.

In the same way Trump was no worried about his nomination and who the party could have blocked it he isn't worried about this.

Probably not. But the possibility exists where the electors can effectively overwrite their state vote. Goes to show you how much of a myth democracy really is.

Rainman16

Donal55 wrote: »

So democracy for the little darlings means running to change. org every time a vote goes against them.
Gobsh1tes the lot of them.

Apparently only 16% of the 18 - 29 year old demographic actually voted.

Donal55

Rainman16 wrote: »

Apparently only 16% of the 18 - 29 year old demographic actually voted.

Same thing happened with Brexit. Then they cry foul when the oldies cast their votes.

johnnyskeleton

Mod note:

Leaving this thread open for the moment. The OP has been answered but there might be some debate on the whole "do the right thing element"

As far as i know, there have been turned or a "faithless elector", but these are rare occurences and with over 70 electors in the difference this wold require a significant loss of faith. Not exactly democratic!

martingriff

The Electoral College will vote as they have been told to by the people. There would be a crap storm (and rightfully so) if they did not. Trump is president he wanted to be elected so said what would get him elected. The only thing that could (and probably is happening) is those who are idiots will not think its acceptable to be racist etc because they saw he was. This will be something that has to be tackled quick by the Republican Party (as they were his nomination) and Trump himself

Rainman16

The electoral collage is such a ridiculous system, The fact that the people aren't actually voting for the president directly, but voting for "electors" to make the actual vote for them, and that it's actually possible that these electors can turn around and vote for whoever they want is so bizarre.

Would it be the right thing to do? That's up for debate.

But the fact that its even a possibility is strange, The reason it is, must be as a fail-safe measure to protect Americans from themselves.

Hank Scorpio

Rainman16 wrote: »

The electoral collage is such a ridiculous system, The fact that the people aren't actually voting for the president directly, but voting for "electors" to make the actual vote for them, and that it's actually possible that these electors can turn around and vote for whoever they want is so bizarre.

Would it be the right thing to do? That's up for debate.

But the fact that its even a possibility is strange, The reason it is, must be as a fail-safe measure to protect Americans from themselves.

I agree the system isn't perfect, but he won fair and square.

If you want a real revolution every American better hope the result isn't changed, because that's what I fear with happen.

Varik

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I agree the system isn't perfect, but he won fair and square.

If you want a real revolution every American better hope the result isn't changed, because that's what I fear with happen.

If the UK back tracked on Brexit there might be a riot, if the US did it it'd be civil war.

martingriff

Rainman16 wrote: »

The electoral collage is such a ridiculous system, The fact that the people aren't actually voting for the president directly, but voting for "electors" to make the actual vote for them, and that it's actually possible that these electors can turn around and vote for whoever they want is so bizarre.

Would it be the right thing to do? That's up for debate.

But the fact that its even a possibility is strange, The reason it is, must be as a fail-safe measure to protect Americans from themselves.

When amendment made in constitution they did not foresee something like that (Second amendment anybody)

Rainman16

Looking into the ramifications for electors who go against the grain on this one is actually quite small, the only penalty is a relatively small fine. Electors are also ironically un-elected officials who don't rely on popular opinion to maintain their position in society.

As well as Democratic electors there are also Republican "Never Trumpers" ( Like the Bush family) who apparently left their voting ballots blank. I wonder just how many republicans are as disgusted seeing what Trump has done to their political party.

FatherTed

Actually it's up to the States to decide how they will use their Electoral votes.

Also there is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact where so far 11 states have passed legislation to award all their respective electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the overall popular vote e.g. if Trump had won, the likes of CA and NY would have actually committed their Electoral Votes to him. I think this came about after 2000 with a similar outcome. Not surprisingly, these 11 states are all heavily Democratic.

About the Electoral College, I understand how it works and the original intent but does disenfranchise voters somewhat in larger populated states e.g. in NY it is 700,000 people per 1 vote as opposed to WY where it is 180,000 per vote. Also, in states that are heavily blue or red, some people will not bother voting as they know it won't be close anyway.

The EC also forces candidates to focus disproportionately on a small percentage of pivotal swing states, while sidelining the rest e.g. neither candidate visited California(except to fundraise) in the run up to the election.

BoJack Horseman

I suppose a petition is better than the 'Snowflake Rebellion' burning cars & smashing businesses in Oakland the last few nights.

Scenes not seen in this city since last Sunday when the Raiders beat Denver....

Rainman16

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

I suppose a petition is better than the 'Snowflake Rebellion' burning cars & smashing businesses in Oakland the last few nights.

Scenes not seen in this city since last Sunday when the Raiders beat Denver....

I wonder how many of these protesters actually voted.

Statistically 74% of 18 to 29 years old's didn't even vote

In my opinion, If you didn't vote in an election, you don't have a right to protest the outcome.

johnnyskeleton

Rainman16 wrote: »

In my opinion, If you didn't vote in an election, you don't have a right to protest the outcome.

Arguably even if you did vote in an election you still don't have a right to protest the outcome. Protest should be reserved for matters that are undemocratic. This is made all the worse in that as far as I know the US has fairly liberal absentee voting systems for students in college in a different State etc.

Equally, however, just because someone didn't vote doesn't, in my view, deprive them of a right to voice their opinions. So they are entitled to express their dissappointment, just not to disrupt other people by doing so!

Hank Scorpio

If it gets rough and the water cannons come out it will end pretty quickly. Most of these people protesting are kids who've been badly misguided.

BoJack Horseman

Rainman16 wrote: »

you don't have a right to protest the outcome.

Meh.... the flakes can protest all they want.
There doesn't have to be qualifiers in that sense.

All the flag-burning & car smashing just makes them look all the more anti-democratic in the eyes of the world.

But yes.... turnout is really poor.
Elections are won by those who turn up.
They just need to summon the will to leave their safe-spaces and the country is theirs!

martingriff

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Meh.... the flakes can protest all they want.

It makes them look all the more anti-democratic in the eyes of the world.

But yes.... turnout is really poor.
Elections are won by those who turn up.
They just need to summon the will to leave their safe-spaces and the country is theirs!

Sweet Jesus I would wish these phrases never came in to been and it make the person who says the sound like quiet a d1ck.

Looting and calling in to question a democratic vote is wrong. Protesting because you feel people may now feel they are able to be racist homophobic etc I am for

Hank Scorpio

martingriff wrote: »

Sweet Jesus I would wish these phrases never came in to been and it make the person who says the sound like quiet a d1ck.

Looting and calling in to question a democratic vote is wrong. Protesting because you feel people may now feel they are able to be racist homophobic etc I am for

A mindset which was magnified and presented by the corrupt media. Trump isn't the only one to blame here, faults lie on both sides.

martingriff

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

A mindset which was magnified and presented by the corrupt media. Trump isn't the only one to blame here, faults lie on both sides.

I agree

osmiumartist

Technically Trump could get every last electoral vote. It's only in the leftie bubble that everybody wants to "fix" the system in favour of Clinton.

Varik

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Meh.... the flakes can protest all they want.
There doesn't have to be qualifiers in that sense.

All the flag-burning & car smashing just makes them look all the more anti-democratic in the eyes of the world.

But yes.... turnout is really poor.
Elections are won by those who turn up.
They just need to summon the will to leave their safe-spaces and the country is theirs!

Those stats were very interesting, especially the turnout results.

Not sure it'll be a big shift as time goes on, the age bracket was 18-29 so unless it was very low for 18 to 24 and those old enough to know better did show up I doubt this change anything. wasn't even the 65+ who were the largest turnout, it was the 30-44 year olds.

Also interesting about the education levels of those who voted, more college graduates voted clinton and more none graduates voted Trump but they weren't huge differences (fifties for one and forties for the other).

martingriff wrote: »

When amendment made in constitution they did not foresee something like that (Second amendment anybody)

Government overstep, and generally tyranny was the point.

LeinsterDub

Alot of the states have laws against faithless electors.

osmiumartist

martingriff wrote: »

Protesting because you feel people may now feel they are able to be racist homophobic etc I am for

So just to be clear here, actually smashing stuff up is OK as long as you are protesting against possible violence?

uck51js9zml2yt

Is it really any different to our PR system.
Not all the votes are counted after the first count, only a proportion of them.
A different pile could lead to a different result.
All the nominees sign up to it as do the American nominees to their system.

alastair

osmiumartist wrote: »

Technically Trump could get every last electoral vote. It's only in the leftie bubble that everybody wants to "fix" the system in favour of Clinton.

I think the people advocating faithless voters' change are well aware of that. They're making their case on behalf of Clinton though, so will hardly be lobbying voters already committed to Clinton. That's nothing to do with 'bubbles' of any kind.

osmiumartist

Rainman16 wrote: »

As well as Democratic electors there are also Republican "Never Trumpers" ( Like the Bush family) who apparently left their voting ballots blank. I wonder just how many republicans are as disgusted seeing what Trump has done to their political party.

My feeling is nowhere near as many as are disgusted by what Clinton has done to theirs. Winning goes a long way to forgvieness too you'll find.

There's no way this will happen. And even if it did, it would cause uproar and make America even more viciously divided than it is now.

The Electoral College system is far from perfect; based on our idea of democracy it does seem very wrong that the candidate who won the popular vote did not win the election. But Trump won according to the rules of the system. Regardless of what one thinks about him (and I am not a fan, moreson for his backwards views on climate change than anything else), he is the democratically chosen President-elect. You don't have to respect his views, or even him as a person, to accept that. There is no point in trying to overturn the result at this stage.

As regards the protests, I think they're rather pointless and counter-productive but the vast majority of those engaging who do so peacefully are really not doing anything out of the way. Anyone involved in vandalism/violence/looting, on either side, is clearly in the wrong, and should face the consequences for such, but it is far too simplistic and ignorant to generalise all those engaging with the protest movement as a "special fascist libtard safe-spacer snowflake" or whatever meaningless combination of words some (emphasis: some) on the right like to lazily spew out.

osmiumartist

alastair wrote: »

I think the people advocating faithless voters' change are well aware of that. They're making their case on behalf of Clinton though, so will hardly be lobbying voters already committed to Clinton. That's nothing to do with 'bubbles' of any kind.

Why not? If people want to lobby for electors to ignore their state's wishes then Trump supporters sure as hell can do the same thing. Wouldn't surprise me if a few states would be disgusted enough to change to Trump if other states decide to ignore their own democratic process.
So yeah, it is a leftie bubble to think this can only work in favour of Clinton.

BoJack Horseman

martingriff wrote: »

Sweet Jesus I would wish these phrases never came in to been and it make the person who says the sound like quiet a d1ck.

Thanks.... I have a similar opinion of you too, but I didn't want to say anything until you did first!

The phrases are very apt.
The 'safe space' concept is very very real & is not a term of abuse.
Snowflake is obviously, but then "emotional fortitude of a toddler" doesn't roll off the tongue as nicely.

I mean, read the first paragraph of this journalism, or this slice of teeney-angst from Lena Dunham.

I can't think of a better word for the sheer scale emotional fragility of our generation when something doesn't go our way.

alastair

osmiumartist wrote: »

Why not? If people want to lobby for electors to ignore their state's wishes then Trump supporters sure as hell can do the same thing. Wouldn't surprise me if a few states would be disgusted enough to change to Trump if other states decide to ignore their own democratic process.
So yeah, it is a leftie bubble to think this can only work in favour of Clinton.

It's really not. Where has anyone claimed any such thing?

It's a deluded effort, but a counter lobby would be equally deluded.

martingriff

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Thanks.... I have a similar opinion of you too, but I didn't want to say anything until you did first!

The phrases are very apt.
The 'safe space' concept is very very real & is not a term of abuse.
Snowflake is obviously, but then "emotional fortitude of a toddler" doesn't roll off the tongue as nicely.

I mean, read the first paragraph of this journalism, or this slice of teeney-angst from Lena Dunham.

I can't think of a better word for the sheer scale emotional fragility of our generation when something doesn't go our way.

I never said some of those people are idiots and only say something is right unless it happens to someone else. It is just the phrases themselves and the people who say them tto make them sound superior

BoJack Horseman

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

The 'safe space' concept is very very real & is not a term of abuse.

It is a real concept for a reason, though. In certain situations it has a usefulness. I've been a member of university LGBT societies that were billed as "safe spaces" and I actually found that quite reassuring, as I'm sure many others did too.

Now obviously not every real-life situation is going to be a safe-space, and those who expect everyone and everything to treat the whole world as a safe space are naive at best, dangerously deluded at worst. But it's abuse and overuse of the concept that's the problem, not the concept itself.

Snowflake is obviously, but then "emotional fortitude of a toddler" doesn't roll off the tongue as nicely.

It's become such an overused trope at this stage though, along with SJW (which I must admit to having used myself in the past) and libtard.
Anyone who disagrees with anything vaguely right-wing? "Oh you special snowflake". :rolleyes: Where it once might have had some relevance, it's quickly become a really meaningless and cliched soundbite, often used by those to shut down people whose arguments they find too difficult to rebut.

And yes, I do recognise that this is not a one way street and those who disagree with anything vaguely left-wing are sometimes lazily shouted down as "literally fascists". But to me it seems like there are very few of these "regressive left" types outside of the confines of Twitter, Tumblr or a handful of painfully middle-class universities. Whereas increasingly right-wing rhetoric has become a lot more visible and powerful across Europe and the US, and it's not unreasonable for people to be concerned about that.

I mean, read the first paragraph of this journalism, or this slice of teeney-angst from Lena Dunham.

Ugh, trust me, there are many of us out there who would otherwise be written off as "safe-space libtard snowflakes" who can't stand Lena Dunham.

nhunter100

Rainman16 wrote:

Apparently only 16% of the 18 - 29 year old demographic actually voted.

Similar to the remoaners in the UK.

nhunter100

nhunter100 wrote: »

Similar to the remoaners in the UK.

"Remoaners" :rolleyes: There's another meaningless bullshít term that should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

The Brexit vote was very different to the American election in that it was consultative only and not legally-binding. So "remoaners" (by which I assume you mean voters who don't want Britain to commit economic suicide, or who weren't taken in by the lies of the Leave campaign) are perfectly entitled to keep fighting against Brexit, especially as it becomes increasingly obvious that those who advocated a Leave vote now have no idea how the hell to implement it.

feargale

Rainman16 wrote: »

On December 19, The Electors of the Electoral College will meet and cast their ballots for the next President of the United States.

If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win.
However, they have the right to vote anyway they want, for Hillary Clinton if they choose.

The Electors can ignore their states' votes and cast their own ballots for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

It has never been done before, It is unprecedented. But so is the outcome of this election

Wrong:
Rutherford Hayes 1876
Benjamin Harrison 1888
George W. Bush 2000

Rainman16 wrote: »

There is currently a petition on Change.org with close to 3 million signatures of people urging the members of the Electoral College to do the right thing. On December 19th, they can save Americans from themselves.

The only way HRC is going to win is if the Portland Putsch spreads nationwide.
If people want to change the rules they should do so when in power. It's a bit late now to be trying to move the goalposts.

P.S. I detest Trump but I love democracy. Being a democrat means you take your beating like a man. The losers do have one other option, to emigrate.

Manach

feargale wrote: »

The losers do have one other option, to emigrate.

Well - there is alway bringing their state with them
"Silicon Valley investors call for California to secede from the US after Trump win"
- Link.

feargale

Manach wrote: »

Well - there is alway bringing their state with them
"Silicon Valley investors call for California to secede from the US after Trump win"
- Link.

Yes, I forgot about that. But if I were you, Manach, I wouldn't be rushing to the bookies

alastair

feargale wrote: »

Wrong:
Rutherford Hayes 1876
Benjamin Harrison 1888
George W. Bush 2000



The only way HRC is going to win is if the Portland Putsch spreads nationwide.
If people want to change the rules they should do so when in power. It's a bit late now to be trying to move the goalposts.

P.S. I detest Trump but I love democracy. Being a democrat means you take your beating like a man. The losers do have one other option, to emigrate.

As is so often pointed out, the USA is a federal republic, not a democracy. The rules allow for what they're lobbying for, and if they succeeded it wouldn't have moved any goalposts. It obviously isn't going to happen, but they're quite entitled to advocate for it.

RobertKK

The electoral college exists because it is the United States, as in separate states who have their own separate laws and taxes apart from federal laws and taxes.
The electoral college gives each state a weighted vote, the EU has a similar voting system as in states have different weighted vote among the 28 members, but this is due to change in 2017.

The electoral college votes is all that matters, not the popular vote.
Blame the 6 million people who didn't vote for Democrats this election compared to the near 2 million less who voted for the Republicans or the 55% turn out.

Elections are decided by the agreed system which all candidates know before a vote is cast.
Elections are not decided by protests, riots or petitions.
There is no evidence of any major voter fraud that would make the election illegal.

It is fine to argue and disagree before an election, but when the election is deemed fair and once you haven't elected in people associated with terrorism, then people should accept the result and whoever you support, just hope the people in power do a good job for their country and on the international stage.

FISMA.

Rainman16 wrote: »

The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

The only reason Trump won is because WE are a Republic, not a Democracy.

Lesson over.

ligerdub

Rainman16 wrote:

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

Rainman16 wrote:

It has never been done before, It is unprecedented. But so is the outcome of this election

Give it up! You can take the little quote marks out there too for that matter. It's far from the first time that's happened, but it would be by the smallest margin.

The only thing unprecedented is the amount of idiots crying into the ether and being against democracy.

ligerdub

johnnyskeleton wrote:

As far as i know, there have been turned or a "faithless elector", but these are rare occurences and with over 70 electors in the difference this wold require a significant loss of faith. Not exactly democratic!

Yeah that has happened before, but it was done by mistake.

I'm only aware of one other such issue, where a voter abstained back in the Gore Bush election (not Florida, and it was a state Gore had won).

ligerdub

RobertKK wrote:

The electoral college votes is all that matters, not the popular vote. Blame the 6 million people who didn't vote for Democrats this election compared to the near 2 million less who voted for the Republicans or the 55% turn out.

Woah! Those 6 million voted for their preference. There is nothing to say they were default Democrats. Republicans lost votes from that pile too.

Stealthfins

Technically the world's a safer place.
Technically there will be no confrontation with mother Russia.
Thecnically made in American could be possible again.
Technically the liberals are off the wall.

RobertKK

ligerdub wrote: »

Woah! Those 6 million voted for their preference. There is nothing to say they were default Democrats. Republicans lost votes from that pile too.

CNN compared the results to 2012.
6 million less Democrat votes.
Near 2 million less Republican votes.