It is important to remember, or perhaps simply to recognize, the United States is not a democracy, but rather a republic. As it relates to the
Electoral College, the distinction means that voters are not voting for the presidential candidates themselves, but rather for a representative to
vote on their behalf when the members of the Electoral College meet about a month after the presidential election to officially determine the winner.
There is an often overlooked aspect of the Constitution and that is the Framers of the Constitution did not trust the voting masses to make good
decisions. This is evident throughout, but very clearly in the electoral design of both the Senate and the president. The Framers created an Electoral
College, or, at least in theory, a group of well-informed statesmen to act as a protective wall between the electorate and the selection of the
presidency. Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 68, 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” who “possess the information and discernment requisite to such
complicated investigations. Sadly, for the first time in American history, the Electoral College is now seeing what is happening with the people, and
the division the outcome of this election has caused. They are now being encouraged to validate its original mission: to prevent the election of an
individual who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications, with the talents for low intrigue. Faithless Electors are
members of the Electoral College, who, for whatever reason, do not vote for their party’s designated candidate.
Since the founding of the Electoral College, there have been 157 faithless electors. 71 of these votes were changed because the original candidate
died before the day on which the Electoral College cast its votes. Three of the votes were not cast at all as three electors chose to abstain from
casting their electoral vote for any candidate. The other 82 electoral votes were changed on the personal initiative of the elector. Sometimes
electors change their votes in large groups, such as when 23 Virginia electors acted together in 1836. Many times, however, these electors stood alone
in their decisions. As of the 2004 election, no elector has changed the outcome of an election by voting against his or her party’s designated
candidate. Keep in mind that just because the media has called the election one way does not mean that that’s actually the outcome of the election.
Twenty states do not legally require their electors to vote for the candidate who receives the most votes. However, in a literal sense, those electors
would be following the original intent of the framers, and view their role as voting for the good of the country and not vote merely along party
lines. Elements of the Democratic Party have not given up. There is a concerted effort, to convince Republican-pledged Electoral College Electors to
switch their votes to Hillary Clinton. With 20 Electoral College votes still up for grabs it is conceivable that Hillary would need to “flip” just
21 of Trump’s 290 pledged votes to take the Presidency. The #NeverTrump movement may come back into play on December 19th, when the Electoral
Though Clinton officially conceded the race to Trump the morning after his reported win, a concession is not legally binding. During the 2000 election
Al Gore conceded to George Bush on the night of the election, only to begin court proceedings a few short hours later to contest the results and
initiate recounts. John Podesta took the podium after the Trump win and smugly said that Hillary would not concede. He bemused; "We can wait a little
longer, can’t we? They’re still counting votes and every vote should count. Several states are too close to call so we’re not going to have
anything more to say tonight." He was hinting at a Plan B, ironically, the media asked Trump if he would accept the election results, insinuating that
he was going to lose. Now that he has won, the riots that are happening indicates the other side refuses to accept the results of the election.
Change.org has already filed a petition asking members of Red States Electoral College to turn on the will of the people of their state and cast a
vote for Hillary instead of Trump. Now keep in mind this is constitutionally legal. It has happened before however none of those faithless votes ever
resulted in a significant shift in the election. Electors are bound by most states to cast the vote for their pledged party and failure to do so comes
with fines and, in some cases, jail time. The election is definitely not over until the electoral votes are cast on December 19. If Hillary can flip
10 votes, we may see the will of the people ignored again.
This is seen as subterfuge in a way to forge a coup d’etat before Trump even takes office on January 20th 2017. There have been attempts at
overthrowing a presidency before in this country. In the 1930’s a group of wealthy industrialists had been plotting to overthrow the government of
President Franklin D. Roosevelt in a military coup. One of the Marine Corps most highly decorated generals, Smedley Darlington Butler, was asked to
head up an Army of 500,000 men to do the job. He refused. It was a Nazi Plot where Wall Street interest threatened to overthrow the government. They
were a front called the American liberty League and those who supported it were several major companies including Heinz, Maxwell house Coffee,
Colgate, U.S. Steel, and General Motors. The chief organizer was Prescott Bush. Now you have been given your dark civics lesson. Considering how big a
lead Trump has, who the electors are, how their votes are counted, and hundreds of years of American democratic norms, statistics point to this being
a liberal left fantasy play. But, it’s never been tested, and the Constitution gives the electors the right to make the final call. The dark
question is whether or not the comparison of Brexit and Trump will play out to a vetoing of the will of the people. If electors should simply choose
to make Hillary Clinton president, this would be tremendously dangerous for American democracy if it ever gained popularity.
Furthermore, electors overturning Trump particularly would certainly cause a constitutional crisis, because there is no world in which the Republican
Party, who again, controls Congress, would accept Clinton taking the presidency in this way. So, Change.org is now encouraging what would be
considered a call for destroying American democracy, at least so far as it relates to presidential election results. People are already asking for his
impeachment before Trump can even get the chance to do anything, without any clear idea of what his potential for making real change is. Do we really
want civil war in America?
November 14, 2016