It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Martin75
If laws exist in certain states which make it impossible for an elector to select a candidate, other than the one selected by the popular vote, then why do those certain states have electors at all? Why, in those certain states, does the position exist, when clearly it has no power to do anything other than what its population demand?
The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;-The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;-The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President-The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
If any objections to the Electoral College vote are made, they must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and one Senator. If objections are presented, the House and Senate withdraw to their respective chambers to consider their merits under procedures set out in federal law.
originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: SlapMonkey
So, let me get this straight.
The position exists, but it has no power, meaning that in actual fact, there is no difference between having a state whose people directly vote for their preferred candidate, and a state which elects its candidate by way of an appointed elector?
Because you cannot have it both ways. Either they absolutely have the right to select whomsoever they see fit, or the position is simply ceremonial, and this recent kerfuffle means absolutely nothing, as do the particulars of the electoral process in the United States. I mean, is the position legitimate, or is it just flim flam?
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: TrueBrit
Because the electoral system is in the Constitution it can just be ignored or modified by law. The Constitution sets up the electoral college while also at the same time giving the states the authority to run their elections. That includes passing a law that governs how an elector must act.
Daniel found that suspending the Colorado requirement would have harmed the state's voters and jeopardized a peaceful presidential transition. "Part of me thinks this is really a political stunt to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president," said Daniel