General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFederalist Paper 68
Federalist Paper 68 argues that the function of the electoral college is so that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any [person] who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. The framers of the constitution were hoping to avoid a situation in which the voters at large were swayed by a candidate who had talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity.
Who wrote Federalist Paper 68? Alexander Hamilton
oldtime dfl_er
(6,931 posts)but believed to be Hamilton.
world wide wally
(21,740 posts)jalan48
(13,859 posts)SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)With the consent of both the House and the Senate, electoral votes can be rejected and not counted as cast.
bigmonkey
(1,798 posts)That "victory" would be transparently partisan. I'm in favor of that outcome, compared to rolling over.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)if the House and Senate reject a vote that goes against the will of the people of that state?
For example, Colorado. One of their electors, I believe his last name is Baca, is threatening to not cast his electoral vote for Hillary Clinton, in an attempt to reach a compromise with electors in other states for a third candidate. Get enough votes, throw the election to the House and let the House elect the third candidate rather than either Trump or Clinton.
If Mr. Baca follows through and votes for a third party (as in individual, not necessarily party), I would assume that Colorado's Democratic House member and their Democratic Senator would file a written objection, and make the case for rejecting that electoral vote. Would you consider those objections to be transparently partisan, or would you consider them as those two members standing up for the electoral vote chosen by the voters of Colorado?
I would consider it the latter.