SCOTUS unanimous: Electors MUST obey the will of their voters

**Beetlegeuse** · 07-06-2020, 10:29 AM

So much for the sore losers from the 2016 POTUS election.

Supreme Court: States Can Punish ‘Faithless Electors’; Unanimous Decision

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that states may punish “faithless electors” — those members of the Electoral College who refuse to cast their ballots for the candidate whom the majority of voters in the state have chosen....

**kelkel** · 07-07-2020, 08:46 AM

It amazes me that they could think that they could disregard the will of the people and do what they want. WTF is wrong with people.

**Beetlegeuse** · 07-07-2020, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by kelkel

It amazes me that they could think that they could disregard the will of the people and do what they want. WTF is wrong with people.

"Though this be madness, yet there is method in 't."

-- Hamlet, Act 2, Scene 2

They might seem lunatic but they do have an end game in mind. Usurp the federal government and replace it with their own totalitarian socialist oligarchy.

What's wrong with them is today's 'mainstream' Leftists are purely Machiavellian. They want absolute power and are willing to do whatever it takes to get it. But they're thwarted in that cause because the dead old white guys who founded the country structured the Constitution cleverly enough that it in specific prevents such a relatively small number of wackadoodles seizing absolute power. It's the Constitution that prevents this so the Constitution must be disassembled brick-by-brick and destroyed.

If you do away with the electoral college, that makes it possible (in theory) for one county in one state to decide the outcome of the presidential election. But thanks to the electoral college, the citizens of Wyoming (all 600,000 of them) still have a credible voice in electing POTUS. And thanks to the US Senate, their state has power equal to the 38 million Mexifornians, at least in that one chamber.

**almostgone** · 07-07-2020, 11:54 PM

Originally Posted by Beetlegeuse

They might seem lunatic but they do have an end game in mind. Usurp the federal government and replace it with their own totalitarian socialist oligarchy.

What's wrong with them is today's 'mainstream' Leftists are purely Machiavellian. They want absolute power and are willing to do whatever it takes to get it. But they're thwarted in that cause because the dead old white guys who founded the country structured the Constitution cleverly enough that it in specific prevents such a relatively small number of wackadoodles seizing absolute power. It's the Constitution that prevents this so the Constitution must be disassembled brick-by-brick and destroyed.

If you do away with the electoral college, that makes it possible (in theory) for one county in one state to decide the outcome of the presidential election. But thanks to the electoral college, the citizens of Wyoming (all 600,000 of them) still have a credible voice in electing POTUS. And thanks to the US Senate, their state has power equal to the 38 million Mexifornians, at least in that one chamber.

....and funnel money to benefit themselves like there's no tomorrow.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ilh...ta-show-report

**HoldMyBeer** · 07-08-2020, 02:15 AM

The electoral college was instated way back in the days before information was as easily accessible and the majority of the population was not educated.
The idea behind it, is if a completely absurd person got voted in (say we decide to troll and elect bugs bunny or a serial killer), they can decline to honor that vote.
The idea is good, but it has been abused. They should not be able to do so without a good, undisputable, reason.

**charger69** · 07-08-2020, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by HoldMyBeer

The electoral college was instated way back in the days before information was as easily accessible and the majority of the population was not educated.
The idea behind it, is if a completely absurd person got voted in (say we decide to troll and elect bugs bunny or a serial killer), they can decline to honor that vote.
The idea is good, but it has been abused. They should not be able to do so without a good, undisputable, reason.

HMB- I disagree. I’m probably wrong though. LOL
The EC was formed so that the big population states (NY, TX,CA) would not be the determinate of the election.
The EC allows for the higher population states to cast more votes having a bigger say however not making just a handful of states determine the outcome.

What you are saying is true about being able to vote against the popular opinion, but I believe that there is sort of a checks and balances for when they want to vote contrary to the popular opinion.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**HoldMyBeer** · 07-09-2020, 02:23 AM

Originally Posted by charger69

HMB- I disagree. I’m probably wrong though. LOL
The EC was formed so that the big population states (NY, TX,CA) would not be the determinate of the election.
The EC allows for the higher population states to cast more votes having a bigger say however not making just a handful of states determine the outcome.

What you are saying is true about being able to vote against the popular opinion, but I believe that there is sort of a checks and balances for when they want to vote contrary to the popular opinion.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, that's true as well.
Those electoral votes are actually represented by politicians. And those politicians can decide not to cast their vote the same why the citizens voted. That's the aspect I was referring to.