Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Breaking: Electoral College Chooses Donald Trump as President
The electors kept the faith:
Electoral College members across the nation voted to affirm President-elect Donald Trump’s victory on Monday, as liberal attempts to sway Republican electors to abandon Trump fizzled.
Republican electors stayed loyal to their candidate, keeping Trump well above the 270 electoral vote threshold needed to secure the nomination.
Texas’ 36 electoral votes for Trump pushed him over the edge at around 4:30 Central Time, even though two rogue electors’ defections deprived Trump of one of those votes. That gave Trump 295 total electoral votes.
The Republican-controlled Congress, a body even more unlikely to be swayed by pressure than the Electoral College, will certify the vote on Jan. 6.
Interesting sidenote:
Published in PoliticsMore Democratic electors are defecting than Republicans in the Electoral College vote so far.
Four Democratic electors in Washington state cast votes for candidates other than Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who carried the state.
Democratic electors in Maine, Minnesota and Colorado have separately tried to cast votes for different candidates, but saw their ballots barred. Clinton carried all three states.
Yes! The enormous irony of all this, is that my understanding of a RINO was someone who maximized the power and influence of the Republican Party, with only secondary regard for how it served the conservative agenda. For now, at least in the short term, the power and influence of the Republican Party is completely tied into unity behind Donald Trump. Donald Trump cannot continue as an anti-establishment figure because now he is the establishment.
True.
As a prospective voter, the question then becomes “Why should I go to the trouble of voting if the elector is just going to whatever the hell he or she wants in December?”
He didn’t say you were good at it.
So did I. I can go to the HuffPo and get my daily Trump-bashing needs met there. I don’t need to pay $5 a month for it, either.
I am not convinced this is the case, politically speaking that is. We are already seeing indications of how the media is fully invested in being 100% anti-Trump and he is in fact deliberately fueling this it seems, tweet by tweet. My suspicion is that the next four years will be Trump, even in the White House, presiding as the one fighting for the little guy against mainstream media and coastal elites. Based on what we have seen so far, I suspect he may be able to pull it off.
We interrupt this teeth gnashing and rending of garments to point out a few things.
One, the EC is pre-party. It was intended to be neither rubber stamp or emergency break since the people weren’t supposed to vote for the president in the first place.
Second, the EC has been kept primarily because of what it has organically evolved into, a method of keeping the executive beholden to many states and not just one. It enhances the political fortunes of all the states.
You can predict all sorts of bad things about a Trump presidency. But being subjected to mob rule isn’t one of them.
And if your major worry is that Trump is a vulgar little man, well, get over it. Most politicians are vulgar little people and we’ve survived many of them. I’m more worried about the vulgarities of the culture, the new issuers of the scarlet letters, those that have decided it’s better to lord over you than to seek compromise and accommodation for all.
See now, I get nervous when people use language like that to describe our Constitutional institutions. You know what sort of things evolve organically? Living things, as in a Living Constitution.
If you want a system where the winner of each state’s popular vote automatically wins that state’s electoral votes, with no possibility for human deliberation or judgement to change the outcome, then fine: pass an amendment. Until that happens, in my view the rules haven’t changed since the 12th Amendment in 1804, therefore the electors still have the legal and Constitutional right to vote for any eligible candidate.
Widespread use of that right would be a really good way to start a civil war.
Agreed. It’s a right best reserved for use in truly extraordinary circumstances. Fred seems to think this year’s election qualifies, but I don’t.
But in this case originalism ceases to be possible. Not only is this evolution caused by external things like the creation of parties, but by legitimate Constitutional changes like the direct election of Senators.
Why would amending the rules for electing Senators somehow inadvertently change the rules for electing Presidents as well?
So, gross elitist wannabe?
Somebody made a model of the Robot from Tom Baker’s first full episode? Cool.
If this year doesn’t qualify, I’m not sure what does.
But considering that Trump is likely to inspire generations of even worse imitators, we may find out.
Yep, very close. Real elites (think Downton Abbey) have an understanding and a kind of respect for the little guy. They learn not to flaunt their status and learn quite well exactly how not to rile up the underlings. That’s half of their entire upbringing – how to deal with servants. It’s quite an art actually. They are aware that their station and status goes only so far.
But all that culture is lost on most of todays elites, or elite sympathizers, who need not have attended ivy league schools or have grown up with old money. They can come from humble beginnings. All they need is an inflated sense of self-importance and undue influence.
Maybe there is a better word for someone who wants a coterie of smart, enlightened people like them to run everything. It’s an attitude, not a class.
It is profoundly undemocratic and un-American. But that’s just my nationalism talking, I suppose…
I’m having a hard time understanding your premise here? What institution is Trump tied to? If anything, I see him as a lightning rod that was energized by people who are disgusted by nearly every institution in this country. I can’t think of one of those institutions that didn’t fight him. Institutions didn’t put him into power. More than any president in quite some time, the people put Trump in power. More accurately, people who have been excluded from our cultures powerful institutions and have been ridiculed by them.
continued –
And this explains some of the misunderstanding and animosity regarding Mr. DJT, the billionaire ‘populist’ lacking ‘class’ coming from these elite wannabes . They can’t understand how the rabble aren’t full of envy for his wealth. They see it as hypocritical or some odd cognitive dissonance. They mock his accent, a clear sign of class-contempt.
Anything unorthodox makes their heads explode, so attached to, and unquestioning of, tradition they are. They hold fixed definitions and labels in their consciousness rendering them utterly incapable of understanding real phenomena. They cannot analyze things objectively – or even objectively enough – to be given the ability to rule.
That’s why the founders set up our system with term limits for the Presidency, required only a mature age (35) and legacy citizenship.trusting the people with the rest. It’s worked pretty well so far.
Again, your opinion, which you are elevating above everyone else. It is the height of arrogance to want to cause the chaos in our nation that overriding the vote surely would, because one Fred Cole thinks it would be a disaster. You are so sure you are right, and the people are wrong, you want to deny them their choice.
I cannot think of anything more un-libertarian, than the desire to tell all the voters that their votes do not matter, and that someone else, besides Trump or Clinton should be put into place. The presumption! Fred Cole knows best, and therefore the People should be denied.
Calling for the EC to have done differently is calling for one of the most totalitarian things I have ever seen called for on Ricochet. It is not, as you claim, republican values, and it sure as heck ain’t libertarian.
This is THE major worry for most of NT, as I see it. Trump is so common, they just cannot stand it. He says un-PC things, he speaks off the cuff, like an ordinary person.
@franco I don’t agree with@fredcole in this thread, but I’m pretty sure what you wrote bears no resemblance to his thought process whatsoever.
I swear, some of you are just as bad as the left in your inability to attribute disagreement to anything other than hate.
*facepalm*
What, no image?
He’s not tied to them. It’s more that, rather than act as a check to stop what is clearly a horrifying mistake, they less him pass through.
Just to clarify, for the sake of all of you talking about “the people” and “their choice,” a clear majority of “the people” chose someone other than Donald Trump.
So please keep that in mind when you talking about the arrogant presumption of wanting to deny “the people” and “their choice.”
The republican system that you say you support, allows for the selection of a candidate based not on a majority population, but majority state. As such, having no one candidate pass 50% does not case chaos.
That being said, the majority of voters in a majority of states, voted for Trump. That is an election by a majority. It might not be 50% of the voters, but then, Clinton (H) did not get that either. Nor did Clinton (B) the first time. Nor did Bush (W) the first time. However, we can say that the Will of the People was followed in all these elections, even if the majority of voters voted for someone else, because that is how the system works.
It seems to me here, you want to eat your cake and have it too. First, you tout we are a republic, and therefore, it is OK to over turn the vote, morally. Then, when that is called elitist, you switch to saying “Well, the will of the people is for someone else”. The only thing you have been consistent upon, is that you are against Trump, no matter the cost, no matter the damage to the Republic.
That is not clear at ALL. First of all, it’s pretty much a guarantee that millions of her votes were dead people and illegals. But most important, if the election had been based on the popular vote from the start, both campaigns would have been run entirely differently. Also, millions of conservatives in California who stayed home because their votes don’t matter under the EC would have voted. I believe Trump would have won the popular vote in this scenario. As it is, though, due to the reasons I outline above, the popular vote is meaningless. We’d have to do the whole election over.
The institution that you claim is a necessary stopgap to prevent a demagogue like Trump from becoming president is the very thing that keeps “the clear majority of people” from simply deciding the president via popular vote. This hypocrisy cuts both ways, Fred Coal.
Maybe this is just a case of you finding horror where most others do not. I’m very wary of Trump despite voting for him. Despite my hesitation, I still find the use of such rhetoric as “horror” to be disappointing and discouraging to any helpful discourse. He’s our president. It is time for adults to step up. He is open to dialogue with conservatives but sulking and hyperbole from conservatives could prove cancerous.