NY: Hillary Clinton to serve as an elector

[Jersey mike]

https://www.radio.com/1010wins/news/state/hillary-clinton-to-serve-as-ny-state-electoral-college-voter

“ “I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people, and to me, that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president,” she said, according to CNN.”


I’d like to say the woman has no idea what a democracy is or why we have the electoral college but that would be false. She knows exactly why we have it and why it works.

[Rams]

Had the electoral college gone her way in 2016 she'd be singing another tune.
She's a voice from the past that the echo won't go away.   It will diminish with time.  

Ignore it and it will eventually go away.   Very few pay attention to what HRC says.  

Rams

[Chrisj CMA]

You would think they would select electors with a reputation for integrity not the opposite

[Patrick]

She has been a marxist since college and is not about to change.  She has to know exactly why we have the Electoral College but is not about to tell her followers why. She just keeps them looking straight ahead and not thinking for themselves. Its amazing the number of people that still listen to her and probably would vote for her again.

[F6Dave]

Of course it won't happen, but if NY voted for Trump she'd be legally obligated to cast her elector's vote for him.  Wouldn't that be interesting.

[Oss]

from your mouth to the Lord's ears

She should be in Gitmo awaiting a military tribunal along with Schiff

[Moonshot_1]

Of course it won't happen, but if NY voted for Trump she'd be legally obligated to cast her elector's vote for him.  Wouldn't that be interesting.

As I understand it and how it works.

When a candidate registers in a state as running for the office of President they present their slate of electors to the state. It is the slate of electors that we vote on. So Trump and Biden will have their own set of electors in each state. In this case the electors are chosen at the respective conventions for each state. One of the reasons the political parties have conventions.

So there is no elector that must choose between candidates. They are already committed to that candidate if the people vote for the slate of electors they are already are on.

So, Hillary is an elector on the Democrat Slate of electors in NY. If Trump wins NY it is Trump's and the Republican slate of electors that will win and be counted. Not the Democrat slate. 

[The emperor has no clothes]

Of course it won't happen, but if NY voted for Trump she'd be legally obligated to cast her elector's vote for him.  Wouldn't that be interesting.

As I understand it and how it works.

When a candidate registers in a state as running for the office of President they present their slate of electors to the state. It is the slate of electors that we vote on. So Trump and Biden will have their own set of electors in each state. In this case the electors are chosen at the respective conventions for each state. One of the reasons the political parties have conventions.

So there is no elector that must choose between candidates. They are already committed to that candidate if the people vote for the slate of electors they are already are on.

So, Hillary is an elector on the Democrat Slate of electors in NY. If Trump wins NY it is Trump's and the Republican slate of electors that will win and be counted. Not the Democrat slate. 

Exactly. With one caveat. In some states (maybe all ?) the electors can vote their choice. I doubt Clinton would switch to Trump though. 

[scooperhsd]

Of course it won't happen, but if NY voted for Trump she'd be legally obligated to cast her elector's vote for him.  Wouldn't that be interesting.

As I understand it and how it works.

When a candidate registers in a state as running for the office of President they present their slate of electors to the state. It is the slate of electors that we vote on. So Trump and Biden will have their own set of electors in each state. In this case the electors are chosen at the respective conventions for each state. One of the reasons the political parties have conventions.

So there is no elector that must choose between candidates. They are already committed to that candidate if the people vote for the slate of electors they are already are on.

So, Hillary is an elector on the Democrat Slate of electors in NY. If Trump wins NY it is Trump's and the Republican slate of electors that will win and be counted. Not the Democrat slate. 

Exactly. With one caveat. In some states (maybe all ?) the electors can vote their choice. I doubt Clinton would switch to Trump though. 

This depends on what rules / laws the states (individually) have put into place. Some states can arrest the elector for being a "faithless elector", with jail time a possible sentenance.

[Patrick]

Of course it won't happen, but if NY voted for Trump she'd be legally obligated to cast her elector's vote for him.  Wouldn't that be interesting.

As I understand it and how it works.

When a candidate registers in a state as running for the office of President they present their slate of electors to the state. It is the slate of electors that we vote on. So Trump and Biden will have their own set of electors in each state. In this case the electors are chosen at the respective conventions for each state. One of the reasons the political parties have conventions.

So there is no elector that must choose between candidates. They are already committed to that candidate if the people vote for the slate of electors they are already are on.

So, Hillary is an elector on the Democrat Slate of electors in NY. If Trump wins NY it is Trump's and the Republican slate of electors that will win and be counted. Not the Democrat slate. 

Exactly. With one caveat. In some states (maybe all ?) the electors can vote their choice. I doubt Clinton would switch to Trump though. 

This depends on what rules / laws the states (individually) have put into place. Some states can arrest the elector for being a "faithless elector", with jail time a possible sentenance.

Well since she still is not in jail, maybe there is some hope left.

[Moonshot_1]

Of course it won't happen, but if NY voted for Trump she'd be legally obligated to cast her elector's vote for him.  Wouldn't that be interesting.

As I understand it and how it works.

When a candidate registers in a state as running for the office of President they present their slate of electors to the state. It is the slate of electors that we vote on. So Trump and Biden will have their own set of electors in each state. In this case the electors are chosen at the respective conventions for each state. One of the reasons the political parties have conventions.

So there is no elector that must choose between candidates. They are already committed to that candidate if the people vote for the slate of electors they are already are on.

So, Hillary is an elector on the Democrat Slate of electors in NY. If Trump wins NY it is Trump's and the Republican slate of electors that will win and be counted. Not the Democrat slate. 

Exactly. With one caveat. In some states (maybe all ?) the electors can vote their choice. I doubt Clinton would switch to Trump though. 

This depends on what rules / laws the states (individually) have put into place. Some states can arrest the elector for being a "faithless elector", with jail time a possible sentenance.

Well, this would require that an elector on a slate of electors (selected and submitted to the State by the political party of the Candidate) on the ballot as being electors to vote for candidate A would vote for Candidate B. There should be severe legal repercussions at the state level as well as the political party level for such an elector.

I would think such an act rises to the level of fraud and the respective State should prosecute accordingly. 

[Moonshot_1]

Of course it won't happen, but if NY voted for Trump she'd be legally obligated to cast her elector's vote for him.  Wouldn't that be interesting.

As I understand it and how it works.

When a candidate registers in a state as running for the office of President they present their slate of electors to the state. It is the slate of electors that we vote on. So Trump and Biden will have their own set of electors in each state. In this case the electors are chosen at the respective conventions for each state. One of the reasons the political parties have conventions.

So there is no elector that must choose between candidates. They are already committed to that candidate if the people vote for the slate of electors they are already are on.

So, Hillary is an elector on the Democrat Slate of electors in NY. If Trump wins NY it is Trump's and the Republican slate of electors that will win and be counted. Not the Democrat slate. 

Exactly. With one caveat. In some states (maybe all ?) the electors can vote their choice. I doubt Clinton would switch to Trump though. 

Don't know how accurate that is but in every state the citizens of that state vote on the slate of electors who are on the ballot as committed to voting for that specific candidate. For an elector not to do so would be fraud as they are not doing what they are, in essence, contractually committed to do. How an individual state reconciles this is up to them.

My inclination would be to have the penalty be severe and a felony. Such an act would the height of voter suppression.

There is no Federal requirement to how an elector votes. But maybe civil rights violations, the elector would be disenfranchising voters by not voting as intended.

[Willow]

Those who do not vote as committed are called "faithless electors".  It has happened 165 times with two specific elections accounting for the majority of them.  There were seven in 2016.

[Patrick]

interesting comments, and, telling.

[scooperhsd]

I strongly suspect that  even if we did not agree 100% - Willow and me would get along pretty well. There are some others I could say that about too.

[DirtyDan]

She'd be better serving as a rope tensile strength tester.

 

 

 “I’ll get you my pretty’s... and your little dog too”

 Dan

[MarkT]

Colorado has put eliminating the electoral college on the ballot.  And they are mis-representing it on TV ads, saying it's to make sure your vote is counted.  Absolutely the opposite of the true nature of the issue.  W/O the electoral college, the large population centers will determine elections.  That is, the liberals who populate urban areas.  So the majority of the country, almost all red on the maps, will truly be "fly-over" country with no say in national elections while the coasts become the electorate.  REALLY pisses me off the liberals pushing this are lying about it on TV ads so ignorent people will say "YEAH GOOD IDEA".  I'm betting they are misrepresenting it everywhere else as well.  The blue book correctly describes it - that urban centers will determine the outcomes.  I'll bet a LOT this one wins, at least here in PINK Colorado.

[scooperhsd]

Wasn't on our Kansas Ballot.

[bagelboy]

I'm tired of these narcissistic,  75 and 80 year old politicians who have made millions, and millions of dollars getting inside information and making behind the door deals hanging in there and keeping the pot stirred......who in their "right mind" wouldn't take the money, live the high life, and just enjoy retirement.....I  think many of these older, burned out politicians are definitely mentally unstable.  And unfortunately filled with anger and hate.....how I wish for a world of civility!