Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Official Donald Trump for President thread (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Eminence
- Start date
- Status
So, what would happen if the Electoral College does not vote for Trump - in terms of what happens in the country?
I know the political reaction would be lawsuits, injunctions, and ultimately the House voting for the President in January. But, in a seemingly very divided country - what would the ramifications be? It seems that it would spark an even greater divide and create chaos within the social fabric of the country.
I know the political reaction would be lawsuits, injunctions, and ultimately the House voting for the President in January. But, in a seemingly very divided country - what would the ramifications be? It seems that it would spark an even greater divide and create chaos within the social fabric of the country.
Yes, that false equivalency.
Trump would not admit Obama is an American eight years into his tenure. Where is that equivalency?
Whack jobs on both sides. But did Hillary claim Bush caused 9/11?
Your side in bizarro land. It's just a question of how much damage you will do.
Bunch of poor ### white people who bought that dream that they would all be wealthy. Killed unions. Now want tariffs. Rubes.
Righetti
Footballguy
beavers
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
Two months ago, most Republicans were embarrassed by the idea of Donald Trump leading their party. They voted Republican, but many of them fully expected (and probably secretly wished) that Trump would lose. As long as the House elects a Republican, then most Republicans will breathe a huge sigh of relief.
BTW, keep in mind that the House is only allowed to vote for the top 3 candidates in the Electoral College (and 2 of those candidates will be Trump and Clinton). So, if 37 Trump electors decide to go rogue, and the #3 candidate ends up being Harambe, then the House might be forced to vote for Trump anyway.
Yeah - I don't think it happens - too many moving parts, and it appears that Trump has done enough to assuage establishment republicans. But, if it happened, I assume the electors would choose a more "traditional" republican candidate to give the House a viable GOP option.
Clinton has no chance under this scenario - the GOP will control the White House. It would simply be a matter of the GOP deciding who to back in the House. But, in terms of repudiating the votes of many supporters, it seems this would drive an even larger wedge between various factions in the country. Trump is bad news, but circumventing the Electoral College seems to be even worse.
Chemical X
Footballguy
I think you are overestimating the percentage of people who voted for Trump who actually like him.
Also, I think it is worse the risk. Not sure how an elector can vote for Trump in good conscience given how he continues to act
Sammy3469
Footballguy
LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP! 
ldusure:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trumps-national-security-adviser-shared-secrets-without-permission-files-show/2016/12/13/72669740-c146-11e6-9578-0054287507db_story.html?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.01724fb3a09a
ldusure:And this guy is going to be the NSA. Just a bizarro world.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trumps-national-security-adviser-shared-secrets-without-permission-files-show/2016/12/13/72669740-c146-11e6-9578-0054287507db_story.html?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.01724fb3a09a
Sammy3469
Footballguy
Pence?
EDIT: I'm sure the Republican electors would have some plan on who they wanted 3rd (they used to do this sort of thing in the early days of the Republic)
Last edited by a moderator:
That would be my guess - but I don't know if that is better or worse. In certain areas, I can see Pence as more viable than Trump - more diplomatic perhaps, but I would then worry about the GOP being more lock-step between Congress and the White House - and that is also worrisome.
timschochet
Footballguy
I watched Michael Moore propose this last night.
It wont happen, of course. And I disagree with you that it should. As much as I despise Donald Trump he deserves to be our next President. Ugh.
MikeIke
Footballguy
They wouldn't be circumventing the Electoral College, they would be providing exactly the service for which it was designed.
timschochet
Footballguy
Thomas Friedman warns how Trump has been extremely reckless thus far:
https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/14/opinion/trumps-approach-a-fresh-start-or-crazy-reckless.amp.html?client=safari
https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/14/opinion/trumps-approach-a-fresh-start-or-crazy-reckless.amp.html?client=safari
Sammy3469
Footballguy
Frankly with his cabinet appointments there is very little between Trump and what the conservative base wants on everything save his economic appointments. Perhaps the Mnuchin, Cohn, Ross's of the world would get swept aside for someone like Hensarling, but that seems like a step down to me (of course I'm more or less ok with his economic team). Maybe Pence would put at least someone in charge of someone that cares about HUD or Dep of Energy, etc, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Skoo
Footballguy
Don't we have the electoral college for this specific reason?
So that the smart people we elect will keep the masses from voting in some thin-skinned moron?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Few things to note:LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP!
And this guy is going to be the NSA. Just a bizarro world.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trumps-national-security-adviser-shared-secrets-without-permission-files-show/2016/12/13/72669740-c146-11e6-9578-0054287507db_story.html?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.01724fb3a09a
- Mattis is the one who had him investigated.
- Clapper is the one who let him off the hook.
- Obama promoting him to DNI was a disgrace and it ended in disgrace.
I'm guessing Flynn is despised by the intelligence agencies he will be working with.
[scooter]
Footballguy
You would need to get some kind of consensus from the 37+ electors. If 3 of them decide to vote for Pence, but 4 others decide to vote for Ben Carson, then Carson would be the only one eligible for the House vote.
BTW, if Pence is elected President, you could end up with a situation where he is also elected Vice President. Not sure what the Constitution would say about that.
I'll take a GOP in lock-step on policies I disagree with over a GOP led by a guy attempting to undermine our system of government and de-legitimize important institutions
Last edited by a moderator:
Sammy3469
Footballguy
I'd also note that he gave the information to the Brits and Aussies who were helping in Arghanistan at the time. The bigger question, is without this protocol, who and what he give out to people as head of the NSA. This all gets back to his judgment which based on his time at DNI, and his tweets and other actions during the election is somewhat lacking.
timschochet
Footballguy
Theoretically, on paper, yes.
But in practice no. We can't do it. To do so, IMO, would do more damage to this country than a Trump presidency.
Little point in having an electoral college if they cannot protect the Constitution from someone like Trump IMO
Baloney Sandwich
Footballguy
Very slippery slope to go down.
Trump is unorthodox, and many believe that he is unfit for office. But he got the support of enough people to win a national election. If we use the Electoral College as a means for invalidating elections - why even bother with elections?
I am slowly coming around on him. Will be interesting to watch the confirmation process to learn more about him.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
There will be lots of people working in lots of agencies that despise the leader of their agency. Trump has nominated people that have openly called for dismantling the agencies they are in charge of. There will be bigly dysfunction in many areas for a while.
Sammy3469
Footballguy
Why...for better or worse, that's exactly what the electors are suppose to do. They were originally designed to be free-agents for this very purpose. If anything it would be more "American" that the current de facto system we have now.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
If you want a dose of reality...I'm still trying to convince myself that the FBI intervening in the last week of the election didn't really make a difference.
The liberal media who can't stop railing on that won't let me get past it.
- The campaign ordered SEIU not to work in Michigan because they wanted to head fake Trump into working in Iowa. Think about that.
- And they dumped millions into Chicago and New Orleans to pump up the popular vote numbers.
timschochet
Footballguy
That's true- IF, as a result of this election, it was declared by Congress that from now on, in future elections, electors will be encouraged to take this option if we ever again have a result like this.
But to do it in THIS election, with no prior notice to the voters beforehand that their choice might be nullified, is decidedly un-American, IMO.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Good point. Kind of like using the Supreme Court nomination process as a political tool. But that can of worms is open now. No sitting President will ever be able to appoint another SC Nominee unless his party controls the Senate as well. Republicans have no problems with being short sighted when it suits them. Dems would do well to follow suit. If they don't they will be further crushed.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Sammy3469
Footballguy
Stop with this nullification BS. If people don't understand their US civics, it's their own fault. Let's say this was reversed and Clinton was elected and then on Nov 21st they found a new trove of e-mails that she broke the law. You're saying the electors are still bound to vote for her, knowing that. That's just nonsense. Electors are there for a reason. We can debate what would rise to the level for them to "unbind" themselves, but this flat out isn't nullification, or going against the will of the voters, or other nonsense.
Bojang0301
Omar4Heisman
You're a special kind of stupid. Both sides are vile. Trump is buddy-buddy with Exxon an drew Goldman Sachs... Hillary is buddy buddy with Goldman Sachs and Big Pharm.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
I don't know. As far as I am concerned, all bets are off at this point. Both parties will get dirtier and dirtier with their tactics. If that means ####### with long established precedent so be it. It's win at all, and I mean all costs. The Comey letter pretty much sealed the deal. Anything goes. Anything.
I understand the frustration - I think the Republicans made a bad decision not to work with Obama on an acceptable moderate SC justice to replace Scalia. It has now set the precedence for future shenanigans. But, at some point, we need grown ups in Congress to do the "right" thing, even if that is adverse to their current positions. This whole notion of "they did it first" is what you expect from a playground dispute.
The one thing that worries me about both parties - they each think they have a monopoly on what is right or best for the country. Both sides have good ideas and bad ideas. If we spent more time working towards compromise, instead of pushing for all-or-nothing results, I think we could see some positive developments.
Trump, and to a greater degree, the GOP, are treating this election as a mandate - when the results show that the majority of Americans did/do not want the GOP agenda running the country.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
There is no more "do the right thing" in politics. It's win at all costs. All costs.
timschochet
Footballguy
Well, I respectfully disagree with you. But what I think doesn't matter. The public would go crazy. There really would be riots and bloodshed. There would be a real threat of rebellion.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
It's not up to the Electors, it's up to the States that send them. If the Michigan legislature decided that there were shenanigans by the Trump campaign or if they thought he had gone King George III mad they could order their electors to choose someone else or send different electors. The electors are just schmoes, they represent the legislatures. The whole assumption about it being up to electors is wrong here.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Then they world be equally complicit in the abdication of their duties. Governance isn't about short term gains "for your party", it's about actually doing what's right for the country.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
I wouldn't be surprised to see this in the future. Dems don't have any balls right now (shocking a party led by women have no balls huh?), if they did...they'd do absolutely anything to undermine Trump.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
moleculo
Footballguy
the problem is that if you believe in your own dogma, short terms gains "for your party" are what's actually right for the country.
Technically, I think the parties, and even the candidates themselves, appoint the electors, not the state Legislatures. When we vote in November, it is for a specific slate of electors - each candidate has their own set.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
- Flynn also had his own internet connection installed at the Pentagon - privately.
- What also bugs me about that WaPo piece is that Flynn shows no indication he thinks he did anything wrong. He mentions sharing information on the battlefield as being an excuse... where keeping it secure is most important.
One reason I'm positive about Mattis is there is a decent chance he will not only blunt Flynn's influence but hopefully also eventually run him out.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
Similar threads
