Slashdot Mirror
Lawrence Lessig Calls For The Electoral College to Choose Clinton Over Trump (washingtonpost.com)
Lawrence Lessig's new op-ed in the Washington Post argues against the idea "that the person who lost the popular vote this year must nonetheless become our president." (Paywalled version here, free version here.) Lessig points out that the electoral college results have already been ignored twice in U.S. history -- in 1824 and 1876.
The Constitution says nothing about "winner take all." It says nothing to suggest that electors' freedom should be constrained in any way...They were to be citizens exercising judgment, not cogs turning a wheel.
Complaining that the electoral college weights the votes in Wyoming roughly four times as heavily as the votes in Michigan, Lessig argues that the popular vote should be respected, and that the authors of the U.S. Constitution "left the electors free to choose. They should exercise that choice by leaving the election as the people decided it: in Clinton's favor."
Meanwhile, Politico is reporting that six electors, "mostly former Bernie Sanders supporters who hail from Washington state and Colorado," are already urging electors pledged to Clinton and Trump to instead coalesce around "a consensus pick like Mitt Romney or John Kasich." And the ethics lawyers for both President Obama and President Bush both told one liberal site "that if Trump continues to retain ownership over his sprawling business interests by the time the electors meet on December 19, they should reject Trump." Finally, from the original submission:
Even Donald Trump has called the Electoral College a "total sham." Is it time for the Electoral College to reflect the popular vote?
Complaining that the electoral college weights the votes in Wyoming roughly four times as heavily as the votes in Michigan, Lessig argues that the popular vote should be respected, and that the authors of the U.S. Constitution "left the electors free to choose. They should exercise that choice by leaving the election as the people decided it: in Clinton's favor."
Meanwhile, Politico is reporting that six electors, "mostly former Bernie Sanders supporters who hail from Washington state and Colorado," are already urging electors pledged to Clinton and Trump to instead coalesce around "a consensus pick like Mitt Romney or John Kasich." And the ethics lawyers for both President Obama and President Bush both told one liberal site "that if Trump continues to retain ownership over his sprawling business interests by the time the electors meet on December 19, they should reject Trump." Finally, from the original submission:
Even Donald Trump has called the Electoral College a "total sham." Is it time for the Electoral College to reflect the popular vote?
The middle of the country is far more important to our society than a bunch of whiny, coddled SJWs who are detached from the economics of reality.
You want a Civil War? Because, ignoring "flyover country" is how you get a Civil War.
Nobody expected yet another election where the losing candidate gets the most votes. And to add insult to injury Trump received the third worst vote margin in all of US history, yet he already acts like he has a mandate by making some very extreme announcements and decisions. Such as supporting Ryan's plan to phase out medicare.
I am all for putting the Constitution at risk.
Irony is that the progressive douchelords in the press were all expecting Trump supporters to be violent when they lost, instead it was the precious snowflakes being paid off by Soros when Trump won by the rules. Shrillery has never played by the rules and now it is apparent that they are feeding money through Stien to try and steal it. Where is Al Franken? If the electoral college does not select Trump, there will not be riots, there will be anarchy. Can you snowflakes handle the heat? Are you all prepped up in Seattle, San Francisco, New York, and Boston? Got your food and ammo? An extra battery for the iPhone is not a weapon. Think the military and police will be on your side or the other side? Who do you think is better prepared for chaos just based on geography and population density - red or blue? Bring it Alinskyites, the book does not talk about real opposition, only propaganda! It will not be a knife fight.
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
Let me put it this way. The opposition to Hitler accepted his electoral victory in 1933 even though the Nazi party had used voter intimidation and minority baiting to win. They felt it would help democracy and they could always come back in the next election. Most of them died in gas chambers. There are some elections you should not accept else you are writing your own death warrant. Trump is not a normal politician.
**Life is too short to be serious**
If your going by number of votes cast the when you look at the total votes, the majority of Americans voted that they did NOT want Hillary.
By that same logic, an even larger majority of Americans voted that they did NOT want Trump.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Governments that spend all their money on handouts tend to be very popular, then they go broke.
Bernie Sanders would have been their rightful candidate,
That's true in the way that it's actually not true at all. Bernie lost the popular vote too to Hillary.
SJW n. One who posts facts.