If faithless electors were to vote for third persons (not Trump or Clinton) in sufficient numbers to bring Trump below the needed 270 then the House of Representatives would choose the President from among the top three recipients of Electoral College votes. The most realistic scenario is for a small number of Trump electors to choose some different, palatable republican candidate that the republican-controlled House can support over Trump. Perhaps some establishment moderate such as Jeb Bush could pull this off?
Currently, only 21 faithless electors are needed for this scenario but the number could change depending on the Michigan and recount results.
Actually the "Government" would never have a choice in the matter. Rather, a constitutional amendment ratified by 3/4 of the states would suffice. My thinking is that many states would like to see California gone because then they can be "Red As they Wanna Be" (tm)
Asswipe, the Alien and Sedition Acts wouldn't speak to this situation. But no one worth mentioning doubts the invalidity of the Acts under the First Amendment. See, e.g., New York Times v. Sullivan (376 U.S. 254, 276) (1964) "Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history" (Moreover, the Sedition Act expired by it own terms on March 3 1801.)
Exactly. This proposal is not as nutty as it sounds because most of the (red) States would probably like to see California go from a politics management perspective.
No problem. We'll take our share of U.S. national debt and then pay it off with California-issued Fun Bucks. (Like the USA does.) Then, we'll change currency . . . .
No, dumbshit, this matter comes squarely within the protections guaranteed by the First Amendment. In fact, political discourse such as this is the primary reason for which we have free speech guarantees.
The idea is that if Hillary/Clinton/DNC/Inc. email gets hacked enough, no one will be able to find evidence of the H"Hillary Clinton Email Controversy" on the internet any more.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously. Civilization started going downhill the day someone demanded "respect" and someone else gave it. (That may have been the very first day.)
. . . like gonorrhea is the most popular venereal disease.
*That's* what they mean by Intel Inside (R) !
OUST FEINSTEIN
. . . when you pry it from my cold, dead hands. (Sansui 3000A tuned to KCRW)
(ca. 2008-2009). So why would anyone listen to this asshole?
This has become the modern version of Jarndyce v Jarndyce. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Millennial pussyfoots, I guess.
An astute POTUS with business acumen could use this capability to gather industrial intel and turn a tidy profit for himself !
If faithless electors were to vote for third persons (not Trump or Clinton) in sufficient numbers to bring Trump below the needed 270 then the House of Representatives would choose the President from among the top three recipients of Electoral College votes. The most realistic scenario is for a small number of Trump electors to choose some different, palatable republican candidate that the republican-controlled House can support over Trump. Perhaps some establishment moderate such as Jeb Bush could pull this off? Currently, only 21 faithless electors are needed for this scenario but the number could change depending on the Michigan and recount results.
Actually the "Government" would never have a choice in the matter. Rather, a constitutional amendment ratified by 3/4 of the states would suffice. My thinking is that many states would like to see California gone because then they can be "Red As they Wanna Be" (tm)
No one is advocating violent conflict. Rather, what is sought is a peaceable and consensual separation. RTFA: http://www.yescalifornia.org/
Asswipe, the Alien and Sedition Acts wouldn't speak to this situation. But no one worth mentioning doubts the invalidity of the Acts under the First Amendment. See, e.g., New York Times v. Sullivan (376 U.S. 254, 276) (1964) "Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history" (Moreover, the Sedition Act expired by it own terms on March 3 1801.)
How long will that last? How does it matter? At that point, its no longer your business!
Exactly. This proposal is not as nutty as it sounds because most of the (red) States would probably like to see California go from a politics management perspective.
No problem. We'll take our share of U.S. national debt and then pay it off with California-issued Fun Bucks. (Like the USA does.) Then, we'll change currency . . . .
No, dumbshit, this matter comes squarely within the protections guaranteed by the First Amendment. In fact, political discourse such as this is the primary reason for which we have free speech guarantees.
White House Chief of Staff. yay
is the word for this. Duh.
(grammar not grammer)
No problem. Fan fiction will fill in the blanks.
The idea is that if Hillary/Clinton/DNC/Inc. email gets hacked enough, no one will be able to find evidence of the H"Hillary Clinton Email Controversy" on the internet any more.
*This* is not *that* AT&T. (Two different companies entirely.)
. . . these signatories are only 1.6 million of Kim Kardashian's fake twitter followers.
[Proposed more accurate and concise headline.]