16 thoughts on “This is why Civics class is so important”

  1. Wouldn't that be the top three candidates of the electoral college vote, not of the general election vote?

  2. I think Alex is right – that's how I read the amendment, also. Still not going to be Kasich, though.

  3. I also read that as being the the top three candidates of the electoral college. However, if that's not the case, then I'll take Gary Johnson as POTUS.

  4. Note also that the states see, sign, and certify the lists prior to their transmission to the US Senate: most states have provisions to immediately disqualify "faithless electors" prior to transmitting any such aberrant votes, so their actions become nullified without taking effect, and they are replaced, prior to them trying to monkeywrench the results of the election.

    Mainly to avert the civil war such shenanigans would start, not to mention the wholesale chasing of such faithless electors from city to wilderness by mobs carrying torches, pitchforks, and high-powered rifles, to do justice upon any such coup-meisters on society's behalf.

    And leave us not forget that in the event of throwing it into the Congress, the strongest odds are that the (R)s would split between Trump and Johnson, and all it would therefore do is elect Shrillary.
    Thus giving the aforementioned mob 535 new targets of their affection, in about the time it would take to hear about it, and for some number of years afterwards, to the tune of some paltry millions of casualties.

    For the truly asinine, that last is a feature, not a bug, but I'll rest my opinion on the side of Franklin's "There never was a good war or a bad peace" sentiments.

  5. The top three would be Trump, Clinton and Johnson. Agree with Aesop though. The requirement that the states certify their list prior takes that idjit out of play…

  6. Er, might want to check your civics education, as your own link disagrees with you. "The Twelfth Amendment requires the House to choose from the three candidates with the highest numbers of electoral votes." Not popular votes.

    I gather the general idea of this is that Republican and Democrat electors are banding together to select another Republican, the general idea being than anyone is better than Trump, even another Republican.

  7. I find Celeste's idea of electors banding together to install someone else in office plausible. I also find that the idea makes my skin crawl, because I can't think of anything more likely to to tear the country apart at the foundations. Doing this would utterly discredit any claim the Republican party has to representing anyone other than those 'coastal elites'. Who do they think those rejected voters are going to pick next? Cruz or Rubio? More likely Ruger or Colt. In fact, here's a random thought that might make somebody rich: A custom dust cover with the words 'Voting Machine' laser etched on it.

  8. OT, but does anyone know why Brigid's blog (Home on the Range) is now restricted? I was going to grab the beer bread recipe and now I can't get into it 🙁 🙁

  9. Toastrider

    You'll have to contact her and get added to her list of permitted visitors.

    I did so yesterday.

  10. We won’t know if there is a third candidate until the electors cast their votes.

    We don’t know for whom any faithless electors might vote, but wouldn’t a Johnson/Pence administration be interesting?

  11. Murray, how does one contact Brigid? I'be been a long time fan and miss her writing.

  12. Could someone please give contact information for Brigid as I would like to contact her for blog reading permission?!!!

  13. If someone could PM Brigid's contact info as I went to read and discovered that I am somehow not allowed…after years of reading, the occasional comment and back/forth…

Comments are closed.