Is the election actually over? Last ditch effort underway to elect Hillary....

originally posted by: underwerks

Thanks. I'm by no means an expert in the mechanics of the presidential election. This just seems shady to me. Could the Clinton's offer them a deal they can't refuse?

I'm sure they could try , alas if that was to happen the outcome nationwide would be utterly unpredictable and most likely absolutely devastating to the country. Not much point to be the president of a smoldering ruin.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
hillary would need more than 20 republican electorates to change sides. I think historically there has been 1? I have a hard time with the idea that the people who voted for Trump to win those electoral votes sitting quietly while being disenfranchised. You think there are riots now? Wait until this happens...

That's what I was thinking as well. Maybe that's the plan.

That would be a stupid plan. Conservatives have all the guns.

Maybe that's what they're after by doing this? (My tin foil is tingling)

You know I'm too young to properly remember the Bush-Gore election, I was 10 at the time, but I can't help but imagine similar discussions taking place back then.

Relax. Trump will be your next President. You the people won. They lost.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

I keep feeling like another shoe is going to drop.

I think we'll have a whole collection the next 4 years.

originally posted by: underwerks
Thanks. I'm by no means an expert in the mechanics of the presidential election. This just seems shady to me. Could the Clinton's offer them a deal they can't refuse?

In the 21 states without legal reinforcement of the Will of the People, I suppose. The ensuing election fraud and tampering charges would likely see people jailed for quite some time, as well as Clinton being impeached on day 1, however. (Remember, Kaine would take the big chair in the scenario, which means a lot of Dems would vote to impeach, too.)

The other certainty is that the House would object to the faithless votes, as would the Senate, voting to reject that state's vote. Assuming neither candidate reached 270, the House would vote to select the POTUS (from the top 3 national vote getting candidates... Trump, Hillary, and Johnson) and the Senate would select the Veep.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

I keep feeling like another shoe is going to drop.

I think we'll have a whole collection the next 4 years.

I just meant with regard to the actual election...which should be over and all the shoes dropped.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

They changed the graphic, but it shows trump only
slightly under her now in pop vote with Michigan still
grey. When that populates, he will be at 306 and
exceed her in pop vote.

ETA: Michigan reports the hold up on declaring for Trump
lies with ....the media.

When asked why media outlets have not called Michigan
for Trump Secretary of State spokesman Fred Woodhams
said "You would have to ask the media outlets that question".

Actual vote count is 13,107 more votes for Trump, not being a close
enough margin to trigger a recount.

ttp://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/10/michigan-election-official-no-reason-believe-large-numbers-votes-will-found-change-trump-13000-vote- win/

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: MotherMayEye

They changed the graphic, but it shows trump only
slightly under her now in pop vote with Michigan still
grey. When that populates, he will be at 306 and
exceed her in pop vote.

No, he's almost 400,000 votes behind.

I don't like it. That's going to fuel a lot of rage. No, I don't agree with using it to fuel rage -- we all consented to vote under the EC system. But we are talking about rabid, violent people that will use any excuse to cause trauma.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

It doesn't matter, the Republican may have lost the popular vote but they won most of the states, giving their party total control of government.

That means that Hillary never stood a chance at all.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I dont think that Michigan is in that number.

I edited my above post, Michigan is reporting that the
media is delaying the outcome of the 16 electoral votes
and his pop votes from that state.

Intentional?

Yes.....

a reply to: underwerks

It was just Announced that Mr. Trump Won the State of Nevada . 2 other States are Still Counting Votes . He now has 290 Electoral Votes amassed .

a reply to: marg6043

To Date , Trump has Won 31 States .

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: underwerks

It was just Announced that Mr. Trump Won the State of Nevada . 2 other States are Still Counting Votes . He now has 290 Electoral Votes amassed .

The electors don't vote until December 19th. Which means they may still be open to influence.

It would be bad for them if they went against their state, no doubt, but not illegal. And nothing a few pardons due to error and a giant petition couldn't fix.

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I dont think that Michigan is in that number.

I edited my above post, Michigan is reporting that the
media is delaying the outcome of the 16 electoral votes
and his pop votes from that state.

Intentional?

Yes.....

No, Michigan has reported 96% of its vote: Link

The role of the electoral votes

Are there restrictions on who the Electors can vote for?

There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states. Some states, however, require Electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—Electors bound by state law and those bound by pledges to political parties.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that Electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties' nominees. Some state laws provide that so-called "faithless Electors" may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No Elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.

Today, it is rare for Electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party's candidate. Electors generally hold a leadership position in their party or were chosen to recognize years of loyal service to the party. Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of Electors have voted as pledged.
List of State Laws and Requirements Regarding the Electors
verified as of March 1, 2016

The Office of the Federal Register presents this material for informational purposes only, in response to numerous public inquiries. The list has no legal significance. It is based on information compiled by the Congressional Research Service. For more comprehensive information, refer to the U.S. Constitution and applicable Federal laws.

Legal Requirements or Pledges
Electors in these States are bound by State Law or by pledges to cast their vote for a specific candidate:

ALABAMA – Party Pledge / State Law – § 17-19-2
ALASKA – Party Pledge / State Law – § 15.30.040; 15.30.070
CALIFORNIA – State Law – Elections Code § 6906
COLORADO – State Law – § 1-4-304
CONNECTICUT – State Law – § 9-175
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA – DC Pledge / DC Law – § 1-1001.08(g)
FLORIDA – Party Pledge / State Law – § 103.021(1)
HAWAII – State Law – §§ 14-26 to 14-28
MAINE – State Law – § 805
MARYLAND – State Law – § 8-505
MASSACHUSETTS – Party Pledge / State Law – Ch. 53, § 8, Supp.
MICHIGAN – State Law – §168.47 (Violation cancels vote and Elector is replaced.)
MISSISSIPPI – Party Pledge / State Law – §23-15-785(3)
MONTANA – State Law – § 13-25-304
NEBRASKA – State Law – § 32-714
NEW MEXICO – State Law – § 1-15-5 to 1-15-9 (Violation is a fourth degree felony.)
NORTH CAROLINA – State Law – § 163-212 (Violation cancels vote; elector is replaced and is subject to $500 fine.)
OHIO – State Law – § 3505.40
OKLAHOMA – State Pledge / State Law – 26, §§ 10-102; 10-109 (Violation of oath is a misdemeanor, carrying a fine of up to $1000.)
OREGON – State Pledge / State Law – § 248.355
SOUTH CAROLINA – State Pledge / State Law – § 7-19-80 (Replacement and criminal sanctions for violation.)
VERMONT – State Law – title 17, § 2732
* VIRGINIA – State Law – § 24.1-162 (Virginia statute may be advisory – “Shall be expected” to vote for nominees.)
WASHINGTON – Party Pledge / State Law – §§ 29.71.020, 29.71.040, Supp. ($1000 fine.)
WISCONSIN – State Law – § 7.75
WYOMING – State Law – §§ 22-19-106; 22-19-108

www.archives.gov...

Rest assured people Trump will be vote president by the electoral vote.

a reply to: marg6043

I understand how the electoral votes work.

I am just concerned that the popular vote difference is going to result in further violence and unrest from Democratic protestors.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

edit: misread, sorry.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: underwerks

It was just Announced that Mr. Trump Won the State of Nevada . 2 other States are Still Counting Votes . He now has 290 Electoral Votes amassed .

The electors don't vote until December 19th. Which means they may still be open to influence.

It would be bad for them if they went against their state, no doubt, but not illegal. And nothing a few pardons due to error and a giant petition couldn't fix.

I think there is a fine for most faithless electors...like $1000. Money Hillary could cover for them easily.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Is not the first time we have an elected president that have not won the popular vote.

What is going in the streets with the protest is a calculated and manipulated planned event that have big money behind it.

The people behind the protest wants death, chaos and riots they want to damage our nations smooth election transition that has always been the envy of many nations around the world.

Radicalism has infiltrated our nation and we should be very worry.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I have a great deal of respect for you for saying that. (Although considering this is the internet, i doubt my respect carries any weight haha.) You're probably one of the only people who would say it and you're 100% right