Democratic Electors Launch Effort to Block Trump

Since the official results of the 2016 presidential election resulted in Mr. Trump winning in the Electoral College, which determines the next president, but Mrs. Clinton winning the popular vote, which doesn’t matter, there has been a move among some of the more extreme members of the Democratic party to attempt to “steal” the election from Mr. Trump by trying to get some of the 306 electors that he won to vote for someone other than Mr. Trump. Recall that 270 electoral votes are required to elect a president.

Since that would require 37 Republican electors to violate their trust, jettison their responsibility, and in some cases, break the law, it would seem to be a bit of a long shot.

A number of Democratic Electoral College electors are planning to use their votes to undermine the election process in opposition to President-elect Donald Trump, Politico is reporting.

Some electors are lobbying their Republican counterparts to vote for someone other than Trump in an attempt to deny him the 270 votes required to elect him, according to the news outlet.They are also contemplating whether to cast their votes for someone other than Hillary Clinton, like Mitt Romney or Gov. John Kasich (R-Ohio).

There’s the plan, although it’s not at all clear how Democratic electors voting for Mitt Romney would help their cause.  There is some precedent for electors to become “faithless” which is the term for an elector who votes for someone other than the person to which he or she is pledged.

With at least six electors already vowing to become “faithless,” the defection could be the most significant since 1808…

Well, even if that were to happen, 307-6=299 — still well above the 270 Trump needs.

But perhaps these Democratic activists really are interested in their second goal.

The electors acknowledge that it is unlikely that they will be able to block Trump from gaining office, Politico reported, but they are optimistic that their effort will raise enough questions about the Electoral College to reform or abolish it.

“If it gets into the House, the controversy and the uncertainty that would immediately blow up into a political firestorm in the U.S. would cause enough people — my hope is — to look at the whole concept of the Electoral College,” one of the electors told Politico.

Good luck with that.  Abolishing the Electoral College requires a Constitutional Amendment, no mean feat.  Since the Electoral College gives voice to voters in states with lower populations that probably would never see a presidential candidate at a campaign stop if the election were determined by popular vote, it’s highly unlikely that those states, mostly in the heartland, would vote to approve an amendment abolishing the Electoral College.

Of course, this will not stop those on the left from launching one of their famous “symbolism over substance” futile efforts.  After all, if they cannot get their way, perhaps they can at least create turmoil and unrest — quite a contribution to the Republic.

Source:  The Hill