Current Events > Literally what is a faithless elector?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I've literally never heard that expression before

---

they're like the unbiased, unpartisan supreme court justices

A LIE

---

Elector in the electoral college that doesn't vote the way the state/district went.

---

Oh so you know how we have electors which are the real people who vote for the President?

If not read up on those.

Anyway, a faithless elector is one who votes for a candidate regardless of what the state's popular vote returned.

It's happened in the past, but never to the point where it had any real effect.

---

https://youtu.be/COmW6r23zas

---

metallica846 posted...

A danger to democracy and a mistake never corrected. Expect more of them this election.

Supreme Court did rule earlier this year that states can take more punitive measures against faithless electors which might hopefully deter it from happening again?

---

So faithless electors is just like voter fraud? Largely made up with a few instances of legitimate concern. Though mostly made up yeah.

---

Hexenherz posted...

Supreme Court did rule earlier this year that states can take more punitive measures against faithless electors which might hopefully deter it from happening again?

(Some) states were already doing it. It was just challenged whether that was unconstitutional.

---

Hexenherz posted...

Supreme Court did rule earlier this year that states can take more punitive measures against faithless electors which might hopefully deter it from happening again?

True, but as it stands, 33 states and DC are the ones with actual laws prohibiting faithless electors, and even then only 17 states have an actual punitive measure in the books.

---

I mean faithless electors have never been enough of an issue to sway an election one or change the results. Although if you want to deal with the issue of it potentially happening then you may as well abolish the electoral college


---

TommyG663513 posted...

So faithless electors is just like voter fraud? Largely made up with a few instances of legitimate concern. Though mostly made up yeah.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector

This lists all the times it has happened.

Ten instances in 2016.

And yeah it's never swayed an election... yet.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

So faithless electors is just like voter fraud? Largely made up with a few instances of legitimate concern. Though mostly made up yeah.

It's not really like voter fraud because until recently it wasn't even illegal most everywhere. I'm not sure if it is illegal, or just against the rules that have no real power.

---

I'm confused. I don't know the US electoral system that well but why are "electoral college" votes even a thing anyway? What does it add to the process?

Edification posted...

I'm confused. I don't know the US electoral system that well but why are "electoral college" votes even a thing anyway? What does it add to the process?

It's only for the presidential election, the popular vote is used for every other elected position. It was devised to help spread the votes out between the population so that groups in less populated states had stronger representation, because a state like California or New York has a shitton of people in them and if it were a popular vote states like that would automatically decide every election.

But it's a dumb system imo, get a bunch of red states slowing us all down.

---

Edification posted...

I'm confused. I don't know the US electoral system that well but why are "electoral college" votes even a thing anyway? What does it add to the process?

Basically, it's sometimes difficult to invalidate these old, dated parts of the U.S. Constitution, so legislators have come up with ways of reworking certain things. Originally the average person did not vote for president, a different group, the College, did. The law was eventually changed to allow people to vote for who the state's electors should cast their vote for, resulting in a system where most of the time the person who got the most votes wins, but with some exceptions, like Rutherford B. Hayes' victory over Samuel Tilden, Benjamin Harrison's victory over Grover Cleveland, Bush's victory over Gore, and Fat Donnie's victory over Clinton.

The Republican Party, being a far-right extremist party when compared to any other 1st world political parties, loves the Electoral College because it allows them to get people into office without a majority of voters consenting and even though their agenda is unpopular with a majority of Americans.

---

Edification posted...

I'm confused. I don't know the US electoral system that well but why are "electoral college" votes even a thing anyway? What does it add to the process?

The thing with a system like the electoral college is that is was designed almost 250 years ago and has given us more wrong outcomes than normal.

---

Thanks for that. Sorry to clarify I mean in regards to a Faithless Elector? I had a feeling there were some people who's votes counted more than others. Probably confusing it with something else like super delegates or something.

Looking on wiki I got confused with the below. What is an "elector" in this context?

Electors are typically chosen and nominated by a political party or the party's presidential nominee: they are usually party members with a reputation for high loyalty to the party and its chosen candidate.

Those electors are the members of the electoral college.

***

Note, indirect democratic processes can be viewed as a feature and not a defect. The framers felt that way at least. The electoral college is a product of that sort of reasoning. Did you know that federal senators were not selected by direct vote until the 20th century? Originally, state governments selected their senators. Indirect democracy in action. Some states still fill state court positions through commissions. Federal judges are selected via appointments. The US system still uses lots of indirect democracy.

The next layer of the onion is considering representative democratic systems and the role of the "representative." The system is also indirect democracy, as representatives theoretically represent the interests of their constituents but are free to vote however they want. The oversight to this process is the election process.

---

Basically when someone in electoral college doesn't throw their support to where state goes. Like if Biden wins CA and the elector goes fuck that Im voting for Trump.

Its fucked up but people would be ok if it goes in their favor.

---

SodomInsane posted...

Basically when someone in electoral college doesn't throw their support to where state goes. Like if Biden wins CA and the elector goes fuck that Im voting for Trump.

Its fucked up but people would be ok if it goes in their favor.

So whats the difference between a member of the public vote and a electoral college vote?

Edification posted...

So whats the difference between a member of the public vote and a electoral college vote?

In a presidential election, the vote of a member of the public is only an indicator to the elector. A member of the public is not directly voting for the president. They are only voting to tell their electors who to vote for.

A vote in the electoral college is done by the 538 electors. They are the only ones directly voting for the president.

---

CyricZ posted...

In a presidential election, the vote of a member of the public is only an indicator to the elector. A member of the public is not directly voting for the president. They are only voting to tell their electors who to vote for.

A vote in the electoral college is done by the 538 electors. They are the only ones directly voting for the president.

Oh shit that's mad. Thanks' for explaining it. I can see why it's such a big deal then.