***Official Political Discussion Thread***

3 electors pledging not to vote for Trump. Maybe more to follow. I kinda like this, but at the same time I don't.

Dangerous precedent to set.

Again, lesser of two evils. What precedent is more dangerous, allowing the dude who ran the most negative campaign in our lifetime to become president or going against what the people in the boonies in your state says?

what about the precedent of overturning a few electoral votes (for the first time in US history) and still losing?
 
Last edited:
3 electors pledging not to vote for Trump. Maybe more to follow. I kinda like this, but at the same time I don't.

Dangerous precedent to set.
I don't really care. Either way we're ******. Either they give it to Trump and we're screwed OR Hillary "steals" it and we have a massive problem on our hands.

You think there are protests now? Woooooooo wait til middle america comes out with the sheets and guns claiming it was rigged. 

Anyways she'd need waaaaaaaaaaaaay more electors to defect to get anything done so right now this isn't much of anything.
 
 
3 electors pledging not to vote for Trump. Maybe more to follow. I kinda like this, but at the same time I don't.

Dangerous precedent to set.
Again, lesser of two evils. What precedent is more dangerous, allowing the dude who ran the most negative campaign in our lifetime to become president or going against what the people in the boonies in your state says?
what about the precedent of overturning a few electoral votes (for the first time in US history) and still losing?
Next time you want to make a joke you should make sure you know what you're talking about first so that it's actually funny since this isn't the first time there have been faithless electors. Surprise!
 
3 electors pledging not to vote for Trump. Maybe more to follow. I kinda like this, but at the same time I don't.

Dangerous precedent to set.

Yeah I don't like this, I didn't vote for the guy and he doesn't represent me one bit, but this is ridiculous. Democrats (present company included) were super cocky talking about how Trump and the deplorables wouldn't accept the results if Hilary won. Now the shoe is on the other foot, they want to pull this stunt. Lick your wounds and move on, regroup, reorganize.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html#restrictions

Nothing in the Constitution says that the electors cannot vote against the popular vote of their state; however, some states have restrictions on who they can vote for and punishments if they don't follow through. The other thing is that voting against the popular vote is essentially political career suicide since the electors are long time members of their respective parties and often hold leadership positions.

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 – § 24.2-202
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
 
Things would get so much worse if they pulled some bs here plus there'd still be a crappy president. She's not even worth it.

Dems need to regroup and think about what went wrong. And pointing at anyone other than themselves is the quickest way to have us get 8 years of this mess.
 
Oh I agree, I definitely don't think they should pursue it but I understand the reasoning behind doing it if they do. Gotta hold that L, dust yourself off and try again.
 
3 electors pledging not to vote for Trump. Maybe more to follow. I kinda like this, but at the same time I don't.

Dangerous precedent to set.

Again, lesser of two evils. What precedent is more dangerous, allowing the dude who ran the most negative campaign in our lifetime to become president or going against what the people in the boonies in your state says?

what about the precedent of overturning a few electoral votes (for the first time in US history) and still losing?

and to top it off da house would just pick Trump.
 
Last edited:
Trump is already settling in. If the democrats were to somehow undo Trump's presidency there's be massive outrage and riots unlike anything we've seen yet. The democrats may be justified in questioning the results after those computer scientist reports but they also need to realize they're walking on a dangerous path.
 
Electors choosing not to vote for Trump: dangerous

But sounds like they're perfectly justified to recount the popular vote in the swing states. I hope they do. If Trump benefited from hacking, we deserve to know about it.
 
"America has repudiated the Obama presidency"

@CNN: Pres. Obama's approval rating the highest since Sept. 2009, on par with Ronald Reagan's shortly after 1988 election http://cnn.it/2g3fjW5

700

Cheers to the folks pedaling that nonsense in here

2238313
 
"America has repudiated the Obama presidency"

@CNN: Pres. Obama's approval rating the highest since Sept. 2009, on par with Ronald Reagan's shortly after 1988 election http://cnn.it/2g3fjW5

700

Cheers to the folks pedaling that nonsense in here

http://niketalk.com/content/type/61/id/2238313/[/quote]

sure helped Democrats keep seats in office...[i]oh wait[/i] :lol[/quote]

Can't blame the president for leading a bunch of idiots.
 
This guy on some Kanye West type of delusion

I thought giving 0 ***** was the lowest level of caring one can possibly step to, then I met President Elect Donald J Trump.

Trump industries about to flourish like never before while the rest of the county goes down in shambles, at the end he will be done after 1 term but the damage would already be done, next president will have to attempt to pick up the pieces and this dude gonna walk away shrug his shoulders and literally wipe his **** with money he scammed the country out of as President, well done America.
Hey man, keep your head up. We don't know what we are getting until January, so just hope for the best. All I know is that middle America isn't gonna get the rewards that Trump promised :lol:
The elites will still be rich at the end of the day
 
Last edited:
at first i thought he didn't have older siblings, because typically they are the ones to slap you around if you keep saying stupid stuff. but i think it's more likely there is a large age gap, so his older sibling always views him as the baby and thinks the mindless contradictions are cute.
 
The reported cost for the NYPD security at Trump Tower yesterday made me think of this. It's a pretty interesting thread on the little talked about implications that Trumps brand becoming "America's brand" would have on the "War on Terror" and national security in general



He raises some great points
 
Last edited:
Ninja gonna go on a Hiatus again when Trump doesn't bring back any jobs and he can't afford da Hemi anymore....

IDK if he's able to afford da Cuban then he may look past trump's failures >D
So he only has the Jesus piece and no chain or anything to put it on?

i dont have da cuban already cuz its gonna be double da size of my older one..if i wanted some baby 5mm ish deal i would've been had it...
 
My dude more concerned with doubling up the size of his Cuban, than doubling up his living space.

Can't wait for President Trump to come through and build a tower in da heights right on top of your building.
 
Back
Top Bottom