Electing a President – The Electoral College and the House of Representatives

by Nathan Barton

US Constitution: Article 2 Section 1 Paragraph 3 (as amended):
“… if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.”

I do not know why those trying to corrupt the Electoral College and throw the 2016 election into the House of Representatives have not bothered to read and understand this. Perhaps they are so enamored of the “fact” that Clinton may have as many as 1 million more popular votes than Trump that they think the American “love” for “democracy” will allow the Constitution to be further gutted. Never mind that several third-party and presumably-neutral if not anti-Trump organizations have conducted surveys and estimate that at least 3 million votes by non-citizens were cast, with the greater majority of those being for Clinton.) Years of Democratic Party work has seemingly paid off for them.

If 37 electors from states which Donald Trump won were convinced to and did refuse to vote for Trump, thus denying him the 270 votes needed, and assuming that all of those voted for Hillary Clinton, she would still only have 269 votes: not enough. They would be tied, and throw the election into the House of Representatives (remember that with 538 electors, such a tie IS possible).

But would the House of Representatives elect Hillary Clinton? This is highly unlikely. First, it would be the CURRENT House that would vote: according to Wikipedia there are 247 Republicans and 188 Democrats (the six non-voting members are just that, non-voting). BUT, as the above extract of the Constitution states, the Representatives do NOT vote as individual members, but rather by STATE. Only 14 states have a majority of Democratic representatives, and 3 states have equal numbers of Democratic and Republican representatives. 34 – THIRTY-FOUR – states are majority Republican. Five of the states with Republican delegations have just one representative: AK, MT, ND, SD, and WY. It is true that some states with a majority GOP delegation (like Colorado) were won by Clinton, but it is unlikely even one of their GOP delegates would vote for Clinton, and even then TEN states would have to change and vote against Trump (and for Clinton). So, even if some state delegations were kept from voting, the election requires a minimum of 25 states to vote in a winner. And notice, only the top three vote-getting candidates IN THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE can be considered by the House. There is no way to introduce a “compromise” candidate unless MORE conspiracy has one or more “faithless electors” vote for someone else.

It is at least possible that of the 538 electors, one or more could vote for Bernie Saunders (as at least two Dem electors from Washington State have at least threatened to do), and there is a possibility (more remote) for one or more electors to vote a “protest” for Johnson or Stein or McMullin, or even for Joe Smith from Smalltown. But is that exactly likely? If there is a conspiracy, yes. A cabal of Republicans would at least be possible, with some elector casting at least one vote (or, if there were several Dem votes for Bernie, enough more than him) for a Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush, then a united GOP could possibly get 25 states to vote for the replacement. Possible, but is that likely?

The paranoid in me says yes, and I assume that there are those both in the GOP leadership and in Trump’s inner circle of advisers to consider that.

Either way, as Allan Stevo and others have pointed out, the shattering of any last trust in the system is almost a certainly. The resulting government and presidential administration would have little or no legitimacy in the eyes of many millions of Americans: perhaps even that mystical/magical three percent (just 10 million). Rebellion, revolution, secession, and waves of violence would be at least a strong possibility.

And if they delayed the vote until the NEW Congress (the 115th) is seated in early January? At least 30 states (plus possibly Louisiana) have a majority of Republicans, and 2 states have balanced delegations. But the level of distrust climbs even further.

Obviously conspiracy is one way that something like this could happen. That conspiracy could be made up of voluntary participants, or it could (German-National-Socialist style) be made up of involuntary participants: people threatened or blackmailed into participating with threats to themselves, their reputation, their families, or something else precious to them which could be used to coerce them into doing this. And theoretically, political pressure could influence this.

My paranoia, as I pointed out, says that all of this is possible. But probable?

I’ll leave it is (as politically incorrect as it is) in God’s hands. That, and more ammo, for just in case.

What do you think?

Mama’s Note: I’m so incredibly sick of the whole thing that it is almost impossible to think about it any more. I’ll prepare for the worst, and hope for the best. That’s all I can manage.

About tpolnathan

Follower of Christ Jesus (christian), Pahasapan, Westerner, Lover of Liberty, Free-Market Anarchist, Engineer, Army Officer, Husband, Father, Historian, Writer.
This entry was posted in Nathan's Rants and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Electing a President – The Electoral College and the House of Representatives

  1. Raymond Brooks says:

    Mama,
    There are a lot of folks with the same idea about going to DC. We go there for the history, not for the politics. If you get tired of the cold in Wyoming, come to southwest Oklahoma. It looks a lot like Wyoming, but without the snow.

    Like

    • MamaLiberty says:

      Ah thanks, Raymond. I spent quite a bit of time in Oklahoma City a good number of years ago. I wouldn’t trade that for NE Wyoming. 🙂 I have a snug log home and plenty of firewood, so the cold doesn’t really bother me.

      For me the “history” of the US government IS politics, and I have no use for any of it. Why would anyone be interested in the “history” of buildings and institutions built on the backs of slaves (chattel and tax types), built with stolen goods and the constant threat of death and destruction of individual lives and property? Why would anyone find that kind of thing worthy of respect or support? I just don’t get it.

      Like

  2. Darkwing says:

    If congress does have to make the selection. My wish is that Mama Liberty get the bid and heads to the White House. My second choice is Mr. Nathan Barton. Can I be the Sec of Defense????

    Like

    • MamaLiberty says:

      LOL! Why would you think I’d want to go to the District of Criminals, except maybe to verify that it had been burned to the ground or otherwise destroyed? But you can be my “secretary of defense” any time. It’s pretty lonesome out here. 😦

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s