# Electoral College revolt? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 11, 2016, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529 "2016-11-11T19:20:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/141 "2016-12-06T21:46:05Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > Right. In order to ratify a popular-vote amendment you need the consent of 38 states; to call a Constitutional Convention you need 34. A quick sloppy calculation tells me that the states with 6 or fewer electors benefit the most from the weighted EC vote, and there’s 20 of those. > > (throw in WV, VT, ME and NH for good measure among the big beneficiaries of things as they are.) All it would take is for enough people-of-conscience (instead of people of maintaining-the-status-quo) to get elected to enough state legislatures. It’s not impossible. Not _likely_, perhaps, but not impossible. ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/142 "2016-12-06T21:51:24Z")
Could Hillary Clinton withdraw, and direct her electors to vote for a more competent and sane Republican ? Someone more palatable to Republican electors than Trump ? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/143 "2016-12-06T21:53:49Z")
If enough electors abstain, or vote third party that it is not a majority, and it goes to the house to pick, does that make us a parliamentary democracy? Especially if they pick Ryan, Mcconnel, or Portman or something. (A legislator who was not on the presidential ticket.) ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/144 "2016-12-06T21:58:18Z")
> [@Grim\_Render](#): > > Could Hillary Clinton withdraw, and direct her electors to vote for a more competent and sane Republican ? Someone more palatable to Republican electors than Trump ? She only has 232 electors. It doesn’t matter what her electors do unless they are joined by a not-insignificant number of Trump electors. ETA: it’s also worth noting that electors are 538 unique people. And Clinton doesn’t have any more iron-fisted control over them than the various states do (and some CO, WA, and TX electors have all declared their intention to go rogue). I doubt she could convince all 232 electors to do something so personally-distasteful to them as vote for a Republican. She might be able to get 100+ if she pushed hard, but, they’ve all got their own (in some cases, very wacky) ideas and preferences, and aren’t required to do as she tells them. Some won’t. ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/145 "2016-12-06T22:08:41Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > She only has 232 electors. It doesn’t matter what her electors do unless they are joined by a not-insignificant number of Trump electors. > > ETA: it’s also worth noting that electors are 538 unique people. And Clinton doesn’t have any more iron-fisted control over them than the various states do (and some CO, WA, and TX electors have all declared their intention to go rogue). I doubt she could convince all 232 electors to do something so personally-distasteful to them as vote for a Republican. She might be able to get 100+ if she pushed hard, but, they’ve all got their own (in some cases, very wacky) ideas and preferences, and aren’t required to do as she tells them. Some won’t. Well, the alternative is a Trump presidency. Could concentrate the minds wonderfully. And needing to get a significant number of Trump electors onboard was the reason for specifying that it would need to be someone palatable. Very palatable. It doesn’t seem likly, but it seems less impossible than getting that many electors to switch from Republican to putting in a Democrat. I am not sure that would be an improvement though. Trump ran on a platform of cleaning up Washington as an outsider. Seeing him cheated out of the presidency in a trasparent and obvious move will do significant damage to American democracy, even if he did lose the public vote. The question is if a Trump presidency would do more short-term damage than the long-term damage of an electoral revolt. ---
**Author:** ![drewder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/57b2e6/32.png) [@drewder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewder)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/146 "2016-12-06T22:25:13Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > If enough electors abstain, or vote third party that it is not a majority, and it goes to the house to pick, does that make us a parliamentary democracy? Especially if they pick Ryan, Mcconnel, or Portman or something. (A legislator who was not on the presidential ticket.) Pretty sure the house is only allowed to pick from the top three candidates from the electoral college vote. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/147 "2016-12-06T22:30:37Z")
> [@drewder](#): > > Pretty sure the house is only allowed to pick from the top three candidates from the electoral college vote. What if you got an elector (or group of electors) to cast a vote for “John Smith” or some other common name? Could the House have a casting call for everyone named John Smith and just pick their favorite John Smith? ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/148 "2016-12-06T22:38:31Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > I wouldn’t mind having a representative that represents me and 29,999 other people, rather than nearly a million. It could make the govt much more accessible. > > Logistically, it may be a problem if we feel they all need to be in the same room in the capital, but if it’s really necessary, we can build them a big enough room to fit them all, we have the technology. What it would do is make governance even less transparent and representatives less personally accountable. It is hard enough to keep track of the policy positions, bill and amendment proposals, and voting records of 435 representatives on 21 committees and the various subcommittees they spawn. There is no realistic expectation of any agency keeping tabs on more than twenty times that number, and any of a profusion of ways to hide legislative agendas in the various activities of a literal stadium crowd of legislators, not to mention the gridlock from likely never being able to get any kind of majority consensus on bills that are penned by a tiny minority of legislators that some how manage to get their individual bill through thousands submitted to each subcommittee under such a scheme. We also struggle in holding legislators accountable to have at least a minimal understanding of the bills they vote for even though they all maintain a paid staff of researchers and the support of the Congressional Research Service. Having to support twenty times that number is the literally definition of unwiedly bureaucracy in action. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2016, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/149 "2016-12-07T05:18:30Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > What if you got an elector (or group of electors) to cast a vote for “John Smith” or some other common name? Could the House have a casting call for everyone named John Smith and just pick their favorite John Smith? If you’re doing that, just get enough electors to vote for a dead person. The 20th Amendment allows it to be blown wide open if one of the House’s three candidates is dead. (The only kink is that it has to be done “by law,” and evidently Congress has [neglected](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/04/25/congress-must-act-now-on-section-4-of-the-20th-amendment/?utm_term=.67aa7b14d968) to enact any standing provisions for such an eventuality. So the Senate and president would be dragged into the mix.) ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2016, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/150 "2016-12-07T06:34:24Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > The Electoral College is garbage, which is actually impressive because the single non-transferable popular vote is already a garbage method of selecting a leader. > > I appreciate the idea of not just acquiescing to mob rule, but the system in question is incredibly suspect in a world as connected and mobile as we are nowadays. Regional representation is one of the lowest of my interests I need represented at the federal level. Regionally I’m pretty well taken care of by my local government. > > While regional representatives at the federal level have some utility in terms of interstate commerce, national parks, and some funding, it doesn’t adequately represent a large swath of interests such as race, profession, gender identity, or anything else except by sheer chance. If you’re a liberal queer black person living in Savannah, Georgia, the only congress people you can write a letter to are actively adversarial to most of your views and interests, because you happen to live in Savannah, Georgia. > > We’re defined by what we are, what we do, and what company we keep in both virtual and physical space far more than where we live than we were when this system was made. With the internet, we’re no longer that parochial. (Or rather, we’re parochial in a completely different way, given our own personal media bias bubbles). > > There have been some attempts to address this with majority minority districts, but that only works for certain racial minorities that live in concentrated areas. It doesn’t do anything for other types of minorities, or other racial minorities that may be more evenly spread about the US. > > One “fix” to the Electoral College system (and, arguably, the Senate) is to keep regional representatives (except for the Senate), but pare them down significantly in number and make them even more local than they are now. Then you assign electors (/senators) to various interest groups (professions, races, genders, queer status, etc) to give them a louder voice in the face of mob rule. You could even assign proportionally based on the individual members’ votes. One person’s vote can be tallied in multiple interest groups. > > This is better, but is still an awful plan, because exactly which groups (and which subdivisions of groups, should LGBT be one bloc, or should different queer subcommunities have their own voice?) deserve a voice and how many electors they get is a very dangerous question, which is subject to fiddling by the people in power. Codifying it in an amendment is liable to move too slowly and be too inflexible to enfranchise emerging new interest groups that should have their voices heard. You could essentially call it the identity politics variant of gerrymandering. > > Exactly who is allowed to declare themselves as part of a electoral group is dangerous too, and risks internal animosity such as “you’re not REALLY black so you can’t vote with us”. > > While I appreciate the desire to give disproportionately large voices to certain groups to prevent mob rule, in practice the electoral college is not a well formed execution of that and doesn’t address many, arguably **most** , of the unrepresented groups in the US at the mercy of said “mob”. > > The popular vote is better (or rigging the Electoral College to follow the popular vote), but comes with the standard First Past the Post problems. If it’s all we can get with that compact, it’s better, but nationwide proportional and ranked systems would be a much better improvement. It’s not regional representation. It’s the fact that states are political entities that make up the so-called United _States._ And people of the same race, queerness, profession, etc are not homogeneous hive-minds. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2016, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/151 "2016-12-07T13:57:38Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > It’s not regional representation. It’s the fact that states are political entities that make up the so-called United _States._ > > And people of the same race, queerness, profession, etc are not homogeneous hive-minds. True, but he did admit that reserving representation by demographic “segments” would not work because of the issue of how to judge who/what IS such a “segment”. ISTM the alternatives are popular vote or a proportionally-alloted (NOT district-based!) Electoral College, and/or elimination of “wins” by mere plurality at the state level. All requiring constitutional mandate to be enforced nationwide. Those hoping for an end to the legal fiction of all the States being preexisting “sovereigns”, rather than most of them being mere territorial subdivisions created by the Congress that were later promoted in status, are actually thinking of a Second Republic. Not happening w/o a Constitutional Convention. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2016, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/152 "2016-12-13T16:51:26Z")
Electoral College Members Request Intelligence Briefing On Russia, Trump > **[Electoral College Members Request Intelligence Briefing On Russia, Trump](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/electoral-college-intelligence-briefing-russia-election_n_584ee466e4b0e05aded4da1b)** > > Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta supports the effort. OK, if a substantial number of electors come to believe that the results were hacked… ? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2016, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/153 "2016-12-13T17:06:33Z")
Much as I despise Trump, I’m almost as uncomfortable about the CIA being allowed to influence the election as I am about the Russians influencing it. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2016, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/154 "2016-12-13T17:15:18Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Electoral College Members Request Intelligence Briefing On Russia, Trump > > [Electoral College Members Request Intelligence Briefing On Russia, Trump | HuffPost Latest News](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/electoral-college-intelligence-briefing-russia-election_us_584ee466e4b0e05aded4da1b) > > OK, if a substantial number of electors come to believe that the results were hacked… ? Or if a substantial number of electors come to believe the moon is made of green cheese? One wonders where the desperation of Democrats will turn for help when Trump is finally inaugurated. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2016, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/155 "2016-12-13T17:48:11Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Much as I despise Trump, I’m almost as uncomfortable about the CIA being allowed to influence the election as I am about the Russians influencing it. But it’s just fine if the FBI comes out for him. Which they did, in a very well-timed manner. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2016, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/156 "2016-12-13T17:53:34Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Or if a substantial number of electors come to believe the moon is made of green cheese? One wonders where the desperation of Democrats will turn for help when Trump is finally inaugurated. Are there intelligence briefings to address the dairy composition of the lunar body? They want information, and that seems like a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2016, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/157 "2016-12-13T18:01:12Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Electoral College Members Request Intelligence Briefing On Russia, Trump > > [Electoral College Members Request Intelligence Briefing On Russia, Trump | HuffPost Latest News](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/electoral-college-intelligence-briefing-russia-election_us_584ee466e4b0e05aded4da1b) > > OK, if a substantial number of electors come to believe that the results were hacked… ? > **[The Electoral College Is John Podesta's Last Hope](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/podesta-electors/510449/)** > > The Clinton campaign chairman is backing a demand from 10 electors for an intelligence briefing on Russian interference in the presidential race. > [@](#): > > They write that this is a bipartisan demand, though that’s somewhat misleading: Chris Suprun, the lone Republican to sign, has already said he will not vote for Trump. > > Later on Monday, Podesta issued a statement backing the electors. “The bipartisan electors’ letter … That poor fool is DESPERATE. I guess he’s struggling to cope with the guilt that his falling for a phishing scheme may have cost HRC the election. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2016, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/158 "2016-12-13T18:52:02Z")
What “phishing scheme”? You offer a citation for your quote, are we to assume that _yo_u are the authoritative source for this last bit? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2016, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/159 "2016-12-13T19:56:09Z")
> **[The phishing email that hacked the account of John Podesta](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-phishing-email-that-hacked-the-account-of-john-podesta/)** > > The Clinton campaign's own computer help desk thought the email was an authentic mail sent by Google ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2016, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529/160 "2016-12-13T21:12:38Z")
See? Not so hard, is it? Keep up the good work! Remember, we are here to help! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-revolt/771529.md?page=9)