# Republican Elector in West Virginia says he might not vote for Bush **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 13, 2004, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271 "2004-09-13T17:15:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2004, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/21 "2004-09-13T22:25:36Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But it is inherent in the EC, **John.** Review the relevant clause of the Constution, posted above. It says, “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.” It also says, “The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves.” In other words, the legislatures **choose** the electors, or direct the means of choosing them, but the electors **vote.** And it wouldn’t be voting at all if they weren’t free to vote however they wished. I think any state law saying the state’s electors would have vote a certain way would be ruled unconstitutional. [Realy?](http://www.usembassy-mexico.gov/ecollege.htm) > [@](#): > > Are Electors required to vote for the candidate who won his or her state’s popular vote? > > There is no Constitutional provision or federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states. Some states (24 plus D.C. at last count) require Electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories – Electors bound by state law and those bound by pledges to political parties. > > The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that Electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from Electors to vote for the parties’ nominees. Some state laws provide that so-called “faithless electors” may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute Elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No Elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2004, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/22 "2004-09-13T23:02:27Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Why not let each man give or withhold his consent as he pleases, and select for himself that government which he believes is most likely to secure his safety and happiness? The general principle is the Principle of Noncoercion. You are trying to use an English-Ukrainian dictionary to square the circle, **Liberal.** The debate is over how we should elect the president of the United States – not over whether we should have a president, or a United States, or a government. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2004, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/23 "2004-09-13T23:04:11Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > [Realy?](http://www.usembassy-mexico.gov/ecollege.htm) I’d say that leaves it an open question, then – and the smart money would be on the position that the “faithless elector” problem **is** inherent in the EC system. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2004, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/24 "2004-09-13T23:05:43Z")
> [@bup](#): > > [hijack]I thought Bush should have, in 2000, requested that Florida’s electors, who he was awarded, _not_ cast their votes for him, but abstain or vote for a third candidate. The election would have gone to the house, he would have been made president, and a huge ugly mess that left millions of people feeling disenfranchised would have been avoided. I, for one, would have felt much less screwed by how my president came to power.[/hijack] I would feel just as screwed as I do now – because we still would have a president who was not the choice of the majority of the people. ---
**Author:** ![Menocchio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@Menocchio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Menocchio)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2004, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/25 "2004-09-13T23:15:53Z")
Election by the house is simply majority, yes? I thought it was 2/3rds, for some reason. ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2004, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/26 "2004-09-13T23:37:40Z")
You’re right **duality** , it appeas that it requires not only the most electoral votes, but more then 269 to win the election, otherwise the decision is thrown to the House. Of course this then raises the possibility that the WV elector could be faithless, the final electoral tally is 269-268-1 and all hell breaks loose as Kerry wins the electoral vote, the popular vote and still doesnt become president. Bush may then need to retreat from Iraq simply to find the necessary troops to insure his safe passage from the inagural address to the White House !!! The relevant passage: > [@Jefferson and Co.](#): > > The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be no more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by Ballot one of them for President: and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner choose the President. Interestingly, if we ever have a third party capable of capturing even a few electoral votes, we will see this happen much more often as a three way split means no one is garunteed more then 269. I often hear that the founders did not write the two party system into the constitution, but this makes me wonder. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2004, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/27 "2004-09-13T23:55:53Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I’d say that leaves it an open question, then – and the smart money would be on the position that the “faithless elector” problem **is** inherent in the EC system. Why would that be, since the only opinion we have available from the SCotUS is that: > [@](#): > > …the Constitution does not require that Electors be completely free to act as they choose… Is there any precedent that the court would lean the other way if pressed further? And until the state laws are challenged, they remain the law within those states. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2004, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/28 "2004-09-13T23:56:57Z")
“Jefferson & Co.”? Nitpick: Jefferson was not at the Constitutional Convention (he was in France at the time) and did not even feel comfortable with the Constitution it drafted. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/29 "2004-09-14T04:26:07Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Is this yet another reason why the Electoral College is an outmoded system? Yup. I hope that’s not a surprise to anyone. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/30 "2004-09-14T16:29:10Z")
> [@Menocchio](#): > > Election by the house is simply majority, yes? I thought it was 2/3rds, for some reason. Yes, but the vote is taken by state, not by representative. So you’d need to get the majority of reps from 26 states to win. Bush has that pretty much secured if it came to that. > [@Hambil](#): > > However, it is more than possible that we could see a Bush/Edwards administration. How so? Election of vice-president in the case of an electoral tie goes to the Senate for a straight vote. The Senate is currently 51-48-1 in favor of the Republicans, with a Zell Miller hiding in the left aisle with a Cheney vote in his pocket. And even if it takes place with the new Class III senators, there aren’t any R seats that look to be replaced (sure, the Fitz seat from IL, but the Zell Miller seat will certainly go red in Georgia). Maybe the Colorado seat - but a tie at the most is forseeable. Unless there’s a race I’m overlooking, that appears very _un_likely. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/31 "2004-09-14T17:47:02Z")
Richie Robb is not a faithless voter in the strictest sense: 8 weeks before the election, he’s told the voters of WV how he intends to cast his vote. So those who like his position can vote for him and not the other WV Republican candidates, and those who want to support Bush can vote for those others and not for Robb. So two questions: (1) How easy is it to split your vote for presidential electors? (2) Do you have to vote for all the positions up for election, i.e. in WV’s case, for 5 candidates, or can you vote for fewer? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/45deac/32.png) [@Evil\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_One)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/32 "2004-09-14T17:49:02Z")
Richie Robb has achieved his objective…a newspaper headline and five minutes of fame. He’ll now be summarily dismissed. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/33 "2004-09-14T18:28:30Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > Richie Robb is not a faithless voter in the strictest sense: 8 weeks before the election, he’s told the voters of WV how he intends to cast his vote. So those who like his position can vote for him and not the other WV Republican candidates, and those who want to support Bush can vote for those others and not for Robb. > > So two questions: > (1) How easy is it to split your vote for presidential electors? > (2) Do you have to vote for all the positions up for election, i.e. in WV’s case, for 5 candidates, or can you vote for fewer? It completely depends by state. For all we know, the West Virginia GOP could have selected 5 EC voters during the primary, and assigned them districts. I have no idea where you would dig up a particular state’s electoral college procedure, but I don’t think we can assume there’s a long list of Republican electors to choose from. In fact, I’d tend to assume the opposite - that there are only 5. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/34 "2004-09-15T02:38:03Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > So two questions: > (1) How easy is it to split your vote for presidential electors? > (2) Do you have to vote for all the positions up for election, i.e. in WV’s case, for 5 candidates, or can you vote for fewer? (1) It’s impossible; and (2) Yes, you automatically vote for the entire slate. In an earlier era in American history, most states listed the names of the individual electors on the ballot, and you could decline to vote for one or more by crossing off his or her name or failing to put a check mark by it. In very close elections, this would sometimes result in a state electing a split slate of electors. This is no longer possible in any of the 50 states. In all cases, your vote for the presidential candidate automatically casts a vote for the entire slate of electors. (In Maine and Nebraska, your vote for the presidential candidate automatically casts a vote for your district elector and for two statewide electors.) ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/35 "2004-09-15T03:23:18Z")
My guess is that Robb won’t get cute with his vote if it will swing the election result. He’ll only pull his protest if one side or the other has it in the bag. Haj ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/36 "2004-09-15T06:48:31Z")
I don’t get what problem so many of you have with the vote going to the House. Afterall, the legislative branch choosing our executive is no different than what we see in the UK, and European Parliamentary systems are touted by many Americans (mostly for reasons no better than “It’s different, and it’s European!”) as being superior to the American system. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/37 "2004-09-15T10:17:21Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > The debate is over how we should elect the president of the United States – not over whether we should have a president, or a United States, or a government. The debate? I was answering your direct question. You asked me to expand my statement and provide the general principle. I did. Perhaps you should refrain from jerking people around. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/38 "2004-09-15T16:33:15Z")
> [@Menocchio](#): > > Election by the house is simply majority, yes? I thought it was 2/3rds, for some reason. Yes, but simple majority of states – the single representative from Wyoming and the one from Delaware cast their votes normally, but the skatey-eight representatives from Texas and from California poll the state delegation and then cast one vote, presumably through their senior member as spokesman, for the choice of the majority in that state delegation. ---
**Author:** ![plnnr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@plnnr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/plnnr)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2004, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/39 "2004-09-15T17:39:13Z")
> [@Malodorous](#): > > Their was an uproar in 2000 when the election was basically decided by nine people, in 2004 it might be decided by the choice of one person. This has already happened: "Although a galaxy of famous Republican speakers, and even Mark Twain, stumped for Hayes, he expected the Democrats to win. When the first returns seemed to confirm this, Hayes went to bed, believing he had lost. But in New York, Republican National Chairman Zachariah Chandler, aware of a loophole, wired leaders to stand firm: “Hayes has 185 votes and is elected.” The popular vote apparently was 4,300,000 for Tilden to 4,036,000 for Hayes. Hayes’s election depended upon contested electoral votes in Louisiana, South Carolina, and Florida. If all the disputed electoral votes went to Hayes, he would win; a single one would elect Tilden. Months of uncertainty followed. In January 1877 Congress established an Electoral Commission to decide the dispute. The commission, made up of eight Republicans and seven Democrats, determined all the contests in favor of Hayes by eight to seven. The final electoral vote: 185 to 184." [http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/rh19.html](http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/rh19.html) ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2004, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271/40 "2004-09-16T01:17:57Z")
> [@Martin Hyde](#): > > I don’t get what problem so many of you have with the vote going to the House. Afterall, the legislative branch choosing our executive is no different than what we see in the UK, and European Parliamentary systems are touted by many Americans (mostly for reasons no better than “It’s different, and it’s European!”) as being superior to the American system. The executive and legislative branches are supposed to act as checks on each other, and that can’t happen if one appoints the other. Voters in parliamentary systems don’t expect the PM to act as a check on Parliament, but I do expect the President to act as a check on Congress. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-elector-in-west-virginia-says-he-might-not-vote-for-bush/264271.md?page=3)