Georgia Elector Might Withhold Electoral College Vote

[wyldwolf]

Baoky Vu, a naturalized U.S. citizen and longtime GOP activist in Georgia, told the Atlanta Journal Constitution that he would not vote for Donald Trump in the general election and might not vote for him as a member of the electoral college either.

Said Vu: “Donald Trump’s antics and asinine behavior has cemented my belief that he lacks the judgment, temperament and gravitas to lead this Nation. Throughout the process, he has hurled insults at our heroes and their families, denigrated the disabled and praised dictators. Forget political incorrectness, this is simply despicable demagoguery.”

http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2016/08/03/georgia-republican-says-he-might-withhold-electoral-college-vote-from-donald-trump/

[MohRokTah]

1. Georgia is one of twenty-one states that do not bind electors by law.

The only states where electors MUST cast their electoral vote for the candidate they were chosen to vote for are:

Alabama (Code of Ala. §17-19-2)
Alaska (Alaska Stat. §15.30.090)
California (Election Code §6906)
Colorado (CRS §1-4-304)
Connecticut (Conn. Gen. Stat. §9-176)
Delaware (15 Del C §4303)
District of Columbia (§1-1312(g))
Florida (Fla. Stat. §103.021(1))
Hawaii (HRS §14-28)
Maine (21-A MRS §805)
Maryland (Md Ann Code art 33, §8-505)
Massachusetts (MGL, ch. 53, §8)
Michigan (MCL §168.47)
Mississippi (Miss Code Ann §23-15-785)
Montana (MCA §13-25-104)
Nebraska (§32-714)
Nevada (NRS §298.050)
New Mexico (NM Stat Ann §1-15-9)
North Carolina (NC Gen Stat §163-212)
Ohio (ORC Ann §3505.40)
Oklahoma (26 Okl St §10-102)
Oregon (ORS §248.355)
South Carolina (SC Code Ann §7-19-80)
Tennessee (Tenn Code Ann §2-15-104(c))
Utah (Utah Code Ann §20A-13-304)
Vermont (17 VSA §2732)
Virginia (§24.2-203)
Washington (RCW §29.71.020)
Wisconsin (Wis Stat §7.75)
Wyoming (Wyo Stat §22-19-108)

[Skinner]

2. While I am totally sympathetic with his point of view...

...I am somewhat unnerved with the idea that Electors might not support the candidate that wins their state. Its one thing to save our country from Trump. But it's another thing entirely for this to become normalized in our politics.

[MohRokTah]

4. There have been 157 faithless electors in our nation's history.

It's already somewhat of a norm, though no faithless elector has ever altered the outcome of an election.

http://www.fairvote.org/faithless_electors

[Skinner]

6. I am aware that it has happened.

My concern is if it comes to be seen as legitimate.

[MohRokTah]

9. There has been a faithless elector in 9 out of the last 17 elections.

That's more than 50% of modern elections (Post World War II).

I think a better course would be to tighten up laws in 21 states because it's pretty much already the norm and is legitimate under the laws of those 21 states.

[Lucinda]

5. Yep. That is a frightening thought, especially when so many are so poorly informed. n/t

[auntpurl]

8. I'd agree with you if this were a normal election.

However, this is entirely EXTRAordinary, as Pres Obama spoke about yesterday. Trump is not fit to take the presidency, not in terms of political positions or policy, but because he is temperamentally unsuited to the degree that he might use nuclear weapons or declare war on our allies.

[cynatnite]

10. Agreed. n/t

[Spider Jerusalem]

14. There's another argument for abolishing the electoral college and deciding elections by popular vote

the electoral college is responsible for a lot of the distortions of Presidential campaign politics, as it is, with the focus on "swing states" (and the occasional aberrant result like the selection of GWB in 2000 after he won fewer votes nationally than Gore).

[MohRokTah]

3. OOOOH! Another thought.

There is a practical scenario where the results of the election could be 269-269. It is entirely possible given the battleground states and the number of electors in each.

This one guy could mean the difference between Donald Trump and the White House.

[unblock]

7. if no candidates gets 270 electoral votes, the republican house would then decide.

they can choose from amount the candidates with the top 3 electoral votes.

so if the electoral votes split 269-268-1, the house could chose the candidate with only one electoral vote!

so the faithless elector could conceivably play kingmaker.

of course, given a republican congress, that could mean one of the usual republiclowns.

[CK_John]

11. Electors are elected in Nov. Each candidate assigns a slate of electors.

[MohRokTah]

12. The slates of electors have already been assigned. eom

[CK_John]

13. It's probably a state issue, I'll have to do a bit of research.