Having "faithless" presidential electors would introduce new opportunities for wealthy special interests to secretly influence our politics and for electors to cast their votes in favor of the highest bidder. #SCOTUS should rule against #FaithlessElectors. https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/u-s-supreme-court-set-to-hear-washington-case-challenging-role-of-state-electors/ …pic.twitter.com/r3CrfmqvJ0
-
Federalist No. 68 calls to say this is exactly wrong. The Electoral College is a failure, and should be eliminated, but faithless electors are more "as designed" than some kind of perversion.
It's not the late 1700s anymore, though. As CLC's @AdavNoti pointed out, "to revert to 18th-century procedures would be to wrongly ignore the many advances that make clear that choice for president now rests with American citizens."https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/faithless-electors/607831/ …
-
-
Right. Get rid of it. It's broken. But that doesn't change the fact that faithless electors are baked in as a core part of the already terrible concept.
-
If your argument is "gosh, this sure would be a bummer if it was the case" yeah, maybe? Who knows? The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact seems like the best workaround we have. You're fighting a super weird fight, IMO.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.