How concerned should we be about "faithless electors" if Obama wins by a very small EV margin,

[Nye Bevan]

such as 271-269? According to Wikipedia, faithless electors can be punished (in some states) but there appears to be no way to overturn their vote if they cause the "wrong" person to be elected.

Thoughts?

[elleng]

1. I'm pretty concerned about all the shenanigans, esp in Ohio (and FL.)

[KaryninMiami]

3. Me too - and who knows what they are tampering with in the other less dramatic states

Anything is possible and they are desperate and will stop at nothing.

[grantcart]

2. I think that there is more liklihood on the other side.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/09/13/faithless-electors-ron-paul-mitt-romney-electoral-college/


As the Associated Press reports today, three of the Republicans who will become members of the Electoral College should Mitt Romney win their states are now saying they will refuse to vote for the Republican. All three are Paul backers who somehow managed to be appointed to this usually symbolic post but who have the power to thwart the will of the voters if that is their pleasure. Two are from potential tossup states, Iowa and Nevada. Another is from Texas, a state certain to go Republican this fall. All profess to be not merely disgusted with Romney’s relatively moderate stands on the issues but angry with some of the petty slights dealt out to Paul delegates in Tampa. Together, they could deprive Romney of a majority should the election turn out to be a nail-biter. If this happens, those in the GOP leadership who insisted on net letting Paul’s name be placed in nomination or in counting the votes cast for him will rue their decisions.

[drm604]

4. What are the rules regarding who wins the electoral college.

Does Obama have to have 270, or just more than anyone else?

[mythology]

5. The 12th amendment says majority of the electoral college

Otherwise it goes to the House of Representatives for the President and the Senate for the Vice President.

Here's the relevant text:

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and 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.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

8. He has to win 270 n/t

[Posteritatis]

16. He needs a majority, and failing that the House chooses from the top three candidates. (nt)

[dawg]

6. I'm only worried about that if we get the 269-269 tie.

Wouldn't it be awesome if that happened; the mainstream media told us it was in the bag for Romney because the House gets to decide a tie; and then the electors vote Obama 269, Romney 268, Ron Paul 1.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

11. Not awesome at all

Romney would most likely win the election, because it would go to the House.

[dawg]

12. Wouldn't a faithless Republican elector throw it to us in that instance?

I'm not up on my Constitutional law. Does it require a majority of EC votes or just a plurality? If a plurality is all it takes, I would love to win because they unknowing sent a Ron Paul devotee to vote on their behalf.

(Of course, I'd rather win with more than 300 electoral votes, but I'm only expecting 290).

[SickOfTheOnePct]

14. To win requires 270 electoral votes

If there were a 269-269 tie, and a Paul elector went for Paul, leaving it 269 (Obama) 268 (Romney) and 1 (Paul), it would still mean the House decides it. Obama having a plurality would make no difference in the outcome.

[dawg]

17. Thanks.

Hopefully it won't be quite that close.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

19. I see no way it will be that close n/t

[CreekDog]

7. At this point? Not concerned at all, the focus now is the people's votes

after Election day is the time to focus on our inexcusable Electoral College system and worse, the roughly half of our states without laws to require electors to vote as their people have.

[RomneyLies]

9. I'm fucking sick of the "concern" threads

[SickOfTheOnePct]

10. I'm more concerned if there is an actual tie n/t

[Ruby the Liberal]

13. I was curious, so looked up the list:

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/laws.html

Do not have to follow the state's vote:

ARIZONA - 10 Electoral Votes
ARKANSAS - 6 Electoral Votes
DELAWARE - 3 Electoral Votes
GEORGIA - 15 Electoral Votes
IDAHO - 4 Electoral Votes
ILLINOIS - 21 Electoral Votes
INDIANA - 11 Electoral Votes
IOWA - 7 Electoral Votes
KANSAS - 6 Electoral Votes
KENTUCKY - 8 Electoral Votes
LOUISIANA - 9 Electoral Votes
MINNESOTA - 10 Electoral Votes
MISSOURI - 11 Electoral Votes
NEW HAMPSHIRE - 4 Electoral Votes
NEW JERSEY - 15 Electoral Votes
NEW YORK - 31 Electoral Votes
NORTH DAKOTA - 3 Electoral Votes
PENNSYLVANIA - 21 Electoral Votes
RHODE ISLAND - 4 Electoral Votes
SOUTH DAKOTA - 3 Electoral Votes
TENNESSEE - 11 Electoral Votes
TEXAS - 34 Electoral Votes
UTAH - 5 Electoral Votes
WEST VIRGINIA - 5 Electoral Votes

Bound by the state's vote:

ALABAMA - 9 Electoral Votes
ALASKA - 3 Electoral Votes
CALIFORNIA - 55 Electoral Votes
COLORADO - 9 Electoral Votes
CONNECTICUT - 7 Electoral Votes
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - 3 Electoral Votes
FLORIDA - 27 Electoral Votes
HAWAII - 4 Electoral Votes
MAINE - 4 Electoral Votes
MARYLAND - 10 Electoral Votes
MASSACHUSETTS - 12 Electoral Votes
MICHIGAN - 17 Electoral Votes
MISSISSIPPI - 6 Electoral Votes
MONTANA - 3 Electoral Votes
NEBRASKA - 5 Electoral Votes
NEVADA - 5 Electoral Votes
NEW MEXICO - 5 Electoral Votes
NORTH CAROLINA - 15 Electoral Votes
OHIO - 20 Electoral Votes
OKLAHOMA - 7 Electoral Votes
OREGON - 7 Electoral Votes
SOUTH CAROLINA - 8 Electoral Votes
VERMONT - 3 Electoral Votes
VIRGINIA - 13 Electoral Votes
WASHINGTON - 11 Electoral Votes
WISCONSIN - 10 Electoral Votes
WYOMING - 3 Electoral Votes

[Posteritatis]

15. I expect one or two, but I also expect them to be overruled within minutes to hours

There's been one, accidentally or otherwise, in all of the last several presidential elections, and it usually gets fixed before the final count is given.

I'm not in the least worried about a tie, though. I'm expecting 303-235, with possibly one or two cranks in blue marginal states trying to cast for Romney anyway.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

18. 2000 & 2004 are most recent

A DC elector withheld her vote in 2000 to protest that DC has no voting representation in Congress. Final vote was 271-266.

In 2004, an elector from Minnesota cast a Presidential vote for Edwards, final vote was 286-251.

It's really remarkable how often it has happened.