Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Why Bush v. Gore might mean that Clinton should be president: The EP argument against winner-take-al [View all]Madam45for2923
(7,178 posts)34. The Electors Trust provides free and strictly confidential legal support to any Elector who wishes t
The Electors Trust provides free and strictly confidential legal support to any Elector who wishes to vote their conscience.
The Electors Trust will defend your right to exercise your independent and nonpartisan judgment.
We will defend you against any fines or legal claims that might threaten the freedom of your vote.
If you are an Elector, we will also allow you to know how many others like you there are. How many, not who. Because we will never reveal any Electors views, to anyone, ever.
https://medium.com/lessig/the-electors-trust-7af58d87c2bd#.hoblc5vzx
http://www.electorstrust.org/
https://twitter.com/lessig/status/806080440121626625
The Electors Trust will defend your right to exercise your independent and nonpartisan judgment.
We will defend you against any fines or legal claims that might threaten the freedom of your vote.
If you are an Elector, we will also allow you to know how many others like you there are. How many, not who. Because we will never reveal any Electors views, to anyone, ever.
https://medium.com/lessig/the-electors-trust-7af58d87c2bd#.hoblc5vzx
http://www.electorstrust.org/
https://twitter.com/lessig/status/806080440121626625
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Why Bush v. Gore might mean that Clinton should be president: The EP argument against winner-take-al [View all]
Madam45for2923
Dec 2016
OP
Here's a thread about #1p1vote and urgent calls to action to protect our democracy
Madam45for2923
Dec 2016
#1
Here are numbers to AGs of states we need to call today to demand they enforce the Equal Protection
Madam45for2923
Dec 2016
#4
Winner take all for state electoral votes is NOT in US constitution. Enforce Equal Protection Clause
Madam45for2923
Dec 2016
#5
Start making the phone calls. We need just one state AG to take to supreme court, but the more AG's
Madam45for2923
Dec 2016
#9
Attorney General Phone numbers. Call! We just need one to take to Supreme Court
Madam45for2923
Dec 2016
#19
The concept is for the Supremes to invalidate winner-take-all across the country to comply with E.P.
JudyM
Dec 2016
#23
That's one way to look at it. Another is that that's right as long as it does not infringe on on
Madam45for2923
Dec 2016
#25
In Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court ruled states don't have the power to recount
Eric J in MN
Dec 2016
#35
Called AG Beemer's office, spoke to H and she put me on with her supervisor, E.
Mc Mike
Dec 2016
#30
I could not gleam from this article how rounding can properly divide a state's EC vote count
Stargleamer
Dec 2016
#27
The Electors Trust provides free and strictly confidential legal support to any Elector who wishes t
Madam45for2923
Dec 2016
#34
Considering that some red state electors are saying that they won't vote for Trump
Thor_MN
Dec 2016
#36