A Constitutional Solution
A Constitutional Solution
Don’t like Wallbuilder Donny or Lying Hillary? There’s a way out. It’s called the Electoral College.
The Democrat Machine got its way and, Democrats are left standing at the altar, staring at a bride most of them don’t want, in spite of her gender.
The brick (and punch) throwers got their way and, Republicans are left standing at the altar, staring at a groom most of them don’t want, in spite of his vast knowledge and quiet eloquence.
If you’re less than thrilled about the choice you’re facing, there may still be time to avoid your vows. It depends on a seriously flawed third party which has fielded an accomplished and acceptable candidate who, even if he doesn’t receive many votes could, if he plays his cards right, stop both Donny and Hillary from winning.
What? They can both lose?
Yes, they can both lose. Our Constitution requires a Presidential candidate receive a majority of Electoral College votes; not a plurality, a majority. The same straightforward, established Republican Party rule that Trumpites refused to acknowledge or understand in the primary process. To get the Party nomination a candidate had to receive more than half the available votes. To become President, a candidate has to receive more than half the 539 available Electoral College votes.
If neither Donny, nor Hillary receive 270 Electoral College votes, they both lose.
Feeling flushed? Pulse quickening? Wondering if this can really happen?
It’s happened twice, once in 1800, when Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr got exactly the same number of Electoral College votes, allowing the House of Representatives to select Jefferson as the next President.
It happened again in 1824 when, because there were four candidates running for President, none received a majority of the Electoral College votes. The Twelfth Amendment limits the House’s choices to the three candidates who received the most popular votes, Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams and William Crawford. The Congress picked Adams, even though he’d received far fewer popular and Electoral College votes than had Jackson.
So, you see, it could happen, the House of Representatives, your Congressmen could pick someone besides Donny and Hillary, someone like Gary Johnson, Libertarian Party candidate and former governor of New Mexico...
…as long as neither Donny nor Hillary get 270 Electoral College votes. But, it will only happen if we make it happen. Here’s a possible scenario:
Sanders and Cruz between them took more than 60% of total primary votes cast in the following states: Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Main, Utah and Wyoming. That’s a lot of votes for someone besides the two front runners and, if they could be convinced to do it again, vote for someone besides the two front runners, like Gary Johnson, that would be 26 Electoral College votes neither Wallbuilder Donny nor Lying Hillary would get. If they roughly split the remaining Electoral College votes, they both come up short of 270.
The House could then choose “Neither Of The Above”, ending our electoral nightmare and, giving us a caretaker President, Libertarian Gary Johnson who remains popular in his home state, New Mexico, where he’s thought to have done a very good job. Instead of the usual wild-eyed, bomb-throwing Libertarian, Johnson takes a much more practical, evolutionary approach and appears to have none of the character flaws belonging to the front runners.
Just a thought, Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Utah and Wyoming, you could save us. Just a thought.
Don’t like Wallbuilder Donny or Lying Hillary? There’s a way out. It’s called the Electoral College.
The Democrat Machine got its way and, Democrats are left standing at the altar, staring at a bride most of them don’t want, in spite of her gender.
The brick (and punch) throwers got their way and, Republicans are left standing at the altar, staring at a groom most of them don’t want, in spite of his vast knowledge and quiet eloquence.
If you’re less than thrilled about the choice you’re facing, there may still be time to avoid your vows. It depends on a seriously flawed third party which has fielded an accomplished and acceptable candidate who, even if he doesn’t receive many votes could, if he plays his cards right, stop both Donny and Hillary from winning.
What? They can both lose?
Yes, they can both lose. Our Constitution requires a Presidential candidate receive a majority of Electoral College votes; not a plurality, a majority. The same straightforward, established Republican Party rule that Trumpites refused to acknowledge or understand in the primary process. To get the Party nomination a candidate had to receive more than half the available votes. To become President, a candidate has to receive more than half the 539 available Electoral College votes.
If neither Donny, nor Hillary receive 270 Electoral College votes, they both lose.
Feeling flushed? Pulse quickening? Wondering if this can really happen?
It’s happened twice, once in 1800, when Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr got exactly the same number of Electoral College votes, allowing the House of Representatives to select Jefferson as the next President.
It happened again in 1824 when, because there were four candidates running for President, none received a majority of the Electoral College votes. The Twelfth Amendment limits the House’s choices to the three candidates who received the most popular votes, Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams and William Crawford. The Congress picked Adams, even though he’d received far fewer popular and Electoral College votes than had Jackson.
So, you see, it could happen, the House of Representatives, your Congressmen could pick someone besides Donny and Hillary, someone like Gary Johnson, Libertarian Party candidate and former governor of New Mexico...
…as long as neither Donny nor Hillary get 270 Electoral College votes. But, it will only happen if we make it happen. Here’s a possible scenario:
Sanders and Cruz between them took more than 60% of total primary votes cast in the following states: Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Main, Utah and Wyoming. That’s a lot of votes for someone besides the two front runners and, if they could be convinced to do it again, vote for someone besides the two front runners, like Gary Johnson, that would be 26 Electoral College votes neither Wallbuilder Donny nor Lying Hillary would get. If they roughly split the remaining Electoral College votes, they both come up short of 270.
The House could then choose “Neither Of The Above”, ending our electoral nightmare and, giving us a caretaker President, Libertarian Gary Johnson who remains popular in his home state, New Mexico, where he’s thought to have done a very good job. Instead of the usual wild-eyed, bomb-throwing Libertarian, Johnson takes a much more practical, evolutionary approach and appears to have none of the character flaws belonging to the front runners.
Just a thought, Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Utah and Wyoming, you could save us. Just a thought.
You're even more cynical than me. I like it.
https://www.amazon.com/PARIS-WYOMING-...
just sent for the book. Looking forward to it.
and Thanks!!
Now I'm worried.
But Amazon offered me a free $50 gift card, so what the hell.
Read up on the election of 1824.
This is not some weird thing I made up. It's happened twice; once in 1800 and once in 1824, the House or Representatives chose the new President and, neither time did they choose the most popular candidate. Both times they chose the best candidate.
The 12th Amendment says when no candidate receives a majority of the Electoral College vote, the House of Representatives is free to choose the new President but, its choices are limited to those who came in first, second, or third in the national popular vote.
They are not free to choose Bill Clinton or Al Sharpton or any other frivolous name you can come up with. Given that Johnson's name will be on the ballot in all 50 states he will receive more of the popular vote than any write in or 4th party candidates so, the House will have to choose from between Hillary, Donny and Gary Johnson.
"The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate.
The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.
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. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.
The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
Re Barry Obama...what can I say? The electorate is a fool.
It's all immaterial unless Johnson gets his act together and wins some states which, looks improbable because instead he's trying to win the election outright, which won't happen.
Until November, I will hold that out as hope.
Where is FNA?
would vote for a Libertarian, regardless of how
they regard the other two candidates. --(Also, I
have reservations. I understand that Ayn Rand
repudiated the Libertarian party. Although, if faced with this alternative, it's hard to tell
what she would say).
That makes the Freedom Caucus kingmakers. If they could talk the Democrats into voting for Johnson because of his liberal social policies, and they voted for him because of his attention to fiscal conservatism and the Constitution, then they could outvote the Republicans.
I think it depends on Trump's end game. If he pivots after a hung election and toes the liberal Democrat line then, I'd say he wins on a bipartisan vote. If he zigs right, to win over the Republicans I'd say Johnson has a chance.
This is not the Arron Burr, Thomas Jefferson type of electoral college or election. Then there were multiple candidates from which the one who attained the most electoral votes became President and the next became Vice President and congress picked the winner in a tie race.There were also many less states.
http://www.archives.gov/federal-regis...
THERE WERE NO POLITICAL PARTIES until after that election. Aaron Burr, Traitor to our country organized the first one, contrary to the instructions and warnings of George Washington. Then Jefferson organized his own to combat the power of Burr's.
An amendment changed the way voting was carried out so that President and vice President would be chosen separately and then specifically so that both Potus and VIce Potus would be of one party .
That was the beginning of the end of the United States Constitution and yea the United States itself as the Parties seized control of the Federal government from the people.
Today, There are only two choices - Democrat or Republican. There are no other electors to any other party of any significance. One or the other of Democrat or Republican will get a majority and if tied Biden will vote Democrat.
That's it no soup for you.
Here is the ONLY way to fix this country. Control the government Not the people via the amendment process. www,TheSocietyProject.org If you read it all you will never be the same again.
Your facts aren't material to this conversation. If neither candidate wins a majority of the Electoral College vote then the House of Representatives chooses the next President from the top 3 popular vote getters.
The 12th Amendment was the result of the election of 1800 and, in 1824 allowed Adams to become President even though he had fewer popular and Electoral College votes than Andrew Jackson.
The Senate has nothing to do with it so, Biden gets no vote. The new President is determined by majority vote of the 435 House members.
Should neither Hillary nor Donny get 270 Electoral College votes, 218 House members could vote for Gary Johnson.
Time for you to buy yourself a better history book or, read the Constitution again.
You're right, Hillary's got most of the big states but, most small states are Republican so, a coalition of Dems and Libertarians and defecting Reps might work. You just cheered me up.
Guess what, the House consists of only Democrats and Republicans. They will Never Ever, ever, ever (So it gets through that thick ego of yours) vote for Gary Johnson. Get real.
Democrat and Republican is all you will ever get. Period. Until and if the corrupt system is fixed and Political parties eliminated. So instead of defending your fantasy how about reading the link I gave you, get educated to what is, and do something that actually might make your fantasy come true.
I'm working with Coburn on the Convention of the States. We'll not get everything we want but, if we can get enough states on board to call a convention, we'll have a chance to get some of what we want. Term limits should be easy. The Fair Tax should pass. Those are two big improvements. After that, we keep pushing for whatever we can get.
BTW, I don't buy into your "funny". I think you honestly had no idea what you were talking about. :)
There are many other things at that link, and all the amendments necessary to fix the country, reviewed by 600 people. Something you should know about, if you can get off your sneering high horse.
We have the same goals but you have a major chip on your shoulder that will hinder any progress, if egos get in the way of fixing the country.
Oh and term limits for politicians are useless because the parties do not have term limits. Another warm body just replaces the cog in the Political Party wheel when a Politician's term ends. Read at that link what will actually work or your efforts will be wasted. Unless you are too close minded to bother. If that's the case go spin your wheels and we will get a new boss same as the old boss,even after you implement any amendment or change. You have to think out of the box that propaganda has put you in. Don't believe me, look for yourself www.TheSocietyProject.org
As far as Trump, after going to several Trump events and watching and listening, I'm never Trump. I see him as very dangerous, more dangerous than Hillary so, I'd take Johnson for 4 years and work hard to help a Constitutionalist win the next election.
The key to the Libertarians being spoilers is concentrating on states they can win, not just show.
I also agree, Congress is fishy these days but, the 12th Amendment is in black and white. They could choose only from the top 3 popular vote getters. Should they choose to do something besides that, I'd say we'd have brought on the long awaited Constitutional crisis.
I'd say their most likely course is to choose either Clinton or Trump, no worse than the situation we're now facing and it would have shown the Libertarian Party now has the power to sway elections.
Every domestic decision he's made has weakened us as a nation and as a people.
Every international decision he's made has weakened us as a nation and the western world as a cultural unit.
He's supported the overthrow of every secular Middle East leader by violent Shias. He refused to support either of the popular uprisings in Iran against its Shia theocracy.
He purged all knowledgeable Muslim experts from the FBI and CIA and Defense Department. He refuses to acknowledge Islam as the source of terror, even though American Muslims are 35 times more likely to commit murder than are the rest of us. He maintains Islam is the religion of peace, no matter what Islam says.
Ocam's Razor says he's a Shia Muslim engaged in strategic war against we infidels and hiding it behind Islam's taqiiya veil.
It's a lovely proposition, but a very unrealistic scenario. I don't know how good of a writer you are, Wanderer, but it could be a terrific opening for a thriller. I suggest you name the hero Max Animus.
I hadn't actually thought of it as a novel or movie but, you're right. Once the reader or audience buys into the premise, they're in my world.
Mwahahahaaa! (evil laugh) My world!
Sounds like getting a stool sample.
If the election does get thrown into the House of Representatives, I believe enough states are majority Republican that Hillary has no chance. This opens up the possibility that the blue states will vote for Johnson in order to block Trump. The questions then becomes whether enough red states are sufficiently anti-Trump to put Johnson/Weld over the top.
This article says as many as 99 electoral votes could be in play. https://libertarianvindicator.com/201...
I'm the author and I chose those states for specific reasons; they're the ones with the highest degree of demonstrated antipathy for Donny and Hillary. If the two major parties approximately split the herd then, the Libertarians need only come up with 34% of the popular votes in those states to win their electoral college votes.
I've spent lots of time in several of those states and, believe the voters would respond to such a suggestion. I believe the Libertarians should concentrate ALL their efforts on these and a few more states where the population would be receptive to the idea of voting Libertarian once, to avoid ending up with Hillary or Donny.
I know some of those people and, I believe they are approachable as spoilers. However, in all his televised statements, I hear nothing from Gary Johnson except gripes about how unfair the two party system is. Instead of pursuing the spoiler policy, he seems to be pursuing the same fantasy the Libertarian Party has pursued all of my life.
Oh, well. What will it be instead, a personally and politically corrupt woman or an astonishingly ignorant, unprepared psychopath?
Sorry. I'll try again.
These states have small populations of very independent people, many of whom feel oppressed by their Federal Government and the liberal states around them. The idea is not to struggle once more to gain traction on the national stage. The idea is to address the voters of those states directly and tell them they hold the country's future in their hands, they, if they so choose, can, by voting for a caretaker Libertarian president, override the foolishness of the liberal states around them and the rigged two party system. They, if they so choose, can prevent us all from having to step on one of the two landmines the rest of the country has set for us.
You win these people over not by appealing to the country at large but, by appealing to them, by telling them it's in their hands, that they can save the country if they're brave enough to go another way. You appeal to them by making them special, important, brave and patriotic.
Appealing to the entire nation leaves no one feeling special, leaves everyone wondering which of the two leading candidates is least bad and, guarantees the Libertarians will receive popular votes in the single digits nationally and no Electoral College votes and, one of the two major candidates will win, again, as they have for over a century.
Johnson's deluded if he thinks he'll look good on the debate stage. I've watched the Libertarian Party convention and their town halls. These guys haven't figured out their first concrete policy on anything. They can't answer any specific questions with specific answers. I'm a libertarian by nature and have voted Libertarian my entire life but, these guys are so bad, in the weeks they had between their convention and their first CNN town hall they did nothing about policy. All they have is vague "intentions" and "philosophical leanings". They will be made jokes of on the national stage because, they are jokes. They're not ready to debate on the national stage and won't be ready until they can answer specific questions with specific policies and proposals.
I'm talking a hail Mary effort, followed, if it works, by a caretaker government, one that spends four years holding things together until the next election when, we can hope a majority of the population will have come to a better understanding of the future we face.
https://libertarianvindicator.com/201...
Ohio, Michigan, and Washiington? Unless there are a multitude of young people who will vote the first time, I don't see those as realistic for Johnson.
I've just finished working on Jim Bridenstine's primary campaign against a small town Trump, named Atkinson, who was supported to the tune of $1 million by a John Boehner group.
That's what you get for voting against the Speaker, retribution.
However, we beat Atkinson 82% to 15%.
Jim Bridenstine is much that Gary Johnson is not: Bridenstine is short of stature, has a nasal, high pitched voice and is ill at ease in front of a crowd. However, he's concrete on policy, knows exactly, down to the smallest detail what he wants to do and says so, up front.
Gary Johnson is tall, has a good voice and relaxed manner before a crowd and - HAS NO CLUE WHAT HE WOULD DO IF ELECTED or, at least he can't seem to tell anyone what he'd do. He's been unemployed for almost a decade. With all that time on his hands, one might have thought he'd have sat down and worked out some concrete policy positions.
I'd volunteer to work for him if he'd adopt my plan and forget whatever plan he has now. I'm from Wyoming and have spent time in Utah and Kansas and Alaska and Iowa. I know the people. they'd go Libertarian if anyone made my case to them.
On the national stage, this election will not depend on which candidate is the best policy wonk. If concrete policy positions were the criteria for electability, Trump would have been eliminated early in the primaries. This election is very much about cultural identity, and is occurring against a backdrop of huge voter dissatisfaction with the direction the country is taking, and strong voter aversion to both presumptive nominees. On the debate stage, Gary Johnson does not have to be perfect to win. He can make a huge positive impression merely by being seen as reasonable and trustworthy in his manner and general approach to the issues, in contrast to Trump and Clinton who will likely be attacking each other tooth and claw.
Machts nichts, as my German teacher used to say when I gave her an excuse. Cruz had a reasonably good website and, at the end of almost every debate answer he'd tell voters to go to it for a more in depth answer.
Almost none of them did. Most voters are lazy. They won't work to educate themselves. They want to be spoon fed. In Cruz's case, even though I didn't care for his website, it didn't and wouldn't have mattered if it had been brilliant, he was judged on what he said on television that was Youtubed and tweeted millions of times immediately after he said it.
So will it be with Johnson. His website won't matter. It's what he says in public, in front of the voters that will matter. So far, his public performance has been alarmingly directionless and apparently indecisive.
To your point about voters not caring about policy; if it's true, as it appears to be, that many voters care only about who gets in the best verbal jabs then, Johnson stands no chance. Not only can he not take Hillary, Donny would and will pummel him with pithy jabs and nonsensical but catchy aphorisms from out of nowhere.
I think (hope) Johnson can succeed on a small stage because I think (fear) he will fail grandly on the large stage.
I spent lots of time and Republican campaign events last year and earlier this year and, disagree with your characterization of the campaigns. Half of the Republican candidates tried remaining above the fray and they lost. I witnessed voters weeping for joy at Trump rallies. They weren't and won't be swayed by Presidential dignity. They want a dictator, their dictator. I had people tell me the first thing Trump would do after he was elected would be to throw out everyone in Congress and put them all in jail.
There is no point in appealing to Trump voters. Johnson will only win by appealing to voters who rejected Trump and Clinton. That only happened in a handful of states thus, my original thesis; the Libertarians must concentrate on a handful of states and play spoiler then, try to convince Congress to select them as caretakers instead of selecting either of the leading candidates.
That said, I don't think my strategy and yours are mutually exclusive. There is quite a bit of overlap. But Gary Johnson needs to run a national campaign to be seen as a credible candidate and to poll high enough to be included in the debates.
I think you should write that story and post it. I wasn't following Johnson then so, I'd be interested to hear about it.