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

ancianita

(38,966 posts)
17. Okay. But how can you disregard that a majority of faithless electors are from red states
Sun Dec 4, 2016, 10:24 AM
Dec 2016

and thus CAN help Clinton?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

No portlander23 Dec 2016 #1
Donald Quixote might say yes. n/t PoliticAverse Dec 2016 #2
Why not? That's subsidizing them by $42,000 in order to support a 2.1 million popular vote. ancianita Dec 2016 #3
Do you have a source for that citood Dec 2016 #4
Politico. Among the "Faithless" electors. ancianita Dec 2016 #5
Nothing in that link indicates Trump electors are bailing citood Dec 2016 #7
Okay. Well, I saw that reference but didn't give it enough thought. ancianita Dec 2016 #14
These "faithless" electors are NOT going to vote for Hillary! Shemp Howard Dec 2016 #6
What exactly does Hillary need electoral votes for? LisaL Dec 2016 #9
She doesn't need those electoral votes. Shemp Howard Dec 2016 #10
If none of the republicans are going to do it then obviously the whole scheme makes no LisaL Dec 2016 #11
Link for this, please. Of the fifteen states that have 'faithless' electors, only one is blue, IIRC. ancianita Dec 2016 #13
Yes. You're missing something FBaggins Dec 2016 #15
Okay. But how can you disregard that a majority of faithless electors are from red states ancianita Dec 2016 #17
I can disregard it easily - because it isn't true. FBaggins Dec 2016 #19
So that's it? Just give up? As I said to TrogL, Georgia, Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, ancianita Dec 2016 #20
We are not left with just "give up" or "get behind nutty notion with no chance of victory" FBaggins Dec 2016 #24
Don't you think electors of those states would hold their intentions away from media scrutiny? ancianita Dec 2016 #22
I think the electors in those states are almost all Trump voters FBaggins Dec 2016 #23
medicare enid602 Dec 2016 #27
Republicans FBaggins Dec 2016 #29
Link? triron Dec 2016 #8
It was supposed to be breaking at the time, and names not given. ancianita Dec 2016 #12
Hamilton Electors are sneakily fooling Democrats! They are anti-HRC! Madam45for2923 Dec 2016 #16
We could try to trust them. I tend to doubt they'll see DT for what he is, but stuff happens. ancianita Dec 2016 #18
Popular vote margin now 2,597,156. Coyotl Dec 2016 #21
No, because even if every single one picks Clinton, the House rejects and we get Trump Amishman Dec 2016 #25
Suppose Trump doesn't get 270 and neither does Hillary. TrogL Dec 2016 #26
What would be the point? J_William_Ryan Dec 2016 #28
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hamilton electoral voters...»Reply #17