Beware the "Faithless Elector"

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • BogWalker

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 5, 2013
    6,305
    63
    42 would have to be faithless

    There hasn't been electoral faithlessness on a scale like that since the 1830's.
     

    printcraft

    INGO Clown
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Feb 14, 2008
    39,063
    113
    Uranus


    V6SVMoR.gif
     

    K_W

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Aug 14, 2008
    5,386
    63
    Indy / Carmel
    42 would have to be faithless

    There hasn't been electoral faithlessness on a scale like that since the 1830's.

    21... don't forget when you have two quantities greater than 1 each, each number you move makes a twice the difference...

    If you have 2 stacks of 10 quarters and move one from the first stack to the second stack the second stack now has 2 more quarters than the first (9 and 11).

    10 & 10 move 1 = 9 & 11
    10 & 10 move 2 = 8 & 12
    10 & 10 move 4 = 6 & 14

    EDIT:...
    232 & 306 move 38 = 270 and 268... oh sorry your number is closer to the correct number. My math of his numbers and hers was off. :ugh:

    I halved the amount before doing my mental math.

    38 would have to be faithless.
     
    Last edited:

    oldpink

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 7, 2009
    6,660
    63
    Farmland
    It's possible, but it's worth mentioning that the electors are some of the hardest core of the hardest core loyalists from their respective parties, and they have had a chance to establish their trustworthiness over decades.
    The odds of any of them going against the will of the voters and ruining their political careers for the rest of their lives are very, very, very slim.
     

    BogWalker

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 5, 2013
    6,305
    63
    21... don't forget when you have two quantities greater than 1 each, each number you move makes a twice the difference...

    If you have 2 stacks of 10 quarters and move one from the first stack to the second stack the second stack now has 2 more quarters than the first (9 and 11).

    10 & 10 move 1 = 9 & 11
    10 & 10 move 2 = 8 & 12
    10 & 10 move 4 = 6 & 14

    EDIT:...
    232 & 306 move 38 = 270 and 268... oh sorry your number is closer to mine. My math of his numbers and her was off. :ugh:

    I halved the amount before doing my mental math.

    38 would have to be faithless.
    I was confused for a second, hah. Doesn't help that if you google "electoral college results" they're not reporting 20 of the votes for some reason. They're showing 228 Clinton, 290 Trump, and 20 unapportioned on most sites.
     

    K_W

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Aug 14, 2008
    5,386
    63
    Indy / Carmel
    It's possible, but it's worth mentioning that the electors are some of the hardest core of the hardest core loyalists from their respective parties, and they have had a chance to establish their trustworthiness over decades.
    The odds of any of them going against the will of the voters and ruining their political careers for the rest of their lives are very, very, very slim.

    I admit I flubbed the math by starting with "1 moved makes 2 difference" and had a number in my head closer to 15 or 20... it's actually 38... a lot less likely.
     

    Cameramonkey

    www.thechosen.tv
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    May 12, 2013
    32,124
    77
    Camby area
    It's possible, but it's worth mentioning that the electors are some of the hardest core of the hardest core loyalists from their respective parties, and they have had a chance to establish their trustworthiness over decades.
    The odds of any of them going against the will of the voters and ruining their political careers for the rest of their lives are very, very, very slim.

    Dont discount the overzealous "my loss is America's gain! I am nothing, America is EVERYTHING! WOLVERINES!!!!!!!" attitude. I too doubt it will happen, but you get enough trigglypuffs that think Trump is the antichrist and suddently we have ourselves madame president.

    (BY FAR an outside event)
     

    warthog

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Feb 12, 2013
    5,166
    63
    Vigo County
    Not going to happen. It'd be more conceivable that Obama would declare Martial Law and refuse to step down but we have already had a thread like that... :):
     

    Leo

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Mar 3, 2011
    9,820
    113
    Lafayette, IN
    I hardly doubt she actually won the popular vote! Look at the map, nothing but red with some blue specks. I do not trust the msm to tell me what the popular vote results are! They are so buried up the dnc's ass that i really doubt anyone, except those very special people, would believe them. You wanna see riots like never before, take the election from Trump and you will see revolution!

    Do not forget the concentration of population on major cities when viewing the red/blue maps. There are individual buildings that house more people than many towns. The Willis tower, (formerly the Sears tower) is over 105 acres of floor space.
     

    steveh_131

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    10,046
    83
    Porter County
    I've never thought of it like that, is that true or just observation on your part?

    If the federal government would stay within the bounds of its enumerated powers in the constitution, the election of POTUS would have far less impact on our day-to-day lives. Obamacare, gun control, out-of-control taxation.

    States and localities should be their own free market - vote with your feet. Don't want to live in Communist Chicago? Come on out to Indiana.

    Want to live in a totalitarian nanny state where your feelings are protected at every turn? Head out to California, and vote for it there.

    Decentralization was they key. We've lost that along the way.
     

    WebSnyper

    Time to make the chimichangas
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Jul 3, 2010
    15,778
    113
    127.0.0.1
    If the federal government would stay within the bounds of its enumerated powers in the constitution, the election of POTUS would have far less impact on our day-to-day lives. Obamacare, gun control, out-of-control taxation.

    States and localities should be their own free market - vote with your feet. Don't want to live in Communist Chicago? Come on out to Indiana.

    Want to live in a totalitarian nanny state where your feelings are protected at every turn? Head out to California, and vote for it there.

    Decentralization was they key. We've lost that along the way.

    Yep, it's call dependency on federal funding and unfortunately has been used by both parties to control many aspects of daily life, including such things as education, speed limits, school lunch content, etc.
     

    oldpink

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 7, 2009
    6,660
    63
    Farmland
    If the federal government would stay within the bounds of its enumerated powers in the constitution, the election of POTUS would have far less impact on our day-to-day lives. Obamacare, gun control, out-of-control taxation.

    States and localities should be their own free market - vote with your feet. Don't want to live in Communist Chicago? Come on out to Indiana.

    Want to live in a totalitarian nanny state where your feelings are protected at every turn? Head out to California, and vote for it there.

    Decentralization was they key. We've lost that along the way.

    I couldn't agree more.
    The Founders wanted the presidency to actually be a weak office.
    When the made the final draft of the Constitution was ratified, they were only seven years out from defeated General Cornwallis, at Yorktown, gaining their independence from a dictatorial monarch in the process.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    51,082
    113
    Mitchell
    If the federal government would stay within the bounds of its enumerated powers in the constitution, the election of POTUS would have far less impact on our day-to-day lives. Obamacare, gun control, out-of-control taxation.

    States and localities should be their own free market - vote with your feet. Don't want to live in Communist Chicago? Come on out to Indiana.

    Want to live in a totalitarian nanny state where your feelings are protected at every turn? Head out to California, and vote for it there.

    Decentralization was they key. We've lost that along the way.

    I made this argument some time back and was lambasted by some of our most-self-identified, hard core (but I think all now banned) libertarian posters. Much like Gary Johnson, they were in favor of a big federal government making sure certain nanny state aspects of our current climate were assuredly rendered on every state in the union.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    11,002
    113
    Avon
    Thankfully, this fear is unfounded. It won't happen.

    Why? Because Electors simply aren't that unfaithful, for one. But, on a deeper level, it won't happen, because if it did, and it flipped the outcome, the federal government would cease to exist. The second amendment exists for a reason. I am thankful that the former applies, so that the latter never need be invoked.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    11,002
    113
    Avon
    I couldn't agree more.
    The Founders wanted the presidency to actually be a weak office.
    When the made the final draft of the Constitution was ratified, they were only seven years out from defeated General Cornwallis, at Yorktown, gaining their independence from a dictatorial monarch in the process.

    The individual citizen should not really care who the president is. The power and influence of the federal government, and especially that of the executive branch, should not extend into the lives of individual citizens. That separation of powers is inherent in the constitutional republic our founders gave us. Unfortunately, Ben Franklin's admonishment was all too prescient, and we continue to bastardize the constitutional safeguards put in place to ensure that we can, in fact, keep our republic.
     
    Top Bottom