What are 'fake electors?'

Faithless electors and fake electors are completely different. Please read the Constitution. Then you will understand.

 

Fake is a fake word created by the left. Faithless electors and alternative electors are completely different. The state votes for both...

 

Trump was hoping that if he won some of the lawsuits throwing out Biden's electors, the electors that were on Standby, i.e., the fake electors, Trump was hoping they would be accepted by the governor of a given state but there's no guarantee of that. Then the electors were held in place on Standby In case he could have gotten Pence to replace slates at the joint session Due to the spate of contested electoral votes (which was one of the plans).And at that juncture they became illegal

 

@Patricio Da Silva
"And at that juncture they became illegal"
Not before 2022

 

Thomas Jefferson was of the same mind. He remarked that the Constitution should be changed every couple of generations. It was not intended to be cast in stone. Nevertheless, the process to amend it is deliberately cumbersome.

The rules for amending the Constitution are in Article V, if you're interested.

 

Absolutely unnecessary.

The reason for the Electoral College was, in part, due to the limitations of technology at the time. There was no instantaneous cross country communication. Not even a telegraph. This allowed the states, who had no direct means of communication with the Federal Government to take on the role of administering elections.

The telegraph, the telephone and now the internet makes the Electoral College and the arcane way of casting votes 100% unnecessary.

 

I 100% understand the need for States to have different points allocated to them because of size, points going to whatever Counytry wide number is decided needs to be achieved to win as POTUS, but there it ends. Win Michigan, get say 10 points, win California get 15 points say just like it is now, but there it can end. Just add all the points up and Bob's yer POTUS,.

 

The problem is that the Electoral Votes of a state do not accurately reflect the population size of the state.

This is because the number of electoral votes a state has is equal to the number of votes they have in Congress (2 (Senators) + X (Representatives)). So no matter how small the population of a state is they are getting a minimum of 3 EV.

If you take the population of a given state and divide it by the number of EV that state has then you end up with wildly divergent numbers.

Wyoming Population 580,000 divided by it's 3 EV means that it gets 1 EV for every 160,000 people.
California Population 39.4 million divided by its 54 EV means that it gets 1 EV for every 730,000 people.

That makes each persons vote in Wyoming about worth almost 4.5 times that of each person in California. Not exactly fair is it.

 

That's a completely separate issue yes, and does not involve the 'fake elector' aspect, yes?

 

We have an electoral college that actually elects the president. The states send electors to accomplish that based on defined parameters and how the people in that state voted. The purpose of the electoral college is to prevent smaller states from being disenfranchised as they would be if the president were elected by popular vote. The large states would dominate without it and disenfranchise the smaller ones. It's complicated but it has allowed to avoid falling into the trap of a one party system.

 

Actually it is brilliant. It has prevented our falling into the trap of a one party system. It prevents Wyoming and its citizens from being disenfranchised.

 

And that can be achieved, as I have said, with just a points allocation equal to the number of EC electors each state gets, yes?

 

Yes, it may seem silly to gather people in Washington from every state to handle the EC election but it is so specified in the constitution. We all know the results of the electoral college vote well before if ever happens. Things weren't as fast in the 1790's when the constitution was written.

 

How would every person's vote being equal result in Wyoming being "disenfranchised"

The current system means that voters in California are being disenfranchised.

 

Correct, this has nothing to do with the fake elector issue...or even the faithless elector issue which are, again, two completely separate issue.

 

Because if we had a popular vote to elect the president every president would be a democrat (there are more democrats than republicans) and there would be no reason for people in Wyoming to vote in presidential elections since their votes would never contribute to the election of a president. It would create a one party system. Have you never investigated how and why the electoral college was created in the first place?

Do you understand why the house of representatives is composed by a system based on population but the Senate has the same number of senators from every state? Don't answer. I already know your answer.

 

We don't use the EC system for any other election in this country.
There is no reason for there to be a special case for President.

The fear of creating a "one party system" didn't even enter the minds of the writers of the Constitution. How do I know this?

Because there were no parties at the time the Constitution was created. Learn a little history.


And I do know, you apparently do not.

Don't bother replying because I already know the answer.

 

The system we have now means that half the voters in California have no reason to vote. Because the 500,000 voters in Wyoming negate the 750,000 votes in California

 

If ignoring what I explained works for you then all is well.

 

Or better yet, why have the EC when we already have the members of Congress?

Under the EC "winner take all system" ALL the Electoral vote goes to the person who wins 50.1% of the popular vote.

We already have one person to represent each EV of the electoral college. This way the votes in the electoral college can be split which is more representative of the citizens of the state.

More people in California voted for the Republican candidate than the total number of voters in Wyoming....and yet NONE of those votes counted towards electing the President. If the two Senators and each representative of each congressional district got one vote then the number of votes in the EC would remain the same but the people from a district that leans heavily in the opposite direction of the majority of the people in the state at least get SOME say in who becomes President.