There are, but they're complex and mostly in place to deal with the issue of what happens when a candidate dies. If the GOP fires Trump as the candidate and Trump says that he's still the candidate because they can't fire him, then there aren't a whole lot of clear resolutions about what happens and it'll mostly be up to individual judges. That's all somewhat moot because the screaming craziness would have a large swath of the GOP stay home in protest no matter what the result is and Clinton would cruise to victory.
-
Features
US President 2016 - the Great Horse Race
- Thread starter lpetrich
- Start date
There are, but they're complex and mostly in place to deal with the issue of what happens when a candidate dies. If the GOP fires Trump as the candidate and Trump says that he's still the candidate because they can't fire him, then there aren't a whole lot of clear resolutions about what happens and it'll mostly be up to individual judges. That's all somewhat moot because the screaming craziness would have a large swath of the GOP stay home in protest no matter what the result is and Clinton would cruise to victory.
arkirk
Veteran Member
Dynastic Presidency anyone? When you see the clowns in the picture below realize that none of those pictured there can relate in any way to common citizens of this country. The elections are empty shows to legitimize this or that overfunded power seeking maniac and these may be male or female.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,724
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
I don't believe there are any mechanisms for the RNC to fire their candidate. The only real option here is if Trump gives up.
That's the thing, if Trump quits, what happens to his far right-wing supporters? I don't think anyone knows.
Of great interest, right now, Trump is bleeding women in the polls (LA Times national poll). Now how is that for a turn of phrase?
Terrell
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2006
- Messages
- 1,178
- Location
- DMV
- Basic Beliefs
- socially liberal/libertarian on most issues, but not all.
Even if ballot deadlines pass, and they cannot remove Trumps name from the ballot, they can still run someone else and have it count in at least some states. The Electoral College is the reason for this. When you vote for President you're not really voting for the President, but who will be the electors from your state. The electors then cast the votes for President. The parties pick who their electors will be, if they carry a state, their electors for that state are the ones that get to vote in the Electoral College for that state. ME & NE are different in that they give 2 electors for carrying the state and 1 for each district, the other states are all winner take all.
The Electors themselves, depending on the state, are not bound to vote for the candidate who won the state. It's possible that the Republicans could win a state with DT's name on the ballot, but the Electors vote for another Republican, depending on the laws in that particular state. I'm also not sure if there are legal punishments for faithless electors, if so they likely vary by state.
The Electors themselves, depending on the state, are not bound to vote for the candidate who won the state. It's possible that the Republicans could win a state with DT's name on the ballot, but the Electors vote for another Republican, depending on the laws in that particular state. I'm also not sure if there are legal punishments for faithless electors, if so they likely vary by state.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,724
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
It'd be an odd faithless elector as they'd be electing the person who they were supposed to elect. There are always options, of course, the party would look stupid running commercials telling people to fill in Trump to elect Kasich.
Worst case scenario, Trump wins the EV because Kasich was supposed to be the guy. Now Trump steps back in and wants to take the helm and it is his name on the ballot. Fuck! The length of hypotheticals is beyond compare this year.
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,664
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
The 538 now-cast reckons that if the election was today, these are the candidates' chances.
A week ago, Trump was ahead of Clinton on the same now-cast.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Still three months to go...
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,664
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,664
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
Well if that trend continues, by that time Clinton will have a +700% chance of victory, with Trump on -600%.
Unless Donald can restrain his instinct to insult babies, apple-pie and motherhood. But so far there is little sign of such restraint.
ElectEngr
Member
What's the over/under on when Trump will drop the n-bomb?
I have October 10th.
(I'm not talking nukes here)
Later,
ElectEngr
I have October 10th.
(I'm not talking nukes here)
Later,
ElectEngr
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 39,721
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Protesters at a Trump rally today stood up quietly and held up pocket US Constitution booklets. They were booed and escorted out.
angelo
Deleted
It's come down to this it seems. Clinton is possibly the most unsuitable candidate for US president ever, only surpassed by DT.
Clinton leaves behind her a weak foreign relations record, had received donation funds from foreign governments, including from those that murder gays and violate women's rights, issues she pretends to support which makes her highly unsuitable to be leader of the free world!
Her aide Huma Abedin had observer in a leaked e-mail, that she is often confused. If that's not enough, the FBI has found her careless in matters of security. Another lesser person would surely have been jailed.
Trump's suitability for this highest of office? No, Not if he opens his mouth before he thinks as he's prone to do.
What a grand choice of candidates! Goofy with running mate Pluto would be much more suitable!
Clinton leaves behind her a weak foreign relations record, had received donation funds from foreign governments, including from those that murder gays and violate women's rights, issues she pretends to support which makes her highly unsuitable to be leader of the free world!
Her aide Huma Abedin had observer in a leaked e-mail, that she is often confused. If that's not enough, the FBI has found her careless in matters of security. Another lesser person would surely have been jailed.
Trump's suitability for this highest of office? No, Not if he opens his mouth before he thinks as he's prone to do.
What a grand choice of candidates! Goofy with running mate Pluto would be much more suitable!
Funkytrip
Junior Member
Meh, from a higher perspective, Clinton is long-standing thoroughly experienced politician who's been personal with half the world's leaders and has already experienced the White House first hand. Sure, there's a lot of shit and framing going on, but if you really really get down to it, you can really really do much worse than HRC.
I know that personal dislike and framing tends to rule supreme these days, but again, from a higher perspective, Hillary ain't that bad. Bush jr. was a much worse candidate imo.
Sarpedon
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2002
- Messages
- 2,976
- Location
- MN, US
- Basic Beliefs
- the Philosophy of Not Giving a Damn
The fact is that the government's information security problem is much, much bigger than any one person. It is the lack of any overall security protocols and policies that have led each department into having their own little ad hoc tech arrangement, with errors like this cropping up. Did she make an error? Yes. Is it silly to blame her for everything? Also yes. She's not a tech person. As someone who is also not a tech person, I can understand why such an error can be made.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 39,721
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
According to a poll by the AJC, Clinton/Trump 44/40... in Georgia. Let me repeat that, in Georgia.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,724
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
The women vote is about 16 pts in Clinton's favor, Trump only has men by 9 pts. You can't win with stats like that. Whites are 3 to 1 for Trump. Blacks, about 13 to 1 for Clinton.
Well then, it's clear that the problem boils down to women and minorities having the right to vote.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,724
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
Someone should send this info to Trump. I'm sure he'll manage to present it in the best, no the greatest, way possible in front of an audience..