Question about the Electoral College

[jimmy olsen]

Say there's a 3 way Presidential election and no one gets a majority of the Electoral votes so the election will be thrown in to the House of Representatives . However it's clear that the winner is going to be Candidate X because his party controls the majority of the House state delegations.

Is there anything for stopping Candidate Z from instructing his Electors from voting for Candidate Y (the less distasteful alternative) so it never gets to that point? I don't think there is, is there?

[Savonarola]

I believe some states have laws to punish "Faithless Electors."

[Savonarola]

A quick Google search revealed a complete list of Faithless Electors:

http://archive.fairvote.org/e_college/faithless.htm

Feel ashamed for them.

[jimmy olsen]

A quick Google search revealed a complete list of Faithless Electors:

http://archive.fairvote.org/e_college/faithless.htm

Feel ashamed for them.

Are they really faithless if their Candidate asks them to vote that way?

More importantly those laws are likely unconstitutional.

[Fate]

The Supreme Court is a political body. The laws may or may not be constitutional depending on the political affiliation of the injured party by a faithless elector. If the injured party was a Republican, then it's clearly unconstituional. If it's a Democrat, certainly it's within the rules.

[MadImmortalMan]

The Constitution provides no provision for political parties. It's blind to them. I don't see why that would matter.

[jimmy olsen]

The Constitution provides no provision for political parties. It's blind to them. I don't see why that would matter.

Why bother responing to a Fate statement like that?

[dps]

The Constitution provides no provision for political parties. It's blind to them. I don't see why that would matter.

Why bother responing to a Fate statement like that?

Why did you even bother starting this thread, seeing as how you seem to know that state laws to punish "faithless electors" are probably unconstitutional?

[grumbler]

Say there's a 3 way Presidential election and no one gets a majority of the Electoral votes so the election will be thrown in to the House of Representatives . However it's clear that the winner is going to be Candidate X because his party controls the majority of the House state delegations.

Is there anything for stopping Candidate Z from instructing his Electors from voting for Candidate Y (the less distasteful alternative) so it never gets to that point? I don't think there is, is there?

Electors don't belong to candidates, but a candidate could presumably tell them to do whatever he wants to tel them to do (vote for Y, pick up a sixpack on the way home, mail him/her $100, etc).  Whether they listen or not is up to them, though.  They are state party members, pledged to a slate.  The slate is how they are supposed to vote.

[jimmy olsen]

Say there's a 3 way Presidential election and no one gets a majority of the Electoral votes so the election will be thrown in to the House of Representatives . However it's clear that the winner is going to be Candidate X because his party controls the majority of the House state delegations.

Is there anything for stopping Candidate Z from instructing his Electors from voting for Candidate Y (the less distasteful alternative) so it never gets to that point? I don't think there is, is there?

Electors don't belong to candidates, but a candidate could presumably tell them to do whatever he wants to tel them to do (vote for Y, pick up a sixpack on the way home, mail him/her $100, etc).  Whether they listen or not is up to them, though.  They are state party members, pledged to a slate.  The slate is how they are supposed to vote.

Hmm...interesting.

Thank you.

[Fate]

The Constitution provides no provision for political parties. It's blind to them. I don't see why that would matter.

The Constitution has provided no provision for curtailing right wing judicial activists bent on self reinforcing their majority by selecting right wing Presidents over left wing Presidents when presented the opportunity to influence the result.

[The Minsky Moment]

The Constitution provides no provision for political parties. It's blind to them. I don't see why that would matter.

The Constitution has provided no provision for curtailing right wing judicial activists bent on self reinforcing their majority by selecting right wing Presidents over left wing Presidents when presented the opportunity to influence the result.

Sure it has.

[Drakken]

Say there's a 3 way Presidential election.

Lost me right there. Will not happen in forseeable future, no need to clutch at straws.

[grumbler]

Say there's a 3 way Presidential election.

Lost me right there. Will not happen in forseeable future, no need to clutch at straws.

   What does that have to do with his hypothetical?  Is it just that you don't know what "clutch at straws" means?

[Neil]

The Constitution provides no provision for political parties. It's blind to them. I don't see why that would matter.

The Constitution has provided no provision for curtailing right wing judicial activists bent on self reinforcing their majority by selecting right wing Presidents over left wing Presidents when presented the opportunity to influence the result.

Sure it has.

Fate rule.