US Election Night: Official Thread
- Galvatron91
- Posts: 8359
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
- Location: Keeping the world safe from crappy posts
Because this is the first time I have been in the thread to moderate and you two heckling each other was most recent and likely to expand, so zip it. If you have a problem with my moderation style, I suggest you handle it with a pm.
And yes, the votes would be counted if they are cast, but they are not cast until December...but the EC voters do have a moral obligation to uphold the wishes of their state as it is a winner take all system. If they do not, they are termed faithless electors and in some states, there can be actions taken against them immediately or following their vote. Also, while the EC was founded as a check against the uneducated masses which concerned the founders, it was also set up to give the small states more of a "voice" in deciding the president.
This comes from the Archives provided by the US government and should clarify what I'm saying:
There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States. Some States, however, require electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges to political parties. http://www.archives.gov/federal-registe ... /laws.html
Which States bind electors to popular vote results? Refer to Electors Bound by State Law and Pledges to find out.
The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties' nominees. Some State laws provide that so-called "faithless electors" may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.
Today, it is rare for electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party's candidate. Electors generally hold a leadership position in their party or were chosen to recognize years of loyal service to the party. Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of electors have voted as pledged
And yes, the votes would be counted if they are cast, but they are not cast until December...but the EC voters do have a moral obligation to uphold the wishes of their state as it is a winner take all system. If they do not, they are termed faithless electors and in some states, there can be actions taken against them immediately or following their vote. Also, while the EC was founded as a check against the uneducated masses which concerned the founders, it was also set up to give the small states more of a "voice" in deciding the president.
This comes from the Archives provided by the US government and should clarify what I'm saying:
There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their States. Some States, however, require electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—electors bound by State law and those bound by pledges to political parties. http://www.archives.gov/federal-registe ... /laws.html
Which States bind electors to popular vote results? Refer to Electors Bound by State Law and Pledges to find out.
The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties' nominees. Some State laws provide that so-called "faithless electors" may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.
Today, it is rare for electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party's candidate. Electors generally hold a leadership position in their party or were chosen to recognize years of loyal service to the party. Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of electors have voted as pledged
- CounterPunch
- Protoform
- Posts: 3394
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2002 5:00 am
- Location: What?
- Contact:
StoneCold Skywarp wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americ ... 697829.stm
BBC wrote:The polls close in the first states at 2300 GMT Tuesday 4 November. The first projected results of the 2008 US election will follow at around midnight.
Wow, that would make it in like 10 minutes, thats only a provisional result right? or will whoever is announced in a mo be the next President?
- Galvatron91
- Posts: 8359
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
- Location: Keeping the world safe from crappy posts
- secretcode
- Posts: 3717
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:50 pm
- Contact:
- Galvatron91
- Posts: 8359
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
- Location: Keeping the world safe from crappy posts
- Galvatron91
- Posts: 8359
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
- Location: Keeping the world safe from crappy posts
- secretcode
- Posts: 3717
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:50 pm
- Contact:
Yes, and we have a Democratic governor as well. I'm just a few miles outside of his district, but I'm really hoping that racist bastard Virgil Goode gets knocked out.Galvatron91 wrote:Correct me if I am mistaken, but doesn't Virginia now have TWO democratic senators?
Anyone watching the results on CNN? They just had this corny, dumb-as-hell sequence with a correspondent being "beamed in via hologram."
Also, secretcode, it's going to be a loooooooong time before we know who's winning. I'd say 10 or 11 at the earliest, but after the last two presidential elections, I expect it to be much, much later.
- Galvatron91
- Posts: 8359
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
- Location: Keeping the world safe from crappy posts
Agreed...good trends in North Carolina and Florida right now, not so good trends in Virginia and Indiana for Obama. Those are all early still. ABC.com is calling PA and NH already? That seems a bit premature to me...especially after they were one of the ones calling Florida for Gore with like 2 percent of the vote in back in 2000.
Ah, but the DC suburbs, Richmond, and Hampton Roads haven't been accounted for yet, and those areas are expected to lean heavily for Obama. He's also won some cities surrounded by rural counties, and those rural counties aren't all leaning as heavily towards McCain as they were for Bush in the past. I'm optimistic about VA, and I may be proud of my state by tomorrow.
- Galvatron91
- Posts: 8359
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
- Location: Keeping the world safe from crappy posts
so your from district 5 then.Sir Auros wrote:Yes, and we have a Democratic governor as well. I'm just a few miles outside of his district, but I'm really hoping that racist bastard Virgil Goode gets knocked out.
that racist bastard seems to be winning.
http://abcnews.go.com/politics/election ... y=Virginia
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Grew up, mellowed out.
Grew up, mellowed out.
McCain picking up some states in the middle (but maybe only 4/5 of Nebraska); but if Obama wins the three West Coast states, he gets 270, right? He should get that, and CO, as well - nevermind the too-close-to-calls....
Oh, and my local House seat now switches to blue, with Dan Maffei winning (woo!)....
Oh, and my local House seat now switches to blue, with Dan Maffei winning (woo!)....