Would this work?
December 14, 2016 7:05 AM Subscribe
Okay, here is my idea for stopping or slowing Trump: through crowd-sourcing, we could check over each of the electoral college members in states that went for Trump for eligibility and fitness. Challenge those who do not meet the specified qualifications. (much more details and speculation inside)
Why this might work.
#1. By uncovering unqualified members, their electoral votes might not count (probably subject to court challenge). Although it is possible that some of anyone-but-Trump's electors might not be qualified, that's how it rolls. However, it is only the Trump numbers that need to be brought below 270 and those would be the overwhelming number of electors in the states where he won. If Trump has 90% of the electors faithful to him, 90% of those investigated are Trump votes.
#2. If 37 candidates could be proven unqualified, it might be send the vote to the House. Yes, the House would very likely vote for Trump, but they might have a split with some never-Trumps joining with Democrats to install a non-psychotic candidate. If less than 37 are found, their number may still add to those who are going to switch.
#3. Why is there reason to believe there are unqualified members? Even Trump's campaign manager had a very tenuous connection to where he was registered to vote.
#4. How they might be disqualified. The U.S. Constitution lists only several qualifications and those revolve around disqualifying members of Congress or Senate and a "person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States." I don't claim to understand that latter specification.
Several states (not that many and summarized here in this pdf download) have additional qualifications. I went over these late at night so I don't claim to have caught all of the significant ones, but for example, Missouri requires "At least one qualified resident of each congressional district shall be named as a nominee for presidential elector by each state committee." I think that makes it pretty clear that if an elector is not from a particular district, that elector is not qualified.
Texas requires that each electoral college member being a voting member of the party. "To be eligible to serve as a presidential elector, a person must: be a qualified voter of this state; and not hold the office of United States senator, United States representative, or any other federal office of profit or trust. To be eligible to serve as a presidential elector for a political party, a person must be affiliated with the party." In this case, the person must be a qualified voter of the state and "affiliated with the party." I imagine a registered independent or any who do not meet the state's voter qualifications are ineligible.
Why it might not work. Beyond what was stated above:
#1. States certify their electoral slate. If they certified an unqualified member, it might not be enough to later prove that person is unqualified.
#2. States have provisions for replacing members. Finding an appropriate member at the last minute might prove difficult. However, if the state does not replace an unqualified member, that may be reason to challenge the result.
#3. This is more likely to be a speed bump than a stop Trump strategy.
#4. Time constraints. The electoral college members are set to convene Monday.
#5. How do we prove such things? Perhaps putting together a portfolio of reasons for possible challenges is the best that can be done.
#6. 37 is a big number.
How to go about it. Guiding principles.
#1. The means for checking qualifications must be legal. If for example, as part of your job, you have access to a government database for driver's licenses but could not access that for anything beyond strictly specified purposes, such access would be illegal. However, there are many databases readily available that are legal.
#2. The discovery should be ethical. Don't hound someone's home to discover whether they live there.
#3. The data discovered should be legally and ethically presented. No Social Security Numbers or home phones should be published.
#4. The findings should be considered tentative until proven. Don't present an elector as being a registered sex offender or as living at a particular out-of-state address based on name.
How to go about it. Methodology. Being crowd-sourced, divide up the following tasks.
#1. Compile a list of states and districts (Nebraska, Maine) where Trump won. Obtain the names of electors and the basic public information about them.
#2. Compile a list of laws relevant to those states. This is a hard one. This can be done on a superficial level (the link to the state summaries provided) and depending on expertise on a more detailed level (accessing the law in the individual state). Interpretation of legal jargon might be required.
#3. Prioritize which states have laws most likely to effect the elector eligibility.
#4. Examine each elector based on eligibility. In the case of needing to be a registered voter, that might involve comparing to lists of eligible voters and determining what law deems a person eligible to vote in a particular state.
#5. Compile tentative findings. Double-check.
#6. I imagine it will not be the job of the crowd-sourcers to determine the legitimacy of any challenge. The information would need to go to some state group will to move it forward.
How to go about this. Expected difficulties.
#1. I am not a lawyer. I don't know if there has been case law surrounding this matter.
#2. My tech skills are limited. I don't know how to crowd-source this over the internet in the best possible way.
#3. It seems that this will ultimately need action to file challenges on local level. I don't know how to do that or whether it is reasonable at this point, or whether an after-the-vote challenge has standing.
So, might this work?
Why this might work.
#1. By uncovering unqualified members, their electoral votes might not count (probably subject to court challenge). Although it is possible that some of anyone-but-Trump's electors might not be qualified, that's how it rolls. However, it is only the Trump numbers that need to be brought below 270 and those would be the overwhelming number of electors in the states where he won. If Trump has 90% of the electors faithful to him, 90% of those investigated are Trump votes.
#2. If 37 candidates could be proven unqualified, it might be send the vote to the House. Yes, the House would very likely vote for Trump, but they might have a split with some never-Trumps joining with Democrats to install a non-psychotic candidate. If less than 37 are found, their number may still add to those who are going to switch.
#3. Why is there reason to believe there are unqualified members? Even Trump's campaign manager had a very tenuous connection to where he was registered to vote.
#4. How they might be disqualified. The U.S. Constitution lists only several qualifications and those revolve around disqualifying members of Congress or Senate and a "person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States." I don't claim to understand that latter specification.
Several states (not that many and summarized here in this pdf download) have additional qualifications. I went over these late at night so I don't claim to have caught all of the significant ones, but for example, Missouri requires "At least one qualified resident of each congressional district shall be named as a nominee for presidential elector by each state committee." I think that makes it pretty clear that if an elector is not from a particular district, that elector is not qualified.
Texas requires that each electoral college member being a voting member of the party. "To be eligible to serve as a presidential elector, a person must: be a qualified voter of this state; and not hold the office of United States senator, United States representative, or any other federal office of profit or trust. To be eligible to serve as a presidential elector for a political party, a person must be affiliated with the party." In this case, the person must be a qualified voter of the state and "affiliated with the party." I imagine a registered independent or any who do not meet the state's voter qualifications are ineligible.
Why it might not work. Beyond what was stated above:
#1. States certify their electoral slate. If they certified an unqualified member, it might not be enough to later prove that person is unqualified.
#2. States have provisions for replacing members. Finding an appropriate member at the last minute might prove difficult. However, if the state does not replace an unqualified member, that may be reason to challenge the result.
#3. This is more likely to be a speed bump than a stop Trump strategy.
#4. Time constraints. The electoral college members are set to convene Monday.
#5. How do we prove such things? Perhaps putting together a portfolio of reasons for possible challenges is the best that can be done.
#6. 37 is a big number.
How to go about it. Guiding principles.
#1. The means for checking qualifications must be legal. If for example, as part of your job, you have access to a government database for driver's licenses but could not access that for anything beyond strictly specified purposes, such access would be illegal. However, there are many databases readily available that are legal.
#2. The discovery should be ethical. Don't hound someone's home to discover whether they live there.
#3. The data discovered should be legally and ethically presented. No Social Security Numbers or home phones should be published.
#4. The findings should be considered tentative until proven. Don't present an elector as being a registered sex offender or as living at a particular out-of-state address based on name.
How to go about it. Methodology. Being crowd-sourced, divide up the following tasks.
#1. Compile a list of states and districts (Nebraska, Maine) where Trump won. Obtain the names of electors and the basic public information about them.
#2. Compile a list of laws relevant to those states. This is a hard one. This can be done on a superficial level (the link to the state summaries provided) and depending on expertise on a more detailed level (accessing the law in the individual state). Interpretation of legal jargon might be required.
#3. Prioritize which states have laws most likely to effect the elector eligibility.
#4. Examine each elector based on eligibility. In the case of needing to be a registered voter, that might involve comparing to lists of eligible voters and determining what law deems a person eligible to vote in a particular state.
#5. Compile tentative findings. Double-check.
#6. I imagine it will not be the job of the crowd-sourcers to determine the legitimacy of any challenge. The information would need to go to some state group will to move it forward.
How to go about this. Expected difficulties.
#1. I am not a lawyer. I don't know if there has been case law surrounding this matter.
#2. My tech skills are limited. I don't know how to crowd-source this over the internet in the best possible way.
#3. It seems that this will ultimately need action to file challenges on local level. I don't know how to do that or whether it is reasonable at this point, or whether an after-the-vote challenge has standing.
So, might this work?
This post was deleted for the following reason: Sorry, including so much elaboration carries this over the line into "here's my idea, I want to have a discussion about this" side of chatfilter. -- LobsterMitten
« Older Tell me about using an iPhone without a SIM card... | Is this even a job? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.