Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
1. Despite screaming at Trump when he refused to commit to accepting the results of the election,...
Sun Nov 20, 2016, 11:02 AM
Nov 2016

... we're to do the same thing? "Undermining the foundation of democracy?"

I'll pass. Hypocrisy isn't my thing.

Ruth Bonner

(192 posts)
5. Nixon was impeached for one crime. Can you name anyone who has been ready
Sun Nov 20, 2016, 11:23 AM
Nov 2016

set to step into the role of President who has broken the law before ascending to office? As often as Trump? And gotten away with it, and bragged about doing so?

Nixon's statement, "When when the President does it, it's not against the law." Nixon only got to that mindset after he was in the office for a while. Trump is there already.

This is not policy disagreement, it is about the foundation of democracy - the rule of law.

Ruth Bonner

(192 posts)
9. The fact he is a law breaker justifies, IMO, asking electors to vote based on their conscience,
Sun Nov 20, 2016, 10:02 PM
Nov 2016

and if voting their conscience means voting for Hillary, then that's okay with me.

Is there any information that could come out about him and/or the election that would sway you that electors should be faithless? If there is no boundary beyond which we will break out of social norms and use a fail-safe mechanism placed there by the founders, then I think we are abdicating personal responsibility.

The Democratic Party has superdelegates that act as electors for the party nomination. They can be faithless if the situation warrants it. If John Edwards had gotten the 2008 nomination and then info about him cheating on his wife, who was dying of cancer came out, then superdelegates voting for the next most popular candidate would seem like the right way to go to me.

If we know Trump to be a threat to our democracy then faithless electors could save our ass.

The first time I heard a guy at work mentioned this possibility, I thought it was crap, now I'm wondering.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
11. Got it! When Trump and his crew said they would fight the election results...
Mon Nov 21, 2016, 07:59 AM
Nov 2016

... because the system was rigged and Clinton was a criminal, that was undermining democracy.

When you advocate the same thing because the election was rigged and you gut tells you Trump is a criminal, that's okay.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
13. Trump and his horde were totally convinced that the election was rigged...
Fri Nov 25, 2016, 07:02 PM
Nov 2016

... and they could tell you why.

Prior to the election, we were convinced it was not rigged ... until we lost. Now we're call foul.

TexasMommaWithAHat

(3,212 posts)
2. And if they get threats?
Sun Nov 20, 2016, 11:09 AM
Nov 2016

I hope this doesn't backfire. I know we'd like to think that there are no crazies on our side, but there are.

Ruth Bonner

(192 posts)
3. I am scared on their behalf. They are adults. We often refer to
Sun Nov 20, 2016, 11:16 AM
Nov 2016

... heroes for democracy (suffragettes) and for Civil Rights as if they can/do only exist in the past, as if we don't need them now. Protesters are risking their safety, so are people speaking out against Trump. Heroes are typically surrounded by people who love them and don't want them to risk their lives or wellbeing. Courage is knowing you are in danger and doing it anyway.

TexasMommaWithAHat

(3,212 posts)
4. And putting people's lives at risk who don't want
Sun Nov 20, 2016, 11:20 AM
Nov 2016

to change their vote? The fact is that we are willing to put opponents lives at risk. What does that say about us?

I really fear where we are going, and I'm very sad to say that not all of my fears are because of Trump.

If we aren't careful, we are going to lose even more votes at the mid-terms.

Ruth Bonner

(192 posts)
6. I didn't think about putting lives of electors who do not change their vote to Clinton at risk...
Sun Nov 20, 2016, 11:29 AM
Nov 2016

I would be disgusted and appalled by anyone who used threats to compel anyone to vote against their conscience. I am unaware of any such threats coming from the left. And, then again, human nature is what it is... it could happen. I'd support the law coming down on anyone who acted in such a manner like a ton of bricks.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Activist Headquarters»Electoral College in Play...