States Appointing a Different Set of Electors

[Chop]

The final vote tallies are in for a State. The result is for the candidate from the opposite party of the party in control of that State's government. The State refuses to appoint/certify the slate of electors based on the popular vote (of that State). The State's legislature either appoints/certifies a different set of electors chosen to match the party in control of that State, or certifies no electors at all.

Or, the U.S. House refuses to certify the election.

Something like this must not happen for either side. If it does, violence (both targeted and general), destruction, and rioting the likes we have not yet seen are highly likely to erupt.

 

[Chop]

Article II​

Section 1​

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President.

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

 

[Chop]

An argument is that, the State Legislature already determined how to appoint its Electors--by popular vote for such Elector's candidate of choice. A State legislature going back and choosing electors for a different candidate is changing the rules in the middle of the game. .

 

[Chop]

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4929874-comer-raskin-trump-election/

U.S. Rep. Raskin will not certify a Trump victory.

 

[Chop]

I don't think Raskin will get any traction at all. Just an idea. Now, if the margin of Trump's victory was razor thin, I wouldn't be surprised if Raskin and other Dems tried to Non-certify electors, and take other measures to thwart the election results.

But, as it turned out, Trump won handily.