Texas Elector Resigns

[smilesammich 10,727]

Do you only have ''true compassion'' for those who have different voices than your own? If you're going to complain about ''Hillary death threats'' be careful about adding your voice to that 'supposed' chorus by wishing him death based on his convictions.

Quite possibly. Kind of hard for someone who believes that strongly to maintain such standards for political office. Which is probably for the best they step aside. He could actually feel that Trump is a sort of anti-Christ, by those sort of standards (I've heard that discussion more than once btw), he wouldn't want to be counted among those giving him a thumbs up... there'd be literal hell to pay spiritually, if you get my drift. Maybe he simply thought he'd never reach that point. At any rate, it's pretty interesting.

honestly i'm still in shock that so many fundamentalist christians bought into trump for exactly this reason, trump soooo fits the bill. i guess i was the only one watching those spiffy end of times movies during youth lock-ins.

So that's where you hang out the rest of the day.

yes, i read multiple articles from multiple sources - even sources full of it. best to know your enemy.

[yuna628 9,750]

honestly i'm still in shock that so many fundamentalist christians bought into trump for exactly this reason, trump soooo fits the bill. i guess i was the only one watching those spiffy end of times movies during youth lock-ins.

yes, i read multiple articles from multiple sources - even sources full of it. best to know your enemy.

Well yes, that's the interesting thing to me. But of course some were willing to vote him in, knowing full well what they actually conclude about him (hint: it's not good conclusions - and they'd rather risk the trip to hell-town for the greater good r'something), but that in doing so will hasten the apocalypse. I wish I were joking here.

Others just twist themselves to the point they are willing to overlook it all.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Well yes, that's the interesting thing to me. But of course some were willing to vote him in, knowing full well what they actually conclude about him (hint: it's not good conclusions - and they'd rather risk the trip to hell-town for the greater good r'something), but that in doing so will hasten the apocalypse. I wish I were joking here.

Others just twist themselves to the point they are willing to overlook it all.

yeah i was thinking that some might view trump the same way they do climate change, whatever needs to be done to hurry up and get on with christ's return. its sad that many christians don't talk about this or see such ideology as a threat to us all.

[eieio 1,594]

So sad.

Let me cheer you two up.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Days that end in "y"...

oh okay, i was really confused there for a second.

I feel like I have seen this before.

Day? Ja? Vue???

i don't need to, but i want to. and i can.

sorry i'm disrupting commie morning worship bunch on ceshst..but i believe your remedy might be in blocking those you can't tolerate, considering i'm not doing anything wrong.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

I mean that I am an atheist.

I guessed that when I saw the Vegan sticker. They go hand in hand. God wants you to eat meat

the comments are interesting..

how about you don't try to get this thread locked, discuss like an adult or move out..

Did you get Chest saved last night , did they use to call you Ms. Got the thread locked

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

anybody else find it ironic this guy promised to Vote for Trump if people voted for him, but because he is honest and principled he is no longer going to do what he promised people he would

Kind of an Oxymoron

[smilesammich 10,727]

Did you get Chest saved last night , did they use to call you Ms. Got the thread locked

you'll have to tell me what they used to call me, i've never been in on those convos.

[yuna628 9,750]

anybody else find it ironic this guy promised to Vote for Trump if people voted for him, but because he is honest and principled he is no longer going to do what he promised people he would

Kind of an Oxymoron

An elector only really promises that they will vote. But they are in no way bound by any penalty to decide not to vote. So this person will not vote and thus, resigns. Texas does not have any law prohibiting faithless electors. That's the way it's supposed to work after all. He was chosen as an elector, but nothing in those qualifications to be one means you must vote for the person elected, regardless, I might add if you sign something stating you will. Any alternate chosen to replace this man actually doesn't even have to sign a pledge at all.

He has told the Star-Telegram that he wasn’t a Trump supporter, but he wasn’t completely opposed to him at the time of the state convention in May when he was chosen as an elector.

As time went by, and he studied the issue more, Sisneros said he realized he couldn’t vote for Trump.

On Election Day, his presidential vote went to Tom Hoefling of Iowa, a write-in candidate.

He spent weeks sifting through his options — voting for a candidate he didn’t believe in, breaking the pledge and becoming a “faithless elector” or resigning.

“I know Art spent a lot of time thinking about his position and stance,” Kim said. “I respect the consideration he put into this. I disagree with it, but I respect it.”

As Sisneros weighed what to do, he received death threats and started having a hard time sleeping.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/election/article117570973.html#storylink=cpy

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/election/article117570973.html

SCOTUS actually weighed in on this matter a long time ago in that, a state could demand an elector to sign a pledge, but as to forcing them to actually vote for someone against their conscience it is a matter of Constitutional freedom. If we want to get back to any sort of Constitutional originalism, I'd actually say for an elector to use their own judgment in the matter was the way the founding fathers actually wanted things to be - much as that would upset modern voters of today.

The constitutionality of state pledge laws was confirmed by the Supreme Court in 1952 in Ray v. Blair^[8] in a 5–2 vote. The court ruled states have the right to require electors to pledge to vote for the candidate whom their party supports, and the right to remove potential electors who refuse to pledge prior to the election. The court also wrote:

However, even if such promises of candidates for the electoral college are legally unenforceable because violative of an

assumed constitutional freedom of the elector under the Constitution, Art. II, § 1, to vote as he may choose

in the electoral college, it would not follow that the requirement of a pledge in the primary is unconstitutional (emphasis added).

[8]

The ruling only held that requiring a pledge, not a vote, was constitutional and Justice Jackson wrote in his dissent, "no one faithful to our history can deny that the plan originally contemplated what is implicit in its text – that electors would be free agents, to exercise an independent and nonpartisan judgment as to the men best qualified for the Nation's highest offices." More recent legal scholars believe "a state law that would thwart a federal elector’s discretion at an extraordinary time when it reasonably must be exercised would clearly violate Article II and the Twelfth Amendment."^[9]

The Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of state laws punishing electors for actually casting a faithless vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector

[TBoneTX 46,318]

One member has been thread-banned for treading on this TOS provision: "Make comments in a Post either direct or implied toward another member that are purposely designed to upset, antagonize, make fun of, belittle, harass, insult, or otherwise instigate an argument that takes away from the personal enjoyment of the Service by other users."

[Dakine10 5,452]

The guy is so pathetic, he should just kill himself.

There is no hope!

Actually it's probably better for Trump that the guy resigned instead of following his conscience. I'm not sure why you're upset about getting an elector in there that will vote for Trump instead of one that might not.

At any rate wishing someone kills themselves over this is what's truly pathetic.

[yuna628 9,750]

A little related update regarding electors revolting. A group of Colorado electors are looking to sue the state government which has laws (contrary to Texas) that force them to vote for the electoral winner. http://gazette.com/article/1591550

Four of Colorado’s nine Electoral College electors plan to challenge a state law that would prevent a long-shot bid to keep President-elect Donald Trump out of the White House.

Robert Nemanich, of Colorado Springs, said Saturday he and three other electors intend to sue Colorado’s governor, attorney general, secretary of state and state Democratic Party chairman claiming state law requiring electors to vote for the presidential and vice presidential candidates “who received the highest number of votes at the preceding general election in this state,” is unconstitutional.

{..}

“There are Republicans and Democrats now willing to look for a solution to Donald Trump (being elected).” he said. “The linchpin comes down to whether there are enough Republicans to join.” Eight of Colorado’s nine electors have voiced support for the lawsuit, which Nemanich said would be filed Monday. The plan would require that 270 electors agree to vote for a presidential candidate that was not on the ballot.