Hillary ONE TERM & DONE: a possible face-saving compromise for GOP electors?

[yurbud]

I'm just throwing spaghetti at the wall here, but stranger things have happened than this.

What if Democrats propose a compromise with GOP electors that since Hillary won the popular vote, and there are doubts (at minimum) about how Trump won the electoral college, Hillary take office but vows to just serve for one term, so essentially 2020 is the "do-over" some have suggested?

The right could say they got their pound of flesh from Hillary, and we could get four years to get the Democrats house in order and present a fresh candidate in 2020.

I'm sure there are some flaws with this or possible better variations.

What do you guys think?

[PoliticAverse]

1. I think you may be in the "bargaining" phase of the "7 stages". n/t

[Kotya]

3. At the same time!

GMTA and all that!

[yurbud]

5. what's GMTA?

[PoliticAverse]

7. "Great Minds Think Alike". n/t

[yurbud]

4. maybe.

[Kotya]

2. I can't tell if you are in the...

..."bargaining" or "denial" stage of grief.

[Txbluedog]

6. Nope-Hillary is done, done!

Unless actual irrefutable proof is provided that ballot boxes/election counts were tampered with, that is.

It is too dangerous to do anything but have the electoral college vote for whoever won their state's electoral votes. Trust me, you do not want to set the precedent of the electoral college or anyone being able to override the will of the voters (no matter how rigged/flawed the election was)

[yurbud]

9. it would have a secondary benefit of making the GOP hate the electoral college even more than Dems

do

[Txbluedog]

10. The primary benefit is too scary

No need to worry about contesting Presidential elections, just "convince" 270 electors to vote for you and viola you are President of the United States

[yurbud]

16. I think whatever happens, the electoral college's days are numbered. Anything to expedite that

can only be a plus.

[Txbluedog]

20. I disagree

It would require a constitutional amendment to get rid of the electoral college, that is 2/3rd votes in BOTH House and approval by 37 or so states. The republicans just lost the popular vote by close to 3 million---where's the incentive for them to do this?

[EL34x4]

21. Yep!

Trump's historic popular vote loss was a huge wake up call to the GOP that with California's and New York's massive population of Democrats, winning the national popular vote is from here on an impossibility.

They're going to defend the Electoral College now more than ever.

[yurbud]

22. the national popular vote interstate compact circumvents that two-thirds business

by getting 270 electoral college votes worth of states to agree to votes to the winner of the national popular vote.

[EL34x4]

33. Think you'll get any red states to agree?

Why would they? Can anyone think of a situation where the GOP candidate would win the national popular vote but not the Electoral College?

This election pretty much put that notion to rest.

[trotsky]

15. The will of the voters in this case was to cast about 3 million more votes for Hillary, though.

Kind of an unusual election.

[JTFrog]

19. You mean override Russia and traitors. The will of the people is that they elect Hillary Clinton.nt

[Txbluedog]

34. Donald J Trump won the electoral college

That is how we elect Presidents in this country. So, the will of the people was that HE be President. If we can get decisive evidence that the election was rigged that would mean we get a new election, not that the electoral college just make Hillary PETOUS

[sfwriter]

26. That's why the founders established a direct election...

...no wait, they didn't. In fact, they seem to have done quite a bit t isolate us from the direct will of the public.

[Joe941]

8. This seems to be a reasonable compromise...

unfortunately GOP are not reasonable.

[Kotya]

11. Where are people getting the notion that...

...the GOP is looking for some sort of compromise?

They won everything.

[kudzu22]

38. If the situation were reversed

and Hillary won a slim electoral victory while losing the popular vote (and there were doubts about whether China interfered on her behalf), would you consider it "reasonable" for Trump to take office while promising to stay only one term?

Me either.

[B2G]

12. The creative fuckery with our Democracy is getting to be amusing.

You asked me what I thought.

[rogue emissary]

13. With the EC meeting in days, I had the same thought.

one by one Rep's and trump voters are seeing the colossal mistake the country made in allowing trump to run. I don't think Pence is any better. If my memory serves me, there's no tradition of Electorates picking a VP.

Hillary would be the logical choice and the one term vow would allow them to save face. If it goes to the house they'll just pick Pence and call it a day.

The problems that trump brings to light are not singular to him. His whole tentative administration is rot with conflicts and corruption.

Found this on Archive.gov

What happens if no presidential candidate gets 270 Electoral votes?

If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote. The Senate would elect the Vice President from the 2 Vice Presidential candidates with the most Electoral votes. Each Senator would cast one vote for Vice President. If the House of Representatives fails to elect a President by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President Elect serves as acting President until the deadlock is resolved in the House.

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/faq.html#no270

[onenote]

24. The EC doesn't meet as a group

Each state's electors meets in their state.

[onenote]

30. If it goes to the House, they'll almost certainly pick Trump

As long as Trump has more EC votes than anyone else, the House isn't going to push him out. Pence will make it clear he doesn't want them to.

Keep in mind that more people voted for Trump than voted nationally for republican house candidates. They're not about to risk alienating a very large swath of voters.

[rogue emissary]

36. He doesn't have any EC votes tell they vote monday.

This whole thread is about the EC not giving him the majority of their votes.

It only takes 38 or 39 not to vote for him or switch to Clinton.

He ends up tied, or with fewer EC votes than her.

[duffyduff]

43. It won't even remotely go that far.

These morons are going to throw this country away and vote for Putin's puppet.

I fully expect state secession by the time this done and over with.

Which is just what Putin would like to see.

[onenote]

44. A tie or fewer votes than Clinton are not the only two options

They're not even the two most likely options.

Obviously, the most likely outcome is that Trump still ends up with at least 270 votes, even if some electors bail on him.

But assuming that 37 or 38 or 39 of his electors bail on him so he only has 269 (or 268 or 267) votes, it doesn't mean that Clinton will end up gaining enough of those votes to go from 232 to 269, 270, or higher. And it's simply beyond reasonable expectation to think she would.

So the most likely scenario (after Trump still having 270 or more) is that Trump has somewhere between 233 and 269 EC votes and Clinton still has only 232 and Trump is still the candidate with a plurality in the EC. And he's still the guy the House picks to be president.

[rogue emissary]

49. So far nothing about this election has been reasonable.

[EL34x4]

39. Why does the GOP need to save face?

You're looking at this from a Democrat's perspective; one that says Trump is an embarrassment and a mistake and the people who put him in power won't be able to face themselves in the mirror.

You need to look at it from the perspective of being a Republican and that in little over a month, they'll enter Washington DC in control of the Presidency, the Senate and the House. Oh, and a vacancy on the Supreme Court. They're amassing the most conservative cabinet ever to undo decades of government liberalism.

That's called "winning."

And people here think that they're troubled by the need to save face and the only remedy for their tortured GOP souls is to give Hillary Clinton the White House?

Seriously?

You said, "one by one Rep's and trump voters are seeing the colossal mistake the country made in allowing trump to run."

Says who? Go take a peek over at Free Republic and count how many people over there are viewing Donald Trump as a colossal mistake. Be prepared to stay awhile to find even one.

Sorry, but there's some serious delusion on this thread.

[rogue emissary]

47. Free republic is a extreme.

That's like saying DU is representing of the entire DNC.

Clearly I don't go there and never said many or all. I said one by one, which I've seen.

For your delusional proclamation. This thread was just someone getting an idea of their chest.

[mtnsnake]

14. I think the only slight hope is for a GOP-backed coup at the electoral college vote on the 19th

and even then, I doubt if it would involve Hillary, it would probably involve the electors in the red states casting their vote for a different republican than Trump.

[yurbud]

23. that would be a slightly more acceptable outcome even so.

[Ace Rothstein]

17. The Republicans don't have to compromise on anything.

That's why the next 2 years, at a minimum, are going to suck so much.

[BainsBane]

18. This is called bargaining

That's a stage of grief. It's not going to happen.

[onenote]

25. I'm not sure anything "stranger" than what you suggest has ever happened in US presidential election

And I wouldn't call it throwing spaghetti at the wall -- spaghetti sometimes sticks, while your idea is got no chance of sticking.

[David__77]

27. I don't consider that a compromise.

The Democratic electors throwing their support to some other Republican who many Democrats and Republicans would find a bit better than Trump would be a compromise.

In 1994, the Democrats lost their majority in the California state assembly. The Democratic speaker, Willie Brown, got his caucus to vote for a Republican to become speaker - not the Republican who the Republican leaders wanted. Then the Republicans got that assembly member recalled, and then Brown did the same tactic with another Republican. It would take that kind of tactic to get anywhere. A lot of dealing.

[yurbud]

40. that dramatically increases my respect for Willie Brown.

[David__77]

51. I think he did a good job with all that.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/25/us/in-bold-move-willie-brown-wins-again.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/06/06/us/california-speaker-frustrates-gop-one-last-time.html

I believe the Republicans felt like they had the rug pulled out beneath them, repeatedly. They finally did get the speakership on their own terms during 1996, and then lost it in the elections that year, and never recovered it. The new assembly margin is 55-25 for the Democrats!

[onenote]

45. Who would play the role of Willie Brown in this scenario

Remember, the electors are from a lot of different states -- they owe nothing to the electors in other states. Would Hillary be the one to direct all of her electors to support a Republican other than Trump? That's 232 electors. Do you think there are 38 repub electors that would do what Hillary Clinton wants done?

[David__77]

48. I don't think Clinton would be a good choice to visibly handle any of that.

I think that it would take the intervention of some groups that look favorably upon the likes of McCain and Lindsay Graham. The "compassionate conservative" crowd. Perhaps even that independent candidate who did well in Utah. If Democrats maintained a sort of iron discipline and communications blackout and there was unanimity to support a candidate favorable to this group, I can imagine that a few Republicans might be peeled off. I don't imagine a scenario in which this got very far. Nor do I actually think the outcome would be favorable to the Democratic Party.

[sfwriter]

28. How about one term of Pence and done?

I don't see that happening, but it would be an easier sell than any term of Hillary. We are more willing to compromise than they are. Again, just tossing spaghetti.

I think they are far more likely to split their vote and send it to the house, a safe Republican forum, for the selection.

The outcome there would likely be Pence, or god help us Trump anyhow. There is a high wack-a-doo frequency amongst Republican house members. Then, the will of the electors is thwarted, the will of the majority is thwarted, and he can start serving under circumstances as dubious as his policies.

Hillary, under any scenario, is a long shot.

[yurbud]

29. I could see that happening if Dems had any ability to bargain, which they don't.

Corporate Dems would say, "Twelve years for Pence MAX, and that's our final offer!"

[onenote]

46. What do they have to bargain with?

I'm curious.

[yurbud]

50. good point.

[duffyduff]

42. Pence is as tainted as Trump. n/t

[Adsos Letter]

31. "we could get four years to get the Democrats house in order and present a fresh candidate in 2020"

This is exactly why they would never go for it.

[CentralMass]

32. The Democrats are going to get absolutely nothing from the GOP

[Hoyt]

35. I understand how you feel after being depressed for months after 2004 election. But let it go.

There are other things to fight, no need wasting energy on something that isn't going to change.

[pangaia]

37. Spaghetti is right. :)))

[duffyduff]

41. Not going to happen.

These jackasses in the EC are so giddy with the prospect of the GOP "controlling" the government, they don't give a shit that Russia is going to be calling the shots.

[YOHABLO]

52. Your spaghetti's not sticking. Better Al Dente

[Freethinker65]

53. Nope

I would go for Romney/Clinton as a big compromise for this progressive (that has NEVER voted for a Republican for POTUS), but even this would be considered too liberal for the current knuckle dragging GOP. They believe they won it all with a mandate...that is all that matters to the GOP. Country be damned

[Jean-Jacques Roussea]

54. convince electors that she'll be impeached

I think they'd be more comfortable about Kaine and his penis/balls

[StevieM]

55. This is never going to happen. Trump will be the next president. That said, I don't think HRC was

planning to run for a second term had she been elected.