Oh dear.

[conuly]

I wasn't really expecting anybody to take me seriously with the whole Electoral College thing. I really do know it's a pipe dream. And I don't really want to shut them down, but on the other hand, I don't want to crush their hopes and dreams either, and if they actually think this is a possibility they're just going to drag out the agony. Denial is fun if you know better, but if you don't isn't it better to rip off that bandaid? I have clearly got to be more careful with what I say on the internet. Does anybody have any practical advice that is realistic but not super blunt? I don't want to be all "Give it up, it's not actually gonna happen", but I don't want them to think it is actually gonna happen because I put that idea in their heads!

I suppose I ought to put my money where my mouth is and actually write to somebody. Where the heck can I get a list of electors and their contact information? Or maybe the media is the place to go with this, and I can at least say I tried? (Ohhhh, man, I don't actually want to try, because then it won't just not happen, I will have failed and it won't happen.)

Edit: Strike all that, good thing they're not as naive as I thought. I was really worried for a minute!

But here's a few things I found out while trying to find some genuine advice for them.

First, I'm not the only person with this ridiculous idea.

Secondly, apparently when it looked like Romney might win the popular vote (but lose the electoral), Trump was completely opposed. "This is not democracy!" Which I actually agree with, but what's he saying now? Crickets, right?

So you know what? I'm done. I'm absolutely done. You want to tell me I'm being stupid? You want to tell me it's futile? You want to tell me I could've done more practical good going to that rally tonight? I know, but I don't care. Fuck him. Just fuck him and his hypocrisy. I'm going to make all the ruckus I can from now until December. My electors are presumably voting Clinton anyway, but I'm going to write to all the others if I can track them down. I'm going to write to all the legislators, even the ones who don't give a shit about me because they're in, like, Alaska. I'm going to harass the hell out of everybody. And the very least you can do is write to your own legislators and ask them to support a national popular vote, and your own state governor, etc. asking them to join the Interstate Popular Vote Compact. Maybe it's a waste of time, but it's not a waste of very much time. (You can boost the signal a bit too, online and in real life. I mean, if you're talking/posting/tweeting about the election anyway....)

I was speaking to somebody elsewhere who thinks an Article V Convention is the way to go. Frankly, I think that's even less likely than a revolt among the electors, but I'll try it too. Because fuck that loser.

Comments

[sathari]

Hi, I'm the person you thought was naive. (No worries. But you made me think about why that was. Hence this comment.)

Because... I'm not sure, but I think there's something important here.

Because my enthusiasm was on the order of "Oh, wow, you have just shown me this intriguing process-and-structure-based kludge to something that amounts to the failure of our democratic principles?"

And I think I failed to share with you that it was my excitement about the very existence of a piece of procedural checks-and-balances I hadn't known about before? A really cool bit of process and policy for its own sake? That even if it didn't work, the cool thing to me was that it existed? (Yep, we're new to each other, you had no way of knowing how much of a wonk I am for process in anything ever.)

(And I'm also not sure if that says anything larger about the overall strategy of the Democratic party with regard to working the process-and-structure, or if that's "juuuuuuust the two of us." On the other hand, the fact that Hillary, ahem, WON THE POPULAR VOTE, but lost the election based on process... possibly means that getting excited about knowing the finer points of process-based finagles and kludges is something to think about as a first step to not having another popularly-won election we lose? IDK)

[conuly]

I think it's slightly more than just the two of us, but nobody realistically thinks it'll work. It's a big picture thing - make the GOP realize the Electoral College is not their friend, and move to get it pulled back. (Do you realize that an even greater percentage of Republicans than Democrats doesn't like the EC? It's over 60% for either crowd, though. The GOP brass seem to love it though, because, you know, they're all such originalists when it comes to the Constitution. *eyeroll*

And yeah, the only reason I even know this tiny bit of trivia is 1. my US government class in high school and 2. this one movie I saw the synopsis of once where the president-elect died election night and the vp was a real doofus, so all the electors said fuck it. Judging from the comments I'm seeing from people who aren't really excited about the very slim possibility here, I think most people don't have any grasp of how the electoral college works or is supposed to work.

(It's 1am here. I think I missed something in your comment I ought to reply to. I might therefore edit in the morning.)

[sathari]

Yeah, it's arguably a spit-in-the-wind thing, but, damn, I think the next 2-4 years are going to be FULL of having not only to pull out every single policy wrinkle and trick and kludge and finagle that we can think of, but--- for the sake of our own emotional health if nothing else--- ENJOYING the hunt for those, and the finding, and the sharing. Getting pumped about public policy esoterica. (LOL)

(Do you realize that an even greater percentage of Republicans than Democrats doesn't like the EC? It's over 60% for either crowd, though. The GOP brass seem to love it though, because, you know, they're all such originalists when it comes to the Constitution. *eyeroll*

You mentioned that over on my journal--- I had NOT known it, but DAMN. Though between this election and 2000, it's sort of obvious why the GOP top brass love the thing--- they know how to PLAY it like a kazoo.

And, yeah, the electoral college is a WEIRD thing to try to explain to people. Not least because, at least IMO, it's really NOT reflective of anything to do with the ways that geography and political affiliation are currently correlated in the US, to the extent that they even are anymore.

[conuly]

And now I can't find where I found the original stat, but a different stat I found - Gallup - did at least confirm that voters in both parties dislike it at at least 60%.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Okay. Fact #1 is: Trump has legally won this election, and unless Congress finds a legitimate reason to take him out (which is highly unlikely,) we are stuck with him until 2020. The electors aren't going to overturn this; there'd be massive civil unrest if they did. But four years is enough time to push the Interstate Voting Compact, mail-in ballots, and all the other election reforms.

A lot of people need to get it in gear, if we don't want to be stuck with Trump till 2024.

[conuly]

The electors aren't going to overturn this; there'd be massive civil unrest if they did

Oh, I know, and even without that the odds of convincing even one elector to Take a Stand are pretty much zip. But at this hour, I'm operating on pure spite. It's the blatant hypocrisy that gets me. Nothing else would motivate me to actually write to people. Ugh! But I cannot stand smarming "oh, it's undemocratic" today and then silence tomorrow. It's this, or plan an assassination, and aside from being super counterproductive I have to say, that's really not in my skillset.

(Honestly, if I really thought this might make a difference this year, I'd absolutely refrain. I believe I mentioned in my earlier post that they have all the guns? Civil unrest? It'd be a bloodbath. But I'm allowed to take futile and pointless stands when they won't harm anybody. I know you think you know better, and you probably do, but maybe you didn't know better when you were younger.)

But four years is enough time to push the Interstate Voting Compact, mail-in ballots, and all the other election reforms.

Damn straight - and that's actually one point in favor of publicly nagging the electors this year. It increases the pressure to make these reforms. Without public pressure, is a Republican-controlled legislature under a Republican president really going to be motivated to make these changes? When the younger generation overwhelmingly leans left and the older generation is, well, starting to die?

In conclusion: Don't try to reason with me. I intend to be completely unreasonable until I calm down. It might be a while.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

I think you're getting me mixed up with someone else. I'm the one who said "Marching in the street isn't going to change either this election's result, or the election laws for next time. Your time would be far better spent staying home and sending e-mails to all your elected officials."

The electors aren't going to overturn this, no. But you're absolutely right about increasing the pressure now, and I'm all in favor of it. It's not a futile and pointless stand; it's a long-range strategy. We'll have to get used to thinking in long-range strategies over the next four years, because a GOP Congress under a GOP POTUS won't be motivated to do jack-shit about election reform.

[conuly]

The electors aren't going to overturn this, no.

I would actually be deliriously happy if we convinced one or two to simply abstain, and I'll explain why.

Republican voters strongly dislike the electoral college - they're about 65% against, which is more than Democrats (about 60% against). However, the GOP's platform is pro-electoral college. This could be because they're all Constitutional Originalists, but I think we both know that isn't the reason.

The truth is that their base is getting older. So is ours, but with ours that means they're reaching voting age and with theirs, not to be crass, it means they're dying.

Which is why the GOP leaders like the electoral college - it gives them a chance to steal a win where they ought to have lost.

But if they see that the electoral college isn't their friend, they've got two choices. The first is to impel the states to close that loophole and make the electors vote in a certain way. That's not actually going to be popular with their voters.

The second, of course, is to ditch it.

[conuly]

(Although if all you want to do is remind me that this is very silly, I know that. I promise, my hopes are not going to get up even a little bit, because I do know better. I will not break down sobbing December Wheneverth because my plans have failed. I do realize this is absolutely, ridiculously, ludicrously futile and I'd do better trying to wish on stars and throw coins into fountains and blow the seeds off of dandelions. But I don't think anybody is going to get hurt by it either, so I will do as I've already decided, even if it's a completely pointless waste of time.)

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Well, I don't in fact think it's silly, and if even one or two electors refused to vote for Trump, that would make a very important statement. But it would take 16 faithless electors to overturn the election.

[conuly]

Yes, I'd be thrilled if we could convince just one or two. I might actually be less thrilled if we won this way - Hilary won the popular vote, but she didn't win by all that much, did she? That won't actually end as well as we hope.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Depending how his trial for fraud goes, there might be several electors who won't vote for him, but enough to turn the election? I don't think. And no, if the election was turned, it wouldn't end well. Like it or not, this is the result of our democratic process - which could stand some improvement, true, but it is what it is.

Trump is a narcissist, and his primary motivation is to obtain narcissistic supply (http://narcissisticbehavior.net/narcissism-and-the-addiction-to-narcissistic-supply/). Rationality won't affect him, and opposition will only polarize him - the tactic that is most likely to work on him is flattery. He has no genuine commitment to any political agenda or social ideology; it's all about whatever makes Donald Trump feel like a Big Damn Hero.

We can use this, if we're really as smart as we like to tell ourselves we are.

[conuly]

Well, if you want to practice the fine art of sucking up, I suppose you can start here.