By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
mikrolik said:
According to the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/19/us/elections/electoral-college-results.html?_r=0), two out of 306 electors pledged to vote for Trump didn't vote for him. But of the 232 electors pledged to vote for Hillary Clinton, five didn't vote for her.

Regardless of whether you support Trump or Clinton, why would the system be set up so that an elector can apparently not vote for whom they are pledged? That just seems kinda weird to me, and defeats the purpose of the Electoral College in the first place.

Aparently the constitution doesn't even mention the popular vote ast all. So the real Presidential election happened today. I'll let an elector explain it:

So, um the general election is kind of a farce. Peoples vote are kind of worthles.



“Simple minds have always confused great honesty with great rudeness.” - Sherlock Holmes, Elementary (2013).

"Did you guys expected some actual rational fact-based reasoning? ...you should already know I'm all about BS and fraudulence." - FunFan, VGchartz (2016)