Electoral College Results

Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 3 months ago to Politics
33 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

This is one for the history books.

CERTIFICATION OF ELECTORAL VOTES - Beginning with the state of Alabama, the tellers proceeded with announcing the results of the Electoral College balloting. At the conclusion of the counting the Electoral ballots, the Vice President reported to the Joint Session that the votes would be recorded as follows:

For the Office of President of the United States,
Donald J. Trump--304,
Hillary Clinton--227,
Colin Powell--3,
John Kasich--1,
Ron Paul--1,
Bernie Sanders--1,
and Faith Spotted Eagle--1;

and for the Office of Vice President of the United States,
Michael R. Pence--305,
Tim Kaine--227,
Elizabeth Warren--2,
Maria Cantwell--1,
Susan Collins--1,
Carly Fiorina--1, and
Winona LaDuke--1.

http://clerk.house.gov/floorsummary/f...
Last Floor Action:
1:54:00 P.M. - The House adjourned pursuant to a previous special order. The next meeting is scheduled for 12:00 p.m. on January 9, 2017.

STATE OF TEXAS CERTIFICATE OF VOTE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTOR MEETING DECEMBER 19, 2016
[...]
FOR PRESIDENT: DONALD J. TRUMP received 36 votes, RON PAUL received 1 vote, JOHN KASICH received 1 vote and no votes were cast for any other person for President of the United States.
FOR VICE-PRESEDENT: MIKE PENCE received 37 votes, CARLY FIORINA received 1 vote and no votes were cast for any other person for Vice-President ofthe United States.
...


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 7 years, 3 months ago
    It is amusing that with all the hype for "Hamilton" electors to abandon Trump, more Hillary electors actually did.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ CBJ 7 years, 3 months ago
      I'm still trying to figure out how Colin Powell managed to pick up three electoral votes, all from Democrats.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 7 years, 3 months ago
        He is black
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 7 years, 3 months ago
          So is Dr. Ben Carson and about 50 million other people. Your quip seems racist to me. Are you a social conservative?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 7 years, 3 months ago
            I think I was referring to Obama's legacy. He was the first black president, and that is about IT as far as a legacy that he can point to. HE is the one who pumped the historical aspect of it, as if blackness means something as far as qualifications for president. I could care less about race. But I do care about culture, and Obama promoted entitlement, particularly for black people- which I think WAS racist.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ 7 years, 3 months ago
        "Powell's experience in military matters made him a very popular figure with both American political parties. Many Democrats admired his moderate stance on military matters, while many Republicans saw him as a great asset associated with the successes of past Republican administrations. Put forth as a potential Democratic Vice Presidential nominee in the 1992 U.S. presidential election... -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_P...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 7 years, 3 months ago
        Their strategy was that they knew they couldn't get Trump electors to vote for Hillary but they thought that Colin Powell would make a compromise candidate. Had the attempt to keep Trump from getting the majority worked, rather than being a miserable failure, the House would have been able to pick anyone who had gotten an electoral vote as president.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ CBJ 7 years, 3 months ago
          Something like that might have worked if Hillary had won a few more states, making the electoral college outcome very close. The House would have been required to pick from the top three, so the candidates that received 1 electoral vote each would not have been eligible for consideration.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 7 years, 3 months ago
      In the primary, I registered as a Democrat and voted for Bernie Sanders. In the general election, I voted Stein-Kreml (Green) for President/VP. Neither made any difference for Texas, but I wanted to help keep the Democrats honest.

      (Generally, I voted for Libertarians and Republicans in state and local elections. Two exceptions were for sheriff and a school board seat. I always read the LWV sheets, seek out other news, and pick the person, not the party.)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 7 years, 3 months ago
        Well, in spite of your vote, Trump won fortunately. Now we get to see if he can actually do what he promised. I do hope that he is successful. Our country is in bad shape from Obama.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 7 years, 3 months ago
    I'm disappointed that Gary Johnson did not receive any electoral votes, considering he ran a strong third in popular votes.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 7 years, 3 months ago
      Gary Johnson failed because he was uninteresting. That might be good: strong leaders are dangerous. But, the "Partyarchy" of the LP is Republican. They want a "professional image" that will appeal to "most voters." That has been true since 1976. Harry Browne was a nice exception.

      However, Browne was a button-down person, an accountant type. He did bring with him a large contingent of voters who already knew him for his hard-money writings. But he ran on a platform of changing the government. His best book was How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World which is about changing your own life, rather than the lives of others. That could have been a winning platform, but it was not the message of the Partyarchy which wants to win government jobs as secretaries of departments.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ CBJ 7 years, 3 months ago
        I don’t agree that Gary Johnson failed or that he was uninteresting. He more than tripled any previous LP vote totals for President. And although he came across as low-key compared to the R&D candidates, he was interesting enough to win the editorial endorsement of more than half a dozen significant newspapers. As for a “professional image”, it is a prerequisite for any presidential candidate that expects to be taken seriously, especially one from a political party that most voters are not very familiar with.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 7 years, 3 months ago
          Donald Trump proved the opposite case. He used news and entertainment media on his own terms. Whatever else, he is comfortable in front of an audience. Gary Johnson is a small government conservative. (Texas senator John Cornyn is a big government conservative, just for comparison.) It was fine for the governor of New Mexico, but it was insufficient for a national campaign for the Presidency. As noted below by craigerb, Ron Paul got 1 electoral vote from Texas. That came from his more consistent and visible application of principles. That elector did not vote for Ted Cruz, for example.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ CBJ 7 years, 3 months ago
            Would the Libertarians have done better with a more Trump-like candidate? I don't see how. To be taken seriously, an unfamiliar candidate from an unfamiliar party will be held to different standards of behavior than those of a well-known major party candidate. It's simply a fact of political life.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by jhagen 7 years, 3 months ago
        Weak leaders can be just as dangerous though. (I'm NOT saying GJ is weak, but that weak leaders are dangerous)
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 7 years, 3 months ago
          We would have to have another discussion on leadership. The Oath of the Valley is a principled declaration against social leadership. It certainly speaks against social management. That can be a nuanced discussion. In the military, leaders eat last: the food line forms from the lowest ranks to the highest. That is a strong principle for the military. The commercial mode would be for people to bid for food with the richest eating first. It works well enough in the wider world, perhaps, but you can see the problems ... Again, perhaps we should discuss the ins and outs in a new topic.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 7 years, 3 months ago
      his support pretty much collapsed in the time leading up to the election. His campaign wasnt very good, and he is intellectually challenged, which is upsetting for a libertarian.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years, 3 months ago
      "I'm disappointed that Gary Johnson did not receive any electoral votes,"
      I was hoping that somehow he would introduce the questions of do we want gov't spending to grow, where is the limit where we've over-interpreted the Constitution, and should we be borrowing more money. Regardless of the answers, I just wanted the questions.

      It seemed like he was strong at first, but then had those missteps like when he said getting in the debates would win him votes even if he spoke with his tongue out or the times he got angry at reporters.

      My impression is Trump's mis-steps would have doomed him to lose by a margin even greater than 2.5 million votes, but too many respectable media outlets appeared to be licking their chops at the train wreck. In the third debate they kept asking Trump about "sexual assault", which I thought was bogus. It made me sympathetic to him, and I think he ran as a clown.

      My point about that is I wonder if there was any way Johnson could have played the media ganging up on him to get free publicity. I'm sure campaign experts have theories on that.

      I really thought he had an actual shot at winning because the mainstream candidates were someone unpopular and scripted and someone presenting himself as an absolute buffoon.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 7 years, 3 months ago
        All it took for me to dismiss JOhnson was his pitiful performance in the first town hall with anderson cooper. Both he and his running made werent taking it seriously, and were intellectually inconsistent (that is not normally a problem in politics, but Johnson was supposed to be a libertarian..)
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Jer 7 years, 3 months ago
          I thought GJ was quite consistent. Where did you see it differently? I also thought GJ was obviously Libertarian with perhaps one exception, and have been confused by libertarian comments implying that he was not.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 7 years, 3 months ago
            What got me was his interest in decriminalizing marijuana (which I am in favor of), but he thought the rest of the mind altering drugs should be prohibited. THAT is inconsistent. Either the government stays out of the "war" on drugs or it doesnt. Once the door is opened, its only a little more of a stretch to outlaw soft drinks because they might cause health problems... etc.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by freedomforall 7 years, 3 months ago
              He was running for president, Term. Admit it. His "inconsistent" position on drugs had nothing to do with why you wouldn't vote for Johnson. Its just an excuse. Yes, its inconsistent. Every person why runs for president is inconsistent and most are conspicuously lying about at least half the things they say. Did you decide Trump was unacceptable because most of his plans were economically inconsistent ? Trump was much more inconsistent than Johnson. You rejected Johnson because you feared Hitlery and didn't want her in office. You concluded that Trump regardless of his inconsistencies was an acceptable lesser evil. You are inconsistent to judge Johnson as inconsistent while supporting Trump the Inconsistent.
              I respect your choice, but not this inconsistency ;^)
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by Jer 7 years, 3 months ago
              Term2, Aren't you stretching just a little? I can understand your concern that GJ does not disavow all drugs, but generally including that bans on soft drinks are next is a little out there. I do not know of any legislator that favors such a step, do you? Incidentally although I do not agree with his position his approach favoring laws against drugs other than MJ is hardly inconsistent. It is very easy to rationally favor laws against heroin but be opposed to laws against marijuana. Johnson was certainly a stronger candidate than any of the alternatives. I am sorry you and I suppose other libertarians disagree. If Libertarians can only support candidates who are perfect we will not win elections.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by term2 7 years, 3 months ago
                Either you can take into your body whatever you want, or you can't it's none of the governments business. If we allow heroin to be outlawed, So could anything else. In NYC the mayor outlawed super sized soft drinks
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ 7 years, 3 months ago
                term2 was right about that. You must be aware of the fact that nothing like that was illegal in the 1800s. Prohibition of alcohol was one aspect of progressivism. When that was about to end, they made marijuana illegal.

                Also, the New York Court of Appeals did overturn the "Sugary Drinks Portion Ban" of NYC, but it was enacted.

                On what basis would you ban them? In somebody's social circle from work, they told of a guy who was so addicted to body building that he weighed 300 lbs. "It's all muscle!" he insisted. "Your heart doesn't know the difference," my colleague replied. Flying your own airplane is seven times more dangerous than driving your own car... which is seven times more dangerous than being a passenger on an airliner. Would you prevent any travel by car over 100 miles? Ban private aviation?

                You need to think this through because your ideas seem internally inconsistent.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by Jer 7 years, 3 months ago
                  Okay, I accept. Gary Johnson was totally unfit to become president of the US, despite the faults of his competitors, because of a position on drugs. He is not Libertarian because of this faulty opinion. He obviously favors banning all sorts of substances, including soft drinks from the market, in violation of every principle regarding property.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo