Network Programming: The Presidential Election Cycle
Much ado about nothing? How much money will be spent on advertising and other 'media buys' over the next year or so? The media hype now has Trump as the next President, much like in 2003 and early 2004, when Howard Dean was the next big thing in politics. Of course the media only has short term memory, so despite the internet and search engines, the media wants to pretend that this narrative is something new.
Here in the States we have what is legally termed, the Electoral College. I would like to point out how the general vote does not directly elect the President at all and the Electors themselves, are not obligated to vote for anyone specifically. This is called 'the faithless elector' a term bandied about by the press back during the Y2K election of President Al Gore. I mean George W. Bush, his friend and ally.
They do have more in common, than not.
Reading up on faithless electors, one sees that the elector's vote can only be altered after it is cast in a couple of states and that if they desired to, these electors could pick anyone to be President. Instead of the public in each state asking their representatives to fix this obvious problem, as was done in a couple of states, the public gets enthralled by the literal side show. Does it really matter anyway? Reading the U.S. Constitution and the very first treaty, we get a different picture. For those interested in that subject, there are some links below. from our friendly world wide web encyclopedia:
"In United States presidential elections, a faithless elector is a member of the United States Electoral College who does not vote for the presidential or vice presidential candidate for whom he or she had pledged to vote. They may vote for another candidate or not vote at all. Faithless electors are pledged electors and thus different from unpledged electors.
Electors are typically chosen and nominated by a political party or the party's presidential nominee. Electors usually are party members with a reputation for high loyalty to the party and its candidate. A faithless elector runs the risk of party censure and political retaliation from their party as well as, in some states, potential criminal penalties. Candidates for elector are nominated by state political parties in the months prior to Election Day. In some states, the electors are nominated in primaries, the same way that other candidates are nominated. In some states, such as Oklahoma, Virginia and North Carolina, electors are nominated in party conventions. In Pennsylvania, the campaign committee of each candidate names their candidates for elector (an attempt to discourage faithless electors). The parties have generally been successful in keeping their electors faithful, leaving out the cases in which a candidate died before the elector was able to cast a vote.
Although there have been 157 cases of faithlessness as of 2015, faithless electors have not yet changed the outcome of any presidential election"
"Twenty-one states do not have laws that compel their electors to vote for a pledged candidate. Twenty-nine states plus the District of Columbia have laws to penalize faithless electors, although these have never been enforced.
In place of penalizing a faithless elector, some states, like Michigan and Minnesota, specify that the faithless elector's vote is void
Until 2008, Minnesota's electors cast secret ballots, so that it was not possible to tell if a particular elector was faithless. When in 2004 an unknown elector was faithless, Minnesota law was amended to provide for public balloting of the electors' votes and invalidation of a vote cast for someone other than the candidate to whom the elector is pledged.The constitutionality of state pledge laws was confirmed by the Supreme Court in 1952 in Ray v. Blair.
The court ruled in favor of the state's right to require electors to pledge to vote for the candidate to whom they are pledged, as well as to remove electors who refuse to pledge. Once the elector has voted, his or her vote can be changed only in states such as Michigan and Minnesota,
where votes other than those pledged are rendered invalid. In the twenty-nine states that have laws against faithless electors, a faithless elector may only be punished after he or she votes.
The Supreme Court has ruled that, as electors are chosen via state elections, they act as a function of the state, not the federal government. Therefore states have the right to govern electors.
The constitutionality of state laws punishing electors for actually casting a faithless vote—rather than merely refusing to pledge—has never been decided by the Supreme Court."
Looking up Donald Trump's last name, we find this:
"A trump is a playing card which is elevated above its normal rank in trick-taking games. Typically an entire suit is nominated as a trump suit - these cards then outrank all cards of plain (non-trump) suits. In other contexts, the term trump card can refer to any sort of action, authority, or policy which automatically prevails over all others."( a side note: Arnold did get elected and so did Ronald Reagan, so any of these actors might be deemed fit to get the gig. As much as I doubt a Trump Presidency, anything is possible, and the guy is just another tele-pormpter reading actor, employed to appear on a screen, anyway.)
sources:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_electorhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trumphttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictiona ... thstandinghttps://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlevihttp://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=6http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/constitution