Last-ditch push underway for Clinton to become president instead of Trump

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

WASHINGTON — Democrats have been bemoaning a Donald Trump presidency for two days after he beat Hillary Clinton on Tuesday night.

Many have taken to social media and to streets across the country to voice their displeasure after the real estate mogul secured enough electoral votes to become president-elect.

But there is a last incredibly long shot that could still get Clinton into the White House on Jan. 20 — a twist in the Electoral College.

Though Clinton led the popular vote by about 280,000 on Thursday morning, Trump has won the minimum of 270 electoral votes necessary to be elected president. As of late Wednesday, he had 290 to Clinton’s 228.

According to the Constitution, electors will meet in their respective state capitals on Dec. 19. In most cases, whoever wins the popular vote gains all of that state's electoral votes.

The number of electoral votes per state is determined by the number of congressional districts plus one for each senator -- a total of 538.

But there is nothing in the Constitution that would prevent any of the electors from refusing to support the candidate who won their state. Or from abstaining. They are dubbed a "faithless elector," though 29 states ban the practice.

A petition on Change.org is pushing for electors to vote for Clinton instead of Trump. It had more than 175,000 signatures as of Thursday morning.

Part of the petition reads:

Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault, and utter lack of experience make him a danger to the Republic.

Secretary Clinton WON THE POPULAR VOTE and should be President.

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

But the Electoral College can actually give the White House to either candidate. So why not use this most undemocratic of our institutions to ensure a democratic result?

SHE WON THE POPULAR VOTE.

There is no reason Trump should be President.

"It's the 'People's Will'"

No. She won the popular vote.

"Our system of government under our Constitution says he wins"

No. Our Constitution says the Electors choose.

"Too many states prohibit 'Faithless Electors'"

24 states bind electors. If electors vote against their party, they usually pay a fine. And people get mad. But they can vote however they want and there is no legal means to stop them in most states.

It's rare for electors to defect or abstain. Even in the razor-close 2000 election in which George W. Bush beat Al Gore, no one withheld their vote for Bush and gave it to Gore, who won 271-266 with one abstention.

The New York Times reported more than 99 percent of electors throughout history have voted as pledged.

16 comments

    • DEPLORABLE Josh

      No kidding. I think that is exactly what they want to happen. God, guns, and guts it what it will come down to if they keep pressing the issue.
      .

  • Monica

    So its ok for all other presidents to have won this way in the past if needed but they won’t let Mr Trump get it? Wow! If this happens you thought there were riots the other day? You think your going to be able to disarm us before you see a real revolution take place? I think not! If they let that woman win because of popular votes but in the past not let others win by popular votes , than they can abolish it after this is all over but if they do it well its going to get real ugly let me tell you!

  • Jessi

    If the “popular vote” was the deciding factor to choose a president, then the campaign wouldve been run differently. This campaign was run with winning the electoral college in minds . If the popular vote” was the goal and a campaign ran with that in mind, there is no saying who would have won.
    It makes no sense playing football and once the game is over, using the rules of soccer to decide the winner!!
    It makes sense to play baseball and use the rules of cricket to determine the winner.
    The margin of popular vote (counted so far) is SO small it’s baffling people are hanging on to it like this!!

    • Robert

      That is a great point, Jessi!
      It’s too late to change the rules now – the game is over!
      Never seen so many sore losers in my life…..

  • Laura Inez Evans

    This is exactly what the liberal Dems are all about these days. Inciting hatred and division among us.

  • A.Patriot

    This is the utmost in irresponsible journalism, and a big part of why I no longer watch nor respect FOX6 news. (I came to be on this website/story only as a link-off-a-link.) People with no understanding of U.S. history, of the incredible foresight and intelligence of our founding fathers, as they came up with the Electoral College as a way to NOT have the most populous states and a simple majority of the population be able to impose their will on the less populous states. They realized this was essential in order to unify this country, to have less populous states join the union. But periodically, when an election is close (and the Electoral College actually functions PRECISELY as the nations founding fathers intended), we get these calls to undermine the process. I was emphatically not thrilled with the candidates we had to choose from. I have trouble being hopeful about what may happen the next four years. However, these calls to blow-up the process are irresponsible. To borrow a much used phrase, “SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!”

  • Don Erickson

    It will never happen and to me it is irresponsible of any agency to push this. Any media geoup that attempts to push this idea into action should be stripped of their licensing and be silenced.

Comments are closed.