Does the Electorial College recognize write-in Votes?

[lib2DaBone]

I must apologize.. I should know more about the electorial process.

Would a write-in candidate even stand a chance?

[polmaven]

1. The Electoral (no i) College

votes based on the winner of the election in each state. It is the state which does the counting of the ballots, and the winner would be based on the voting laws of that state.

[former9thward]

2. Electors can vote for whomever they wish.

For example in 2000 one of the D.C. electors refused to vote for Al Gore even though Gore had won in D.C. and she was pledged to vote for him.

[Xithras]

3. Yes. Absolutely.

It's been said before, but technically speaking, the American people don't vote for President...the Electoral College does. Your state holds an election, and your state government then sends Electors to the college to cast that states votes for the President.

Here's the rub...the Electors can technically cast their vote for ANYBODY THEY WANT. They take a pledge to vote for the winning candidate for their state, and most states have laws in place to punish electors who vote contrary to the wishes of their state, but their vote still stands and can't be challenged or changed under federal law. There is actually a term for these people: Faithless Electors.

There have been more than 150 of them since the country was founded, but none have ever changed the outcome of an election. The last one I'm aware of was an Elector in the 2000 election who refused to cast her vote for Al Gore, in protest of the fact that Washington DC wasn't given the same rights as states.

Because the Electors are just normal non-politicians, they are free to "recognize" anyone they want. As was pointed out in 2000, the Electoral College could have voted to elect Ralph Nader President, even though he failed to carrry a single state, and under the rules of our Constitution he would have BEEN President (and a lot of Electors would have been sitting in state prison cells).

[lib2DaBone]

4. Thank You. I'm trying to better understand this Electorial process.

I am trying to understand Republican Re-districting and the Electorial college.. very confusing....

[MADem]

5. ,,,,awaiting pardons from President Nader (the putz)!!!!

It's a fucked up system. It made sense eons ago, but nowadays, I think we can do better.

[Xithras]

6. Nope.

The President doesn't have the authority to pardon individuals imprisoned by the states. He is limited to pardoning those convicted of federal crimes, and imprisoned in federal custody.

There is no federal law against an Elector changing their votes. Technically, because the power of an Elector is defined by the Constitution, it would require a Constitutional Amendment to limit their power or punish their actions at a federal level. The laws punishing Faithless Electors were created by the states themselves, and not all states have them. Because they are representing the voters of their state, the majority of states have laws requiring Electors to take an oath promising to vote according to the will of the people in their state. If the Elector votes a different way, most states can charge or fine them under a form of perjury laws. If if can be proven that they deliberately deceived their way through the process with the intent to undermine the vote, they could potentially face conspiracy charges that would land them a LONG state prison terms.

So no, President Nader wouldn't have pardoned them.

[MADem]

7. Even more reason why it's a failed system. Only a matter of time

before faithless electors swing an election.

If it's built into the system, it will eventually happen.

[dems_rightnow]

8. No, a write-in candidate would never stand a chance

Though the electors may cast their vote for literally anyone, it's important to know who the electors are.

These are not people grabbed off the street. They are people who have shown great support for their party. They are chosen because they can be trusted to vote for the candidate in their party. A few have made "statement" votes over the years, but only because they knew it would not hurt their candidate.