Please Read Federalist #68 to See Why We Should Keep It and Swear to Honor It!

​The arguments for the Electoral College are elucidated there. Those who claim to value the “Intent of the Framers” – if they really subscribe to that and are not just trotting that out whenever convenient – should read and learn that the Electoral College has been subverted. Read there, prescient descriptions of the kind of person, that is, THE PERSON, who is not yet president-elect. That only after ratification by the electoral college. The Intension of the Framers was clearly to block such a person as Trump from being President. If we were to do away with the Electoral College instead of repairing our system to enable it to function as intended, we will never be able to bring it back.

In the future, if someone also unqualified to be President – perhaps someone much less unqualified than Donald Trump or hard to imagine but “God Help Us More So” – was selected, we would no longer have access to the Electoral College to bail us out. We would be STUCK!!!

Please read. Its amazing. Federalist #68


About Ghoh

My name is Joe, but username Joe was already taken. I am interested in politics, religion and ideas that are off the beaten path, whatever the subject.
This entry was posted in Donald Trump, Ethics, Hypocrites, Politics, politics 2 and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Please Read Federalist #68 to See Why We Should Keep It and Swear to Honor It!

  1. Excellent! And that is the point: one even worse will come after if the electors do not reject this man, and we worry that by the impeachment will be impossible. What happened in the Philippine elections in fact happened here, and perhaps also in the primaries and the Brexit vote, which means the shift toward fascism world wide may be manufactured. Who would do such a thing! And just when the internet got away from us. Lets close ’em down! Show the world American Liberty! I’m going out to the shed to re-read Federalist 68 right now- thanks!

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Reblogged this on mmcdonald77 and commented:
    Most constitutional scholars think that the pledging and binding of electors it unconstitutional in the 24 states that have such laws, so much is it the original intention of the founders that we elect electors who then decide, not rubber stamp the state elections. Another question that may emerge is whether states can withhold their electors as a lot.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. We re-blogged this- hope you do not mind (if so I’ll un-re-blog it). I’m trying to get back to the conflicted elector article- the shed is freezing, but I’m looking in Madison’s notes from the convention. The founders surely did not assume, as we do when we consider abolishing the college- that the people are even capable of electing the president, for both the likelihood of fraud and other reasons.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Ghoh says:

    When trying to understand a boondoggle, see who benefits.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s