Posted on 12/05/2016 2:37:13 PM PST by sharkhawk
The Dem rump group of electors claimed they had ONE turncoat among the Republican presidential electors. Looks like we’ve found the Judas Goat in Texas.
If he had the courage of his convictions that he clams to have, then he should ask to be replaced.
So, I re-conclude .. the guy is a fraud.
Suprun may wear a fireman’s uniform, but he’s still a dipshit.
He's not a Federal Elector, he's an Texas Elector.
Just another #NeverTrump scumbag pulling an excuse out of his rear end.
Tar and feathers.
Suprun is an admirer of George W. Bush; this should tell you everything you need to know.
Who chose him as an elector?
***************
Not sure of the process but I’m assuming he was chosen at the TX GOP convention
https://votesmart.org/education/electoral-college
Who are “Faithless Electors”?
A faithless elector is one who casts an electoral vote for someone other than the candidate they have pledged to elect. On 157 occasions, electors have cast their votes for president or vice president in a different manner than that prescribed by the legislature of the state they represent. Of those, 71 votes were changed because the original candidate died before the elector was able to cast a vote. Two votes were not cast at all when electors chose to abstain from casting their electoral vote for any candidate. The remaining 85 were changed by the elector’s personal interest or perhaps by accident. Usually, the faithless electors act alone.
There are laws to punish faithless electors in 24 states. While no faithless elector has ever been punished, the constitutionality of state pledge laws was brought before the Supreme Court in 1952 (Ray v. Blair, 343 U.S. 214). The court upheld those laws that require electors to pledge to vote for the winning candidate, as well as remove electors who refuse to pledge. As stated in the ruling, electors are acting as a function of the state, not the federal government, and states have the right to govern their officers. The constitutionality of punishing an elector for actual faithlessness, however, has never been decided by the Supreme Court. In any event, a state may only punish a faithless elector after the fact; it has no power to change their vote.
Only slightly less weird than crab people.
Attention whore. May he suffer for his treason.
Not impressed.
He has dyed his hair and apparently had some work done to resemble Glenn Beck.
I wonder what California’s laws are on faithless electors.
Rule 308, rules 223, 45, and 44 also. And in a pinch, rule 9 and rule 380. Lots of rules. :)
A banana republic.
They need to give these positions to stable, knowledgeable people and deep six the ceremonial awards bullshit.
Who cares. If he doesn’t want to do the job let someone else do it. What a drama queen. Everyone thinks they are so freaking important.
That’s what we did in AZ when one of the delegates publicly said she was not going to cast her vote for Donald Trump although he won our State decisively. Like this fellow, the other side held her up as a pillar of virtue. When she showed up at the convention, armed guards escorted her out and we let someone who actually wanted to do their job take her place. That’s how you you do it.
Good find.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.