[RetroSexual]

I’m surprised someone hasn’t taken this all the way to the Supreme Court. They would definitely rule against it.

Actually, I don't think they would. My interpretation is that states are allowed to choose their electors by whichever means they prefer. If a state chooses to stupidly throw their electors to a candidate they oppose, then that's their constitutional right.

[Federalist Society]

Actually, I don't think they would. My interpretation is that states are allowed to choose their electors by whichever means they prefer. If a state chooses to stupidly throw their electors to a candidate they oppose, then that's their constitutional right.

You are absolutely correct. I remember my Constitutional Law professor in law school stating that if my home state of Oklahoma was to decree by state law that the electors shall be the tuba section of the University of Oklahoma marching band then it would be constitutional. Extreme example, but it made the point that the states decided how electors are chosen. Oklahoma was talking about the same thing a few years back. I called my state rep and spoke with the secretary. She couldn't understand why I would be for this, after all wouldn't I want the person who got the most votes to win. I told her I do want the person who gets the most votes in Oklahoma to win. That basically what we are having in the electoral college system is 50 individual popular vote elections. (57 if your 0bama) Otherwise you are letting the major population centers decide the President. I don't think she ever got it.