Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In the 1960 Presidential election, Democrats from Hawaii created a new precedent by sending a second set of electors to the electoral college. Now Republicans from 7 states are copying that precedent...
wordpress ^ | December 16, 2020 | Dan from Squirrel Hill

Posted on 12/16/2020 11:49:11 AM PST by grundle

In the 1960 Presidential election, Democrats from Hawaii created a new precedent by sending a second set of electors to the electoral college. It was that second set of electors that got officially counted on January 6, 1961. Now Republicans from 7 states are copying that precedent, in the hopes that they will be officially counted on January 6, 2021.

In the 1960 Presidential election, after the Republicans from Hawaii sent in their electors for their candidate, Nixon, Democrats from Hawaii sent in their own, second set of electors for their candidate, JFK. When the electoral votes were officially counted by Vice President Nixon on January 6, 1961, it was that second set from Hawaii that got the official count. With this, a new precedent was set, and it was set by Democrats.

Now, in the 2020 Presidential election, Republicans from 7 states (Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico) have copied that precedent by sending in a second set of electors. On January 6, when Vice President Pence counts the electoral votes, he will have to choose whether to count the first or second set of electors from each state.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: falsehope; joebiden; mitchmcconnell; secondelectors; stopthesteal; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 12/16/2020 11:49:11 AM PST by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: grundle

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.


2 posted on 12/16/2020 11:52:08 AM PST by Notthereyet (May the Lord God Find 10 Good Men In America. Amen. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

As long as the legislatures of those states declare the R electors legitimate. That appears to be the only procedural step that needs to be taken for constitutionality. I was not aware NM had outstanding election issues.


3 posted on 12/16/2020 11:52:36 AM PST by calenel (Tree of Liberty is thirsty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

The fact that 7 states accepted and sent votes for two sets of electors should stand for something:

Pennsylvania 20 votes

Georgia 16 votes

Michigan 16 votes

Wisconsin 10 votes

Arizona 11 votes

Nevada 6 votes

New Mexico 5 votes

According to new common core math that would be 84 votes. Guess that don’t mean anything these days.


4 posted on 12/16/2020 11:52:44 AM PST by rktman ( #My2ndAmend! ----- Enlisted in the Navy in '67 to protect folks rights to strip my rights. WTH?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Say Goodbye to free Elections.


5 posted on 12/16/2020 11:53:30 AM PST by EnglishOnly (eeWFight all out to win OR get out now. .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

As of yesterday, Mitch McConnell objects to the second set of Electors.


6 posted on 12/16/2020 11:58:57 AM PST by White Lives Matter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle
does anyone thing a dim would have counted the gop electors????

no way.

7 posted on 12/16/2020 12:00:51 PM PST by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

McConnell can sit on it. He doesn’t get a say in this process.

The president of the Senate presides. And who is the president of the Senate? That’s right. Mike Pence


8 posted on 12/16/2020 12:01:21 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (I will not rest until the American People have the honest vote count they deserve. DJT 11-07-20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: grundle

This would only be significant if Nixon won the votes of Hawaii?


9 posted on 12/16/2020 12:05:46 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Bttt


10 posted on 12/16/2020 12:06:19 PM PST by Guenevere (No weapon formed against you shall prosper, and you will refute every tongue that accuses you(Isaiah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

Does it matter what Mitch McConnell objects to?


11 posted on 12/16/2020 12:07:36 PM PST by \/\/ayne (I regret that I have but one subscription cancellation notice to give to my local newspaper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

It looks like Nixon personally ordered the Democratic electors account?


14 posted on 12/16/2020 12:26:41 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: malach
It was not a new precedent. It had been done in 1876.

OK. Thanks for letting me know.

15 posted on 12/16/2020 12:49:00 PM PST by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: All

For further reading.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_Count_Act

It looks like it gets back to which are certified by the Governor of that state. Hence the fight to decertify. If decertified, would free up Congress to pick which ones to accept. I believe Pence would break the tie of each chamber votes for the expected party (House:D; Senate: R).


16 posted on 12/16/2020 12:49:50 PM PST by TigerClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: EnglishOnly

Probably true, but at least we would have a 4 year breather to try to institute systems to try to provide them.
The question is whether you want this one to seat fraudulent President or if you want to wait 4 years with the rightful guy in office to see if we can solve the wide-open fraud issues.


17 posted on 12/16/2020 12:57:46 PM PST by trebb (Fight like your life and future depends on it - because they do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

“This would only be significant if Nixon won the votes of Hawaii?”

So I looked up the 1960 Presidential election and found a conflict. Wikipedia says Nixon won Hawaii but the National Archives says that Kennedy won Hawaii. I’m going with the archives. Did Wikipedia make an honest mistake, or are they changing history for the purpose of affecting today’s conversation?

In any case, the votes from Hawaii did not make a significant difference in the outcome. Contrast this with the case now, or in 1876.


18 posted on 12/16/2020 1:39:45 PM PST by ChessExpert (NAFTA - Not A Free Trade Agreement)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Big difference: Ds had 64 seats in the Senate and held the House.

Both must agree on any changes to electors.


19 posted on 12/16/2020 1:50:40 PM PST by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually" (Hendrix) )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson