Electors are associated with a Candidate nominated by a Party so the deadline to associate an elector with a name is still important. Thus, the inability of the GOP to name a slate of electors until its candidate was officially nominated until after the deadline in law had passed caused some manuvering by the RATS in attempting to screw up the GOP. As though the Illinois GOP needed any help in screwing up.
Do you have a cite for that proposition? The Illinois law that I cited appears to permit a party to name an elector, without associating the elector's name to a candidate's name. The candidate's name is optional on the ballot, the elector's name is not.
I think, but can't cite names yet, that the Republican Party in Illinois chose electors (and alternates) at the Illinois Republican State Convention, held in Collinsville on May 14-15, 2004.
Again, I agree that voters have grown accustomed to seeing the name of the presidential candidate on the ballot, no argument. But it is NOT a legal requirement. The DEMs can change the candidate at any time in the process. Any time before the election, and any time before electors cast their ballots in December. Once there is a president-elect (this happens in December, not in November), US law kicks in to determine succession in the event of unavailability.