[Nevadan]

Are you familiar with the term “faithless elector”? See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector. Essentially it describes an elector who does not vote for the candidate for whom they have pledged. There are laws against this happening in only 29 of the states. In the rest it is legal to do so. So, what is to stop a multimillionaire such as Soros from bribing some of the Republican electors to vote for Hillary? We already have top Republicans in Congress who would rather have Hillary than the Republican candidate. Ryan wouldn't fight it for sure. With the current makeup of the Supreme Court, I can see this being allowed. The MSM would play it as the electors only following their consciences.

[wastoute]

And the Electors are certainly free to follow their conscience. I just hope their conscience has accepted the responsibility for the consequences.

[tomkat]

The MSM would play it as the electors only following their consciences.

Hence, Cruz's cuck statement at the Convention to 'vote your conscience' might have been more telling then merely a mealy-mouthed political cliche' ?

If so, the biggest reason yet to HATE the traitor bastard.
  (as though more convincing were needed)

[Waryone]

Bingo! Electors are legally allowed to vote their conscience. Remember people trying to get electors to change their vote so Algore could win in 2000. Electors in all likelihood are party people/elites. They know who they want to win. So if it is at all close in electoral votes, I’m certain Soros has some in his pocket who will say they refuse to vote for Trump because — blah, blah, blah, even if Trump has won their state.

If there are any kind of shenanigans and Congress doesn’t certify the Electoral College vote, I’m not worried about Obama staying in there. “Speaker” Ryan will just declare himself president and take over until “everything” can be sorted out.