[Jacquerie]

Should Vu vote for whom he wishes, he will perform his duty as the Framers intended.

The electors of Article II were designed to use their judgment in their vote for president. At each state "college" on election day, they were to meet and discuss among themselves for whom to vote.

The political party takeover of the electoral system is a corruption of the Framers'intent to install presidents unburdened with political debts. They knew that a man indebted to those who put him in office could hardly be expected to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Popular vote be damned.

Donald Trump: The Echo of Our Framers' President.

The Framers' President.

The Framers' President II.

[Kenny]

That doesn’t change my mind. We have elected Presidents the same way forever. This is a coup, individuals defying the will of the people. No other way to see it.

[Robert DeLong]

If Trump is not the embodiment of the Framers’ ideal president, he is certainly the echo of a process that sought men of character and accomplishment for our nation’s highest office.

We are the many; our oppressors are the few. Be proactive. Be a Re-Founder. Join Convention of States.

I agree.

[Vigilanteman]

It sounds all warm and fuzzy in theory, but in practice, while the framers wanted to avoid parties and factions, it is unrealistic to claim that they didn't foresee them. Much of the constitution was based on their own experience and their own ancestor's experience gained from the English Civil War, the Salem Witch Trials and their own reference with English politics and the Tory and Whig factions.

Vu's motives are not avoiding factionalism or anything which the framers might have envisioned as an ideal. They are a play for attention.

[Nifster]

Go pound sand....he will cheat the voters who have no choice but to pull the lever for him....IF you want to vote Trump he will be the elector.

THAT is NOT what the founders intended

[SoothingDave]

The Constitution means nothing to the Trump fans.

[Redwood71]

I agree with the interpretation you have displayed. It was written by the founders that way. But the founders’ intention to disallow a president to be installed based upon debt, is totally outdated and destroys the will of the people displayed in the many primaries through the land over the last year. So by saying we should not update the system, you are saying we should not allow black people or women to vote that was amended in 1870. Additionally we should not have the abolishment of slavery that was added in 1865. We even ordered people to stop drinking with one amendment and changed that 5 amendments later.

The nation may need amendments in the future. For example, advances in technology may change the way we communicate. Someday, we may be able to vote from our own homes, hooked into central computers through our TV sets. And what if we are able to live in space? We may need new laws to govern space life.

So allowing people to overrule the vote of citizens like this individual in the electoral college, not even for the reason you displayed, then that violates the use of the college. If you don’t evolve, you die. Ask Darwin.

And right now we even have a candidate running for the dems that has lied concerning confidential information she has allowed to slip through her system knowingly and admitted by the investigating lawmakers to be detriment to the US. And people should worry about debt? Do you know of a broke candidate? I don’t.

red