tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post7293292972134596540..comments2024-03-06T03:15:58.539-05:00Comments on <b>THE NEW REFORM CLUB</b>: Law of the Clinton CandidacyHunter Bakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14961831404331998743noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post-72418309419132067542016-09-13T10:55:00.796-04:002016-09-13T10:55:00.796-04:00I think Hillary would have to pledge that if elect...I think Hillary would have to pledge that if elected (including by the EC), she would abdicate (I know that's the wrong word, but it's right for her), in favor of Kaine. All the public would need to do is trust her to keep her word. HAHAHAHA.jeremyabramshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01383487770711882586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post-24666794243661605082016-09-13T10:13:42.147-04:002016-09-13T10:13:42.147-04:00Thank you for clearly asking these questions. In ...Thank you for clearly asking these questions. In all the talk of a "replacement" these sorts of questions have been bouncing around my head but no one seems to address the practicality of actually implementing such a seemingly simple idea.<br /><br />As best I can figure it out, it is far too late to actually (legally) get any replacement candidate on the ballot in any State. The only feasible option seems to be something like the Democrats did in Missouri with Carnahan: "vote for Clinton and we'll actually elect XXXX." I do not know the legalities of fulfilling this promise at any individual State level, but it certainly seems there is no federal law prohibiting it.<br /><br />Another set of questions to ask, outside the technical legalities, is the downstream effects, both legal and societal, of using intentionally "faithless" electors to seat a President.submandavehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15950457116215345788noreply@blogger.com