Ja, gibt es. Ist natürlich aber immer einfacher gesagt als getan. Und verschiede Parteien haben natürlich interesse drann, dass das System so erhalten bleibt.Blaeh schrieb:
Gabs mal überlegungen in den Staaten das System mit den Wahlmännern zu ändern?
Blaeh schrieb:
Und was wenn einer der Wahlmänner nicht das wählt was er versprochen hat? Ist doch bestimmt mal vorgekommen.
Wikipedia schrieb:
On 22 occasions, 179 electors have not cast their votes for President or Vice President as prescribed by the legislature of the state they represented. Of those, 71 electors changed their votes because the candidate to whom they were pledged died before the electoral ballot (1872, 1912). Two electors chose to abstain from voting for any candidate (1812, 2000).[1] The remaining 106 were changed by the elector's personal interest, or perhaps by accident. Usually, the faithless electors act alone. An exception was the 1836 election, in which all 23 Virginia electors acted together.
That election was the only occasion when faithless electors altered the outcome of the electoral college vote. The Democrat ticket won states with 170 of the 294 electoral votes, but the 23 Virginia electors abstained in the vote for Vice President, so the Democrat candidate, Richard Mentor Johnson, got only 147 (exactly half), and was not elected. However, Johnson was instead elected Vice President by the U.S. Senate, so faithless electors have never changed the final outcome of an election.
Drink deep, and descend.
