If you think about it, the above two paragraphs contradict each other. I think there may be some misunderstanding of the way the electoral college works here.Skiprr wrote:First: It is true that Texas's 34 electors are selected at the state's Democratic and Republican party conventions. The 34 electoral votes equal 32 federal Representatives and two Senators.
What we actually vote on come Election Day is that slate of electors. But wait; there's more. A Republican electorate must vote for the Democratic nominee if the state's popular vote is in his favor. This is a place I believe facts have been misconstrued or misinterpreted.
<snip>
Actually, independent candidates--even expectant write-ins--send their lists of 34 selected electors to the Texas Secretary of State at the same time the major parties' conventions do. I don't know if this list of electors has ever been exercised.
What happens is that each party sends in their list of electors and the party of the person who wins the popular vote has their slate of electors used. This means all 34 electors come from the party of whoever won the election.
I think you misunderstood the wording of 192.005. This is the section of law saying the slate of electors comes from the party who won. What it means is that there is really an election between 34 electors named by the Republicans, 34 named by the Democrats, 34 named by the Libertarians, etc. and not the names on the ballot.Second: Some posts here make it sound as if the 34 electoral votes in Texas are at the discretion of the individual electors, or are driven by party affiliation.
They are not. Other than Nebraska and Maine, state regulations or laws mandate that all of a given state's electoral votes be cast for the candidate who wins the greatest number of popular votes. In Texas, that's §192.005 of the Election Code.
Let me restate that: By law, all 34 Texas electors must vote for the candidate who receives the greatest number of popular votes.
But, and this is really very important, there is no law in Texas or federally that requires an elector to vote the way they are supposed to. They each can still vote their conscience. Obviously, the parties do their best to select electors who will do as they are supposed to, but there may be some few who do not. They are called unfaithful or faithless electors. Here is one website I found googling unfaithful electors that tells the stories of a few of them. It also discusses very briefly (almost mentioning in passing) if this is a strength or weakness in the electoral college system