For example, let’s say Bernie Sanders was the nominee in 2024 against Trump. A lot of people on the internet seem to like him, even some conservatives. But would liberals fall in line and vote for him enough to beat Trump?
Bernie’s supporters always seem to attack the Democrats liberal base, do you think they’d sit home if Bernie or any leftist was the nominee.
that’s not how the electoral college works tho. in most states, an elector not voting in accordance with the state’s popular vote is against the law. trump only gained 3 votes with faithless electors in 2016, and that was a record (not counting the time 63 electors switched because their pledged candidate died); no faithless elector votes counted in 2020 nor 2024.
Explain Bush Jr then. Popular vote was against him.
It’s simple math in which every elector voted for their state’s popular vote winner (and that’s if you discount Bush v. Gore, which I’m assume you’re doing here, otherwise we’d be debating an issue that has no relation to the electoral college at all); all the votes for the losing candidate statewide are discounted. Never has an elector been “paid off” to vote against their state’s popular vote.
I’m not sure you’ve been paying attention lately. These people are not paragons of virtue and they won’t be making a press release about getting paid off.
I don’t think you know that electors have a public ballot and people know when tallies don’t match up with statewide popular vote counts. You should read up on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact#Motivation, especially the linked https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Electoral_College#Difference_with_popular_vote which has a helpful graphic.
So the electors were paid to vote for a specific candidate by monied interests, and it happened to be the candidate who won the plurality of votes in every state? That’s a remarkable coincidence.
https://youtu.be/7p6BUMG1VQk