Sentences with phrase «elector candidates»

New York state law requires ballot - qualified parties to choose their presidential elector candidates no later than September 10 this year.

When a party submits no presidential elector candidates, it is admitting that it is certain it won't carry Read more»

However, in 2004, the State Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ralph Nader, and said there is no need for a residency requirement for presidential elector candidates, other than that Read more»

On January 10, four Missouri state representatives introduced HB 1236, which deletes the accidental error in the 1993 ballot access reform bill that requires party petitions to include the names of presidential elector candidates.

However, in 2004, the State Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ralph Nader, and said there is no need for a residency requirement for presidential elector candidates, other than that they live in Wisconsin.

Because the Virginia petition requires the presidential elector candidates to be listed, and there is a residency requirement for each elector, the old petitions are worthless.

These petitions must instead carry the names of presidential elector candidates.

Virginia law requires petitions for president to include a list of presidential elector candidates, and says one elector must reside in each U.S. House district.

However, the state disqualified the petition because the state says one presidential elector candidate needs to live in each U.S. House district.

Not exact matches

While the exact rules vary from state to state, essentially a voter is voting for a set of electors chosen by the party, and the most votes for a given party / candidate selects that set of electors, so where there is winner takes all, the set of electors is equal to the total number of electors for that state

I mean 51 % voters picked 20 electors who supports candidate A, and 49 % of them voted for 20 electors supporting candidate B. Which one electors will be chose to «final» voting (sorry for lack of specialist vocabulary)?

Almost all states follow a «winner - takes - all» policy: if a candidate gets a plurality of the vote in that state, then the group of electors chosen by that candidate's party are the ones who vote.

Additionally, one elector is allocated for each congressional district that a party's candidate wins.

If a state has 30 electors and party A wins with 51 % of the popular vote, then 30 electors supporting the candidate for party A will be chosen.

Second, the electoral college was set up to weed out «unacceptable» candidates not by dividing fringe voters in different states per se but by giving the electors the power to elect the candidate who lost the popular vote in the event that the more popular candidate turned out to be unacceptable for whatever reason.

What they'd probably do is to vote for their party's presidential candidate, and become «faithless electors» when it came to the VP, either abstaining from that vote, or voting for a non-Texan (presumably, a different member of their own party) for that office.

Each state's law determines how those electors are selected, and which candidate they vote for.

Furthermore, each committee of state electors, usually drawn from among the elite land - holding class, would theoretically serve as a final check against an unfit presidential candidate.

Just not both from State X. On the other hand, electors from State Y and State Z are perfectly free to vote for two State X candidates.

What the Constitution says is that an elector of State X is not allowed to vote for both a presidential candidate who resides in State X and a VP candidate from State X.

(a) It shall be unlawful for any alien to vote in any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing a candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, unless -

There are only two systems in the United States to allocate electoral college electors, and both involve voters picking only one candidate pair (President / Vice-President).

The poll asked electors eligible to vote in the one - member - one - vote ballot to state their principal reasons for supporting their preferred candidate.

Subject to the concurrence of the Electoral Commission, where the Returning Officer considers that the name shown on the nomination paper or other document as the name of the constituency candidate's political party is indecent or offensive or excessively long or likely to cause confusion to or mislead electors, --

(c) Vacancies occurring in nominations where candidates are to be voted for by the electors from more than one county, shall be filled in the manner prescribed by the State Committee.

A party must submit a list of its candidates, including nominees for presidential electors, to the secretary of state.

The intent of giving Electors two votes was the expectation that, with a lack of knowledge of candidates outside his state, a typical Elector would cast a vote for a «favorite son» from his own state, so a second vote was added to require a vote for a more nationally - known candidate.

This is inimical to any democracy but also, very often, impossible due to the absence of a candidate that some electors might be willing to vote for.

Of course 270 or more elector votes are needed to win the presidency but there are scenarios that exist where one candidate could win 269, another 268, and then a third candidate win one of the districts above and be awarded a single elector.

The difference is that the elector is not faced with the dilemma of voting for a bad candidate for fear of not voting for the party they want to win the election.

The election would take place with electors completing the Party Ballot section only (assuming there were no candidates standing to oppose the Speaker).

In a multi-member constituency, parties tend to select a more diverse slate of candidates in order to appeal to the widest possible range of electors.

In the end, success turned on our candidate, Rocky De La Fuente, sending people out in vehicles to drive hours from Alabama to Louisiana in order to contact the last remaining elector and get their notarized affidavit.

The Louisiana November 2008 ballot includes the names of 81 candidates for presidential elector.

Federal law requires jurisdictions that vote for President to tell the National Archives the number of votes received by each candidate for presidential elector.

In some states, the electors» names appear on the ballot along with the names of the candidates for president and vice president.

While the Irish Speakers also give up their party membership and are elected automatically at general elections, much like Westminster, their local electors still get the chance to vote for party candidates to fill the constituency's remaining seats.

The U.S. Constitution does not specify procedures for the nomination of candidates for presidential elector.

While 538 such candidates is impossible without several changes in the rules (even in Maine and Nebraska, two statewide electors are allocated together), a smaller number of ties like ten is possible.

But some states require that their electors vote for the candidate on the ballot and won't certify other results.

While it's true that an original rationale for having an electoral college was because electors were regarded, at the time, as being relatively free from undue influence, nowadays they mostly just rubber - stamp the candidate for their respective party.

And faithless electors would allow a third candidate to be considered, perhaps someone that could get Republican votes in Congress.

Other than that, the next largest numbers of faithless electors were for the vice-presidential candidates.

E.g., in 2016 elections, while candidates from 4 parties ran for President; the two «main» parties» candidates combined got 96 % of popular vote and 100 % of electors.

However, the only time that that many faithless electors existed, it was because their candidate died.

It also has the electoral college votes per state, but it removes faithless electors for other candidates.

Electors were needed as a mechanism that allowed, if the need arose (nobody got enough electoral votes to get elected, a candidate died, etc.), to negotiate a solution in a timely manner (because each consultation with their home state could take weeks)

Note that selecting a presidential elector is listed separately, so «electing any candidate for office of President» refers to the actual election of the President, that is, the vote of the Electoral College.

They're voting for electors who promise to vote for a presidential candidate.

That means candidate A will have 7 electors for that state, candidate B will have their own 7 electors, candidate C has their 7 electors.