When have electors voted contrary to the peoples decision?

[Dover]

Most of the time, electors cast their votes for the candidate who has received the most votes in that particular state. However, there have been times when electors have voted contrary to the people's decision, which is entirely legal.


When the Electoral College Counted

In most presidential elections, a candidate who wins the popular vote will also receive the majority of the electoral votes, but this is not always the case. There have been four presidents who have won an election with fewer popular votes than their opponent but more electoral votes.
Here are the four elections when the candidate who led the popular vote did not win the office:

1824: John Quincy Adams, the son of former President John Adams, received more than 38,000 fewer votes than Andrew Jackson, but neither candidate won a majority of the Electoral College. Adams was awarded the presidency when the election was thrown to the House of Representatives.

1876: Nearly unanimous support from small states gave Rutherford B. Hayes a one-vote margin in the Electoral College, despite the fact that he lost the popular vote to Samuel J. Tilden by 264,000 votes. Hayes carried five out of the six smallest states (excluding Delaware). These five states plus Colorado gave Hayes 22 electoral votes with only 109,000 popular votes. At the time, Colorado had been just been admitted to the Union and decided to appoint electors instead of holding elections. So, Hayes won Colorado's three electoral votes with zero popular votes. It was the only time in U.S. history that small state support has decided an election.

1888: Benjamin Harrison lost the popular vote by 95,713 votes to Grover Cleveland, but won the electoral vote by 65. In this instance, some say the Electoral College worked the way it is designed to work by preventing a candidate from winning an election based on support from one region of the country. The South overwhelmingly supported Cleveland, and he won by more than 425,000 votes in six southern states. However, in the rest of the country he lost by more than 300,000 votes.

In 2000, Al Gore received 50,992,335 votes nationwide and George W. Bush received 50,455,156 votes. After Bush was awarded the state of Florida, he had a total of 271 electroral votes, which beat Gore's 266 electoral votes.
Today, a candidate must receive 270 of the 538 votes to win the election. In cases where no candidate wins a majority of electoral votes, the decision is thrown to the House of Representatives by virtue of the 12th Amendment. The House then selects the president by majority vote with each state delegation receiving one vote to cast for the three candidates who received the most electoral votes.
Here are the two elections that were decided by the House of Representatives:

1801: Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, both Democrat-Republicans, received the same number of electoral votes, despite the fact that Burr was running as a vice presidential candidate, not for the presidency. Following 36 successive votes in the House, Jefferson was finally elected president.
1825: As mentioned above, Andrew Jackson received a majority of the popular vote over John Quincy Adams, but neither man received a 131-vote majority of electoral votes needed at the time to claim the presidency. Adams won the House vote on the first ballot.

_________

How The Electoral College Works

http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecworks.htm

[shoelace414]

1. None of those has this case

Where a state.. lets say Florida.. hold an election and goes for canidate K, but the state government hold a special session and decides to seat electors for Candiate W, totally ignoring the actual vote count.

[Dover]

2. Are you saying that it is lawful to hold a special election AFTER

a general election and select your electors then? If the state goes to candidate K then winner takes all as regards electors. So why would it help to have a special session and elect electors for candidate W?

[shoelace414]

4. No, I'm saying

the state house (whatever they are called in Florida) legislatiave house can hold a special session and decide to seat electors however they want, ignoring the public vote.

they'll say it's because of massive voter fraud or something like that.

[Dover]

5. Yikes! Is Florida the only state with such a law? That's outrageous!

;

[Dover]

6. Florida House Set to Pick New Electors

December 12, 2000


Florida House Set to Pick New Electors

(NY Post) By KENNETH LOVETT and GREGG BIRNBAUM TALLAHASSEE - The Florida House of Representatives - with surprise Democratic help - is expected to take the historic step today of selecting a legislative slate of presidential electors for George W. Bush. House and Senate committees yesterday endorsed the resolution, which names the same electors already certified by state officials and Bush's brother, Gov. Jeb Bush.

The GOP-controlled House is expected to act on the resolution this morning - even as the nation awaits the crucial U.S. Supreme Court ruling that could decide the election.

The Senate could give final approval to the resolution tomorrow, although its Republican majority is more reluctant to move forward if the U.S. Supreme Court ruling puts the election to rest.

But House Speaker Tom Feeney said that even if the U.S. Supreme Court decides in Bush's favor, two remaining lawsuits seeking to throw out thousands of absentee ballots in Martin and Seminole counties offer enough uncertainty to warrant legislative intervention.

"As long as there are controversies and contests still pending, our intention is to proceed," Feeney said.

The difference is that the legislators believe the U.S. Constitution guarantees a slate named by them must be accepted, whereas the slate named by the governor is vulnerable. Democrats charge the move is political - designed to ensure a Bush slate even if the election is awarded to Gore.

..snip/..

http://www.evote.com/index.asp?Page=/news_section/2000-12/12122000Florida.asp

[Catt03]

3. I thought Scalia made tht clear

when he stated in his brief after the 2000 decision that people do not elect the president, the State Legislature does.

I don't have a reference but I remember that he supported the Flroida Legislature in that if the vote ws counted and it was for Gore, they could overturn it.

[buycitgo]

7. According to the constitution

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct*, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:..." -- Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2, U.S. Constitution

what this means, as has been said here, and elsewhere, it doesn't make a BIT of difference what ANYBODY does, except each individual state legislature

they can pick their own slate in NEW YORK, even if Kerry wins by ten million VOTES!

there'd be quite the uproar, but it's RIGHT THERE in the constitution

popular vote is MEANINGLESS

repeat:

MEANINGLESS, when it comes right down to it

it's just a gentelmen's agreement

*read it and weep