"This year, narrowly denying Trump a majority in the Electoral College would still probably result in Trump’s election via the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, producing the same president but with a Constitutional crisis along the way. And in the long run, encouraging electors to deviate from the outcomes in their states would result in the House more often deciding presidential elections, which is probably not in Democrats’ interests given how their voters are clustered — and gerrymandered — into urban congressional districts."
"Winning a House seat in Montana or expanded access to early voting in North Carolina might not be as sexy for Democrats as dreaming about an uprising in the Electoral College. But Trump won the election, and Democrats probably ought to be thinking about how to win some elections of their own."
What is at risk if electors go faithless and deny Donald Trump 270 electoral votes? What are more effective ways for Democrats moving forward? Do Democrats risk losing these paths by focusing on faithless electors?
Throughout the campaign, there were ample warnings against winning at all costs, warnings mostly directed as a cavaet against Donald Trump. Should such warnings apply to the current calls for faithless electors?
READ THE FULL ARTICLE
"Democrats Need to Win Elections, not Flip Electors"
by Nate Silver, Editor-in-Chief, FiveThirtyEight
December 19, 2016 l FiveThirtyEight