🇺🇸 Doomscroll News

Category: Politics

  • ‪Can Electors Go Rogue? The “Faithless Elector”‬

    ‪Can Electors Go Rogue? The “Faithless Elector”‬

    An elector can vote against the popular vote of their state. This is known as being a “faithless elector.” Historically, however, this has been rare and has never changed the outcome of a presidential election.

    Who are the electors? They are chosen by the political parties in each state. They are often party loyalists, chosen to recognize their service.

    Are there rules against it? Yes, many states have laws that require electors to vote for the candidate they are pledged to. The Supreme Court has upheld these laws, allowing states to penalize or replace faithless electors. As of 2024, 38 states and D.C. have such laws.

    As of 2024, the following 12 states do not have any laws that bind electors to the popular vote winner or penalize them for being “faithless”:

    • Arkansas
    • Illinois
    • Iowa
    • Kansas
    • Louisiana
    • New Hampshire
    • New Jersey
    • New York
    • North Dakota
    • Rhode Island
    • Texas
    • West Virginia

    How often does it happen? It’s very infrequent. Out of over 23,000 electoral votes cast in U.S. history, only a small number have been faithless. The most significant number of faithless electors in a single election was in 1872, when a candidate died after the election but before the electors met.

    Of course. While faithless electors have never changed the outcome of a presidential election, there have been numerous instances of them throughout U.S. history.

    Here is a list of every faithless elector vote for a presidential candidate, broken down by election year.

    Instances of Faithless Electors by Election

    2016: This election had the most faithless electors in modern history.

    Pledged to Hillary Clinton (Democrats):

    In Washington, three electors voted for Colin Powell and one voted for Faith Spotted Eagle.

    In Hawaii, one elector voted for Bernie Sanders.

    An elector in Maine attempted to vote for Bernie Sanders, but was forced to change his vote to Clinton.

    Electors in Minnesota and Colorado also attempted to vote for other candidates but were replaced.

    Pledged to Donald Trump (Republicans):

    In Texas, two electors defected. One voted for John Kasich and the other for Ron Paul.

    2004: One Democratic elector from Minnesota, pledged to John Kerry, voted for John Edwards (Kerry’s running mate) for both president and vice president.

    2000: One Democratic elector from the District of Columbia, Barbara Lett-Simmons, abstained from voting for Al Gore as a protest for D.C.’s lack of congressional representation.

    1988: One Democratic elector from West Virginia, Margarette Leach, voted for Lloyd Bentsen (the vice-presidential candidate) for president and Michael Dukakis for vice president.

    1976: One Republican elector from Washington, Mike Padden, voted for Ronald Reagan instead of Gerald Ford.

    1972: One Republican elector from Virginia, Roger L. MacBride, voted for the Libertarian ticket of John Hospers and Tonie Nathan.

    1968: One Republican elector from North Carolina, Lloyd W. Bailey, voted for George Wallace of the American Independent Party instead of Richard Nixon.

    1960: One Republican elector from Oklahoma, Henry D. Irwin, voted for Virginia Senator Harry F. Byrd instead of Richard Nixon.

    1956: One Democratic elector from Alabama, W. F. Turner, voted for a local judge, Walter B. Jones, instead of Adlai Stevenson.

    1948: One Democratic elector from Tennessee, Preston Parks, voted for Strom Thurmond of the States’ Rights Democratic Party instead of Harry S. Truman.

    1912: Eight Republican electors voted for Nicholas Murray Butler for vice president instead of James S. Sherman, who had died before the electoral vote. This was a case of a candidate’s death, not a political protest.

    1896: Four People’s Party electors cast their vice-presidential votes for Thomas E. Watson instead of the Democratic nominee, Arthur Sewall.

    1872: This is the most significant case in terms of numbers. Horace Greeley, the Democratic/Liberal Republican candidate, died after the general election but before the Electoral College voted. As a result, 63 of the 66 electors pledged to him cast their votes for other individuals.

    1836: Twenty-three Democratic electors from Virginia refused to vote for Richard M. Johnson for vice president, who had been Martin Van Buren’s running mate.

    1796: Samuel Miles, a Federalist elector from Pennsylvania, voted for Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson instead of the Federalist candidate, John Adams. This was the first instance of a faithless elector.

    Sources:

    fairvote.org,latimes.com,thegreenpapers.com,wikipedia.org

    David Gross

    Follow me at https://x.com/dgapps and https://davidgrossapps.com

  • The Phoenix Plan: A Blueprint for American Rebirth

    The Phoenix Plan: A Blueprint for American Rebirth

    Prioritize national strength, economic independence, and internal order.

    Core Principles

    • Competent Government: Before voting on any bill, members of Congress must have one week to read it and pass a test to prove they understand it.
    • “Fortress America” Economy: The plan aims for a self-reliant economy. This includes:
      • Taxes: Making current individual tax rates permanent while eliminating special-interest loopholes, the Child Tax Credit, and complex corporate taxes.
      • Trade and Investment: Using tariffs to protect critical industries and offering residency to foreigners who make multi-million dollar investments in the U.S.
      • Ending Corporate Crime: Forcing companies to be specific about how they use investor money. Seized assets from convicted executives and banks will fund their own prosecution and imprisonment.
      • Nationalizing Crypto: Making all private cryptocurrency transactions illegal. The entire crypto system will be seized and reserved as a financial weapon for the military to use only during a declared war.
      • Honest Money: Transitioning away from the Federal Reserve to a system where the U.S. Treasury issues debt-free money directly.
    (more…)

  • My Vision for a Stronger America, Beyond the OBBB

    Prioritize the Need for a New American Fiscal Nationalism & Continue Building a Fortress America Economy: A 15% baseline tariff and sweeping deregulation are not just good ideas; they are necessary defensive measures. While they won’t single-handedly slay the $37T debt dragon, they are the foundational armor for a “Fortress America” economy.

    The $37 Trillion Elephant: Neither party has a plan to pay the debt.

    Investigate the China-California Connection: Deep-dive into how California’s state debt and business ties with Chinese entities create a national security vulnerability.

    Illinois & New York: Blue State Debt Bombs: Unfunded liabilities and corruption in states led by figures like @GovPritzker Gov. Pritzker are a key aspect of the national crisis.

    Saudi Vision 2030: The World’s Most Expensive PR Campaign: The Public Investment Fund’s acquisition of companies like Scopely isn’t about innovation; it’s about their deliberate pursuit of user data. This positions them to monitor our movements, creating a future where digital tracking could easily enable real-world stalking.

    Understand that Political Theater is the Real Insurrection: The political theater in D.C. is the primary cancer. It’s a managed spectacle that provides cover for the real, coordinated erosion of American sovereignty.

    The @SenFettermanPA (Sen. Fetterman) –@marklevinshow (Mark Levin) Doctrine: A pro-Israel, anti-Ayatollah stance is the only coherent foreign policy for national security.

    The @RepThomasMassie (Rep. Massie) –@Ilhan (Rep. Omar) Red Line: Bipartisan efforts to limit executive “war” powers… are a dangerous abdication of responsibility.

    Beyond Counterfeit Cryptocurrency & The Corrupt Old Guard: The post-2008 distrust in the established financial order is justified. But cryptocurrency is not the answer; it’s a digital counterfeit designed to profit from chaos. The real path forward is outside both of these failed systems: a return to productive, asset-backed economics.

    The Hypocrisy of “Stablecoins”: We need to debunk the myth of stability and expose their role in facilitating capital flight from America.

    Critique Cryptocurrency’s Role in the National Debt: Institutional adoption of BTC/ETH/etc. creates a shadow monetary system that undermines the dollar.

    Look Into the Mechanics of Sharia-Compliant Finance: Expose how deals with nations like Qatar and Saudi Arabia introduce legal and financial systems that are antithetical to U.S. economic principles.

    Take a Stand for Authentic Discourse: Public officials should actively curate their audience to prioritize verified, real individuals.

    Deconstruct “Sound Money”: Bitcoin isn’t the new gold, but the new Confederate Dollar.

    … AND A “DREAM ON” WISH LIST:

    Look Into the Qatar Gift Horse: Analyze the “gift” of an Air Force One jet as a symbol of foreign influence at the highest levels.

    Fire Engineers: A ruthless platform approach to platform integrity (purging bots) is more important than internal harmony at a tech company.

    Truth Social’s Bot Problem: Even “alternative” platforms are failing to provide authentic spaces for discourse.

  • While Politicians Play Games, Cryptocurrency Threatens Our Financial Future

    While Politicians Play Games, Cryptocurrency Threatens Our Financial Future

    Our nation faces a profound and immediate threat from a predatory, globalist financial scheme. This is the real crisis. I am talking about cryptocurrency. My opposition is not rooted in partisan politics, but in a firm belief that we must protect the United States from this clear and present danger.

    These digital tokens, propped up by nothing more than speculation and hype, are a cancer on our financial system. They are the preferred tool for illicit activity, riddled with fraud, and often mined in countries hostile to American interests. The chaos unleashed by figures like Sam Bankman-Fried, whose FTX exchange imploded in a storm of corruption and foreign entanglements, is not an outlier—it is the inevitable outcome of a system with no intrinsic value. So-called “stablecoins” are a ticking time bomb, and the entire ecosystem is a playground for market manipulation that puts the savings of everyday Americans at risk.

    This is the fire that needs to be extinguished. Yet, what is the response from Washington? Political theater.

    Case in point: H.R. 3573, cynically titled the “Stop TRUMP in Crypto Act.” This bill is a perfect illustration of a political establishment that is unable and unwilling to grasp the scale of the threat. It is a weak, performative gesture that tinkers around the edges of ethics for the political elite while completely ignoring the fundamental dangers that cryptocurrencies pose to the financial stability of our country.

    (more…)

  • Justice KBJ: Anti-DEI, Pro-Religious Freedom, Defender of Jan. 6 Rioters … or Not?

    As I’ve been telling people since she was confirmed—and I have witnesses—Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s record is revealing a judicial philosophy with surprising MAGA elements. Here are a few of her rulings that prove it:

    • Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services (2025): Marlean Ames, a straight woman, alleged her supervisor, a lesbian, discriminated against her by favoring LGBTQ+ employees. The case centered on whether plaintiffs from majority groups had to meet a higher legal standard—showing “background circumstances” of discrimination—to bring a lawsuit. Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Jackson ruled that Title VII forbids such a two-tiered system. The decision eliminated the “background circumstances” test, ensuring all individuals face the same evidentiary standard when alleging workplace discrimination.
    • Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission (2025): The Court unanimously sided with Catholic Charities against the state of Wisconsin, which had denied the organization a religious-employer exemption from unemployment taxes. Wisconsin argued the charity wasn’t “operated primarily for religious purposes” because it served all people, not just Catholics, and didn’t proselytize. The Court held that the state’s position violated the First Amendment by imposing a “denominational preference” and attempting to define what constitutes a valid religious activity, which the government is forbidden from doing.
    • Fischer v. United States (2024): This case questioned whether a felony obstruction charge, originally passed to prevent evidence tampering, could be broadly applied to defendants from the January 6 Capitol riot. Justice Jackson joined the conservative majority in a 6-3 decision that found prosecutors had interpreted the law too broadly. The Court ruled the law is limited to acts that impair the integrity of evidence, not any conduct that disrupts an official proceeding. This significantly narrowed the application of a key felony charge in Jan. 6 prosecutions.
    • CFPB v. Community Financial Services Association (2024): Her opinion, while far from perfect in my opinion, was a strong defense of judicial restraint, arguing that courts have no power to overrule Congress on funding matters unless the Constitution is explicitly and unambiguously violated. This reasoning champions a limited role for the judiciary, a core principle of legal conservatism.
    (more…)

  • Big Beautiful Bill: Critiquing Expenditures & Rescissions with a New Federalism Vision

    This article will dissect key components of the bill, reinforcing a fiscally conservative perspective focused on efficiency, market-based solutions, and a reduction in federal overreach.

    A recurring theme will be the devolution of certain programs and responsibilities to the states. It is important to note that many of the responsibilities envisioned for state management are relatively minor in scope, aiming to return local control over local matters. However, even in these areas, and certainly in any more significant transfers, fiscal prudence is paramount. This necessary shift away from federal overreach cannot be a license for states to engage in fiscal malfeasance, particularly when such actions have broader national implications, such as contributing to inflationary pressures through unfunded liabilities or chronic deficit spending.

    To ensure accountability without fostering inter-state conflict, any transfer of responsibilities must be accompanied by a carefully designed mechanism for mutual accountability. This system would involve regular reviews, based on clear, objective, and pre-agreed metrics, of state performance in managing these devolved areas. Should a state demonstrably and significantly mismanage its obligations, leading to measurable negative externalities for other states – for example, by directly exacerbating national inflation through irresponsible fiscal policies directly tied to these devolved functions – a transparent and impartially administered penalty system could be considered. Such penalties, if ever deemed necessary, should be narrowly targeted and proportionate, based on an automatic formula and/or pardons, to avoid politicization and ensure they serve as a corrective measure rather than a tool for “financial war.” The primary goal is to incentivize sound governance, not to create adversarial relationships between states.

    (more…)

  • Part III: Analyzing the “Big Beautiful Bill”: A Look at New Taxes, Fees, and Revenue Raisers

    The proposed “Big Beautiful Bill” (BBB) introduces a sweeping range of new taxes, fees, and revenue-generating measures that demand close scrutiny. This article examines key provisions, aligning with a vision that prioritizes American interests and fiscal responsibility.

    Measures to Potentially Bolster American Interests:

    Several proposed measures in the BBB could be seen as aligning with an “America First” approach:

    • Excise Tax on Remittance Transfers (Sec. 112104): This provision introduces a new tax on money sent abroad. Such a measure could be viewed as a way to retain capital within the country and generate revenue from outflows.
    • New Immigration-Related Fees (Title VII, Part 1): The bill imposes new fees for various immigration processes, including asylum applications, employment authorizations for certain non-citizens, and for sponsors of unaccompanied children who fail to meet court appearance requirements. These fees ensure that the immigration system is not an undue burden on the taxpayer and that those who use the system contribute to its costs.
    • Fee on Natural Gas Exports and Imports to Non-FTA Countries (Sec. 41002): This establishes a fee on natural gas trade with countries not part of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the U.S. This is a strategic move to favor trade with FTA partners and generate revenue from other international gas transactions.
    • Modification of Vessel Tonnage Duties (Sec. 100002): Changes to vessel tonnage duties (taxes on ships entering U.S. ports based on their cargo capacity) updates these fees to better reflect modern shipping practices and ensure fair contribution from international maritime commerce.
    • Termination or Restriction of Clean Energy Tax Credits (Title XI, Subtitle C, Part 1): The bill calls for ending or limiting various clean energy tax credits, such as those for electric vehicles, alternative fuel refueling property, and energy-efficient home improvements. This aligns with the perspective that such credits may represent market distortions or handouts and that their removal levels the playing field.
    • Increased Excise Tax on Private Foundation Investment Income (Sec. 112022): An increase in the excise tax on the net investment income of certain private foundations, based on asset size, is proposed. This is a way to ensure that large, tax-exempt foundations contribute more to public revenue, particularly if there are concerns about how these funds are being utilized or if they are perceived as benefiting from arrangements that do not primarily serve domestic charitable purposes.
    (more…)