Clinton or Trump? Like it or not, (and, in my case,
it's "not"), we are going to get stuck with one of
those two. We have no choice about that. But the
choice is pretty much: certain death (Clinton), or
Russian roulette (Trump). a slightly better chance
with Russian roulette.

Of course Trump is better than the human excrement called Hillary. I'm just cautioning not to have one's hopes set too high.

yes you are correct the people don't actually elect the President. However if 50 million people write-in the same one name the electors would/should have to make that person the President.

I think you miss the point.
Qualifications for President are not the issue.
nobody can serve as President unless so qualified, but that has nothing to do with how a President is elected.

Nobody can vote directly for President, except for the Presidential Electors who, according to the Constitution, are chosen by whatever mechanism each state decides.

Most states have chosen to allow citizens to vote for Electors (altho the Constitution does not require that), but most states have "regulated" the election of Presidential Electors so that votes are counted for Electors only if the Elector is duly registered (and, in many cases, only if they have filed candidacy forms!)

Furthermore, in over thirty states, voters in a Congressional District are disenfranchised and no longer allowed to choose their own Presidential Elector to represent them; instead, these states have a corrupt "winner-takes-all" system, whereby 100% of the states' Electors go to the slate of Electors that receives a statewide plurality.

The Constitutional qualifications you cite apply only to the person chosen by the Electoral College, and state laws regarding the choice of electors are not affected in any way by those provisions.

In short, most states consider write-in votes null and void if they fail to specify the names of Electors who are duly qualified -- which means that the Electors (not the candidate the are pledged to) is a registered voter (and, in most states, has filed paper of candidacy to be an Elector).

Hi Chad ,
I am not a defender against your claim "Trump used his influence to buy the Clintons when they were selling to him." I am not familiar with what Trumps influence as a currency that Clinton's could use and what the Clintons gave Trump in return. How did Trump abuse the constitution?
By hiring effective lawyers to guide and enable his projects to be constructed is part of business today and is rational.

Behavior is the best indicator of a persons intent and character, not what they say. Trump used his influence to 'buy' the Clintons when they were selling to him. He has abused the constitution to remove private property from individuals through the use of 'law' offering those in power more revenue if he owned the property and now he claims that he will 'swing' the other way and protect property rights. He is more likely to find a judge who will rule in his favor while claiming to be in favor of the constitution. After observing and fighting this nonsense for 47 years (started when I was 20) I have observed that despite promises made by either party the leadership continues to move the country toward more socialism. The only differences between either party was what they promised, what they delivered has always been the same.

Trump proposes TAX CREDITS for child care, medical savings accounts, etc.

That is a far cry from socialist subsidies!

Trump was not to blame for creating the STATIST systems nor the RULES that were imposed upon us all; the fact that he played by the rules and succeeded does not make him responsible for them.

In fact, his success makes Trump even more credible when he speaks of changing the rules that victimize us all, ending the "fixes", and draining the swamp of corruption that permeates the political ESTABLISHMENT (and the "insider" beneficiaries like Clinton, Bush, Pelosi, Reid, McConnell, Boehner, et al.)

Although there certainly are circumstances when not voting is a principled ethical stand, for example if either choice results in equivalent evil, or when it simply does not matter who wins and your choosing to not vote represents a stand against the electoral process and those running for office.
However, those circumstances do not apply to the current election. It does matter who wins as we will be feeling the effect of each candidate’s philosophy for years, perhaps decades. One candidate wants to protect the Constitution; the other wants to interpret it based on party agenda without regard to national adverse consequences. One candidate wants poor people and middle-class people to become rich. The other candidate wants poor people and the dwindling middle-class to remain poor so they will need government handouts to sustain themselves, thus remaining psychologically indebted to the party that provides free stuff.
The perspective and values of millennials and tweens who will inherit positions of authority someday are at stake. How you vote next week will influence who influences them and our country’s future. Your vote counts. Even if you do not live in a swing state and your vote does not affect the electoral college outcome, your vote still affects the populate vote, which makes a lasting statement of whether we give voice to our principles or have just given up without a fight to the end. Please vote.

Although there certainly are circumstances when not voting is a principled ethical stand, for example if either choice results in equivalent evil, or when it simply does not matter who wins and your choosing to not vote represents a stand against the electoral process and those running for office.
However, those circumstances do not apply to the current election. It does matter who wins as we will be feeling the effect of each candidate’s philosophy for years, perhaps decades. One candidate wants to protect the Constitution; the other wants to interpret it based on party agenda without regard to national adverse consequences. One candidate wants poor people and middle-class people to become rich. The other candidate wants poor people and the dwindling middle-class to remain poor so they will need government handouts to sustain themselves, thus remaining psychologically indebted to the party that provides free stuff.
The perspective and values of millennials and tweens who will inherit positions of authority someday are at stake. How you vote next week will influence who influences them and our country’s future. Your vote counts. Even if you do not live in a swing state and your vote does not affect the electoral college outcome, your vote still affects the populate vote, which makes a lasting statement of whether we give voice to our principles or have just given up without a fight to the end. Please vote.

"the current POTUS" was who I was referencing. You missed the context of the reply.

I say that until my vote is actually counted like all the other votes, I'm not going to vote. My vote is, None Of The Above.

To be qualified by AMERICAN CONSTITUTION you must be 35 years old, Born in America and have no lived outside the U.S. for 14 years. The Constitution is the Supreme law of the land and it says so in Article 2 paragraph 6. 16 Am JM page 267? any law contrary to the Constitution is null and void.

He proposes socialized medicine, welfare for elderly and public education. Those are major socialist policies. I understand that in today's America anything that rejects the above is a non-starter, but if he believes in those policies and will implement them, then he's a socialist.

In addition, his entire experience of making billions and building companies is based on socialist structures - he took advantage of monopolies created by the corrupt state (that is why he was such friends with Hillary before). After decades of socialist corruption that helped make him billions, do you really think that he had an unexpected meeting with Ayn Rand?

I, too, would like an explanation for Chad's assertion that Trump would not be any better than Shillary. Should be interesting, if nothing else.

How is Trump "a socialist to the core"? I see no evidence to that statement in anything Trump has said in his proposals regarding his goals as POTUS. Enlighten me.

I am confused by your choice to cast your vote for Johnson if Trump satisfies all of what the "libertarian" voters want. By your own statement, Johnson only proposes many of the libertarians wish list.
Casting a vote for Johnson in this election strikes me as a short-sighted protest vote which can only help HRC reach the oval office. Once HRC makes it to the WH, this nation is finished as founded.

jhannen, thank you for putting into words what has been rattling around my old brain for quite a while in regards to Trump and Clinton both.
Plus, I keep hearing the song from a movie about Eva Peron each time I see a picture of HRC. Her evil self-interest shines through each time I see her.

Write-ins for anyone other than a person who is eligible for office are considered void under NY Election Law. [I have often witnessed Boards of Elections discarding such ballots.]

To be eligible, the person named must be a registered voter (and "Mickey Mouse" is not eligible).

A Presidential Write-In must name all of the electors -- NOT the candidate to whom they are pledged.

Everyone on a slate of Presidential Electors must be eligible, and the slate must include electors from each CD in the state (plus two statewide). [In 2008, I was in charge of the team that vetted and prepared the slate of NY electors for Ron Paul, so I'm very familiar with this requirement.]

Please explain how anything Trump has said indicates that he intends to usurp powers not granted by the Constitution.

Hillary clearly wants to extend Federal power beyond what is now the case, and she WILL appoint Supreme Court justices who will ignore or circumvent Constitutional limitations.

I don't know how close the election in ny will be. But I would still try everything I could to defeat Hillary once and for all

NOT voting will change nothing.
You can vote for Gary Johnson and actually make a -- however small -- difference.
And all the other offices, such as Congress, state legislature, are important too, and you should vote for anyone who promises less government and more freedom.
Remember: NOT voting just makes the professional politicians giggle and it won't help anyone else.

according to American law a written declaration is valid. I will not dispute the "fact?" that the ballots were thrown out. I have never heard what you have said as being legal canyon give me more information?

Write-ins do not count in most states!

Since nobody votes directly for President, but only votes for Presidential Electors, the Board of Elections discards votes for anyone who has not officially filed to be an Elector.

(In several previous elections, and especially in 1976, tens of thousands of Presidential votes were voided because the write-ins were not the name of an officially-filed Elector!)

Well put (altho it pains me somewhat).

Johnson-Weld is a disappointment, but I still might vote for them because my vote does not count in New York (because its corrupt winner-takes-all system in my state denies me the right to vote for an Elector to represent my Congressional District).

i think not voting is justified because Donald is a vulgar man who thinks his voter are stupid, and Hillary is not a moral person to run our country.