You need a course in Civics. The Electoral College does not appoint anyone. their function is to vote for the candidate who received the most votes in their state. This is what makes our nation a Republic and this is why we have a Republican form of government. It is deliberately done this way to prevent rule of the mob (Demos) we are emphatically not a Democracy, we have a democratic form of government ONLY, in that one man or women gets one vote, to exercise or not as they see fit.

The electoral college normally votes for the candidate their fellow statesmen selected. Occasionally there are faithless electors and this is what prompted the barrage of cajolery, pleas, and outright threats of bodily harm, to electors, in an effort to cause them to be faithless.

If you want to rail at anyone, set your sights on all the idiots demonstrating with "Not My President " signs who couldn't be bothered to exercise their franchise and vote for their candidate. They have plenty of time to riot in the streets but wouldn't take an hour to vote.

All of these accusations "a confirmed adulterer, womanizer, fraud, tax evader, chronic liar, narcissist, racist, misogynist, and accused sexual predator among other accusations." are drivel drummed up by Trump's opponents.

In the scales of Justice, both Clinton's corruption, venality, perjury, sexual predations, confirmed adultery and rape, chronic lying, threatening of witnesses in criminal proceedings and treasonous behavior which is proven fact far outweighs any allegation made against Trump . How many times is it recorded and proved that Trump rode the Lolita express with the Clinton's, to Pederast Paradise? It wasn't Trump who was called a liar by the Director of the FBI with regard to her criminal exposure of State Secrets to our enemies.

Your bringing up this ancient refuted bunch of stupid accusations with an additional charge of bribery of Electors is ludicrous. Why don't you claim Trump is an illegal alien, he came from Mars?
It is interesting that three times as many faithless electors failed to vote for Clinton, the damage they attempted to do to Trump rebounded to their detriment.

Most people, whether Republican or Democrat at least agree that this past election has been unusual to say the least. Filled with the elements of intrigue normally found in a Tom Clancy movie ('Clear and Present Danger' - Hunt for Red October), false accusations, tales of corruption, etc., -there is still a question I have not seen any news on: "Why isn't the EC being investigated?" The EC is charged with 2 main tenets in the Constitution in regards to the presidential election: 1) to affirm the winner of the popular vote, and 2) to appoint the best qualified candidate by means of education, experience, and character. With that being said, "why did the majority of the EC appoint Trump?" He lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million, (of course if we believed his 3-5 million illegal voters that number could be much higher), has never held public office, dropped out of college, 6 bankruptcies, a confirmed adulterer, womanizer, fraud, tax evader, chronic liar, narcissist, racist, misogynist, and accused sexual predator among other accusations. All of this begs the question: "was the EC bribed or blackmailed into appointing Trump?" I find it very difficult to pass on that thought.

I had always thought that one reason the founders made an "electoral college" responsible for electing the president, was so that those electors, having been appointed by the state legislature, would have reason to be more responsible.

I think I will look it up in my "Anti-Federalists" and "Federalists" Papers, as well as the Madison Debates. It does seem America, with its emphasis on voter rights, has taken responsibility for the election of the president off the table. That is, voters have rights, but not responsibility. A major flaw in democracy.

In order for democracy to work, the populace who wants to govern themselves, must be able to responsibly elect their representatives and governors. Voter rights advocates have diminished the importance of responsibility.

There was not a problem with Obama and the EC because he won the EC votes deservedly....you know, most qualified, best educated, held public office, good character, etc. Now I do admit that there were problems with the EC 2 other times in history, well before you, I or anyone living today was even born. Your brazen anger is a possible clue to your responses - inside you know that what I wrote is true...and it upsets you. Well, you should be upset....but not with me. Your angst should be for those who so flippantly and disgracefully usurped the very Constitution they are sworn to uphold. Me, and my brothers and sisters in the military did not risk our lives daily (like the millions before us) to see people trounce on the very laws we support and are sworn to protect for ourselves and our families, for you and your family. Your anger seems to include a serious dislike (or lack of understanding) about what is fair, right and equal. Are you one of those who believe only in "white privilege?" Do you not understand that the white man did not build America alone? What would have happened if the Native Indians had told the Pilgrim's "turn your ship around - we don't accept immigrants here?" So far, nearly everything Trump has done has been a sham....he seems bent on repealing or reversing EVERYTHING that Obama did for the country....simply because Obama did it! Wouldn't Trump's time be better served in working with both parties to FIX some of the things Obama was not allowed to (your republican congress tried to block every proposal the man suggested) or could not get too? When will people learn that there will never be peace as long as one group thinks and acts as if they are the only one's who have a say in what should be? <That sir, is the definition of stupidity!

I have advocated competency tests for voters. If the person voting is ignorant of the candidate's policies as stated and of the rudiments of the political process why should they be allowed to vote? In my opinion all voters should have to demonstrate that they know who the candidates are and what are their policies on the issues of the day. I would also deny anyone on welfare, who is not disabled, the vote, because they have a vested interest in voting for whoever promises the biggest handout and they "have no skin in the game". Unfortunately it is unconstitutional to deny the vote to any individual as well as being non-egalitarian.