One Trump Elector in Texas has bailed on the Fascist-Elect… and declared the Republic dead:
I do not see how Donald Trump is biblically qualified to serve in the office of the Presidency. Of the hundreds of angry messages that I have received, not one has made a convincing case from scripture otherwise. If Trump is not qualified and my role, both morally and historically, as an elected official is to vote my conscience, then I can not and will not vote for Donald Trump for President. I believe voting for Trump would bring dishonor to God. The reality is Trump will be our President, no matter what my decision is. Many are furious that I am willing to have this discussion publicly. Personally, I wish more civil officers would be honest about their convictions. Assuming a Trump Presidency is their ultimate goal, they will get that. The problem is, that isn’t what they want. They want a democracy. They will threaten to kill anyone who challenges their power to vote for Skittles for dinner. That is evidence alone to prove that our republic is lost. The shell may remain, but in the hearts of the people and functionality of the system our republic is gone. I also believe that a pledge is a man’s word that he will follow through on something he committed to. God’s Word is clear we should all “let our ‘yes’ be ‘yes’ and our ‘no,’s ‘no.” I believe to resign is to honor the intent of the pledge as it relates to the people of my district. Since I can’t in good conscience vote for Donald Trump, and yet have sinfully made a pledge that I would, the best option I see at this time is to resign my position as an Elector. This will allow the remaining body of Electors to fill my vacancy when they convene on Dec 19 with someone that can vote for Trump. The people will get their vote. They will get their Skittles for dinner. I will sleep well at night knowing I neither gave in to their demands nor caved to my convictions. I will also mourn the loss of our republic [Art Sisneros, “Conflicted Elector in a Corrupt College,” The Blessed Path, 2016.11.26].
The “Skittles for dinner” phrase refers to Sisneros’s argument that the Founding Fathers intended the Electoral College to act like parents, using their authority to protect their children from bad decisions like voting to have candy for supper. Hmm… so the Electoral College is the original nanny state?
I’m not sure I can fully cheer Sisneros’s decision. I respect every voter who puts conscience over partisan demands. However, Sisneros’s choice feels impotent and selfish, assuaging his own desire for personal moral superiority but not projecting his beliefs into broader action. He may not be giving in to others’ demands, but he is giving in to Trumpist tyranny.
Maybe I’d feel differently if I, like Sisneros, believed some otherworldly reward awaited me after shuffling off the earthly chains that Il Duce Trump will only make worse. But even if there were an afterworld, justice in this world would still have an inherent value worth fighting for. A Trump Presidency will do grave injustice (by secular and Christian standards) to humanity. Instead of stepping aside to allow someone else to make Trump President, Sisneros (and Daugaard, Michels, and Jackley) should stand against that ascent and do their Constitutional duty to elect a qualified President.