I am just wondering can electors in US make complex vows.
Even though the aggregate national popular vote is calculated by state officials, media organizations, and the Federal Election Commission, the people only indirectly elect the president, as the national popular vote is not the basis for electing the president or vice president. The president and vice president of the United States are elected by the Electoral College, which consists of 538 electors from the fifty states and Washington, D.C. Electors are selected on a state-by-state basis, as determined by the laws of each state. Since the election of 1824, most states have appointed their electors on a winner-take-all basis, based on the statewide popular vote on Election Day. Maine and Nebraska are the only two current exceptions, as both states use the congressional district method. Although ballots list the names of the presidential and vice presidential candidates (who run on a ticket), voters actually choose electors when they vote for president and vice president. These presidential electors in turn cast electoral votes for those two offices. Electors usually pledge to vote for their party's nominee, but some "faithless electors" have voted for other candidates or refrained from voting.
Currently, if you pick Gary Johnson for example, and Gary Johnson won’t win, then your votes will disappear.
You may prefer Trump than Young or Young than trump.
Something similar happens with Nader and Bush and Gore.
As far as I know, Americans still pick electors. It’s just that the electors swore that they will pick a president after they get “elected”. Imagine if Bob is an electoral college candidate. Bob says I will pick Trump if I am elected. What happens is, people, don’t even know who the hell Bob is. People pick Trump.
However, we know that behind the screen, people don’t really pick Trump. People pick Bob that already swear that he will pick Trump. A small technicality nobody notices.
Imagine if instead of swearing that I will pick Trump, Bob says something like, “I will pick Gary Johnson, and if Gary Johnson can’t win, I will pick Trump, and if Trump can’t win, I will pick Young”. Basically, none of the votes are wasted.
Also, it can happen without having to change any laws on the election. The electoral colleges can make their commitments.
Of course, in practice, voters don’t really pick Bob. They probably see Gary -> Trump -> Young.
Basically, in election, the electors are in the “market”. Often, the one that most voters like, are not necessarily the simplest ones.
This can actually be implemented by single transferable votes. However, instead of changing the election system, the election system remains the same.
Voters simply choose whether they want to burn their vote if their main candidate lose or to pick an elector that will transfer it to their second most favorite candidate.
In fact, I’ve heard that electoral college can actually decides anything. What about if some elector will say that I will pick whatever I want if elected, or I will pick what downloaders of this app pick, if I am elected.
Is there a law that requires an elector to have a simple “vow”?
This question suggest how third party candidates may use what the electors will do as a bargaining position. Would Third Party Candidates in the United States fare better under a proportional representation split of electoral votes?