**EDIT: I've now created http://RemoveTrumpNow.com/ -- everyone, please yell it at protestors (online and offline), so I can go viral or at least have the load bring my server down. Thanks!** There's no good, legal way to stop Trump from becoming President. There is, however, a terrible but still legal way: Quoting https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/provisions.html (which itself is quoting the Constitution): > Each State shall appoint, **in such Manner as the Legislature thereof > may direct**, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of > Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in > the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an > Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed > an Elector. (emphasis added). In other words, a state legislature does not appear to have an obligation to appoint electors based on the popular plurality vote, and this presumably applies even if an election has already been held. According to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/key-dates.html the states have until December 13th to resolve any disputes re whom to appoint as electors, and the electors ultimately vote 6 days later, on December 19th. There are 6 states where Trump won, but only obtained a plurality of the vote, not a majority: - Florida (29 electoral votes): Clinton lost by 128,503 votes, and there were 293,802 votes for third party candidates. If 43.74% of them had voted for Clinton, Clinton would've won. - Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes): Clinton lost by 68,012 votes, and there were 212,508 votes for third party candidates. If 32.00% of them had voted for Clinton, Clinton would've won. - Michigan (16 electoral votes): Clinton lost by 17,386 votes, and there were 241,125 votes for third party candidates. If 7.21% of them had voted for Clinton, Clinton would've won. - Arizona (11 electoral votes): Clinton lost by 81,607 votes, and there were 94,917 votes for third party candidates. If 85.98% of them had voted for Clinton, Clinton would've won. - Wisconsin (10 electoral votes): Clinton lost by 26,889 votes, and there were 152,773 votes for third party candidates. If 17.60% of them had voted for Clinton, Clinton would've won. - Utah (6 electoral votes): Clinton lost by 125,851 votes, and there were 192,096 votes for third party candidates. If 65.51% of them had voted for Clinton, Clinton would've won. Trump currently has 305 presumptive electoral votes, and Clinton has 233. If you could convince the state legislatures totaling **exactly** 36 electoral votes to exercise their option to appoint electors for Clinton, regardless of the plurality vote, Clinton and Trump would both have 269 electoral votes, which would force the election to the House of Representatives, with each state receiving one vote. Since Trump won 24 states by majority (not just plurality), he would only need 2 of his plurality states to still win the election. If you could convince the state legislatures totaling **more than** 36 electoral votes to appoint Clinton electors, Clinton would win the election. Convincing the Michigan legislature that at least 7.21% of the third party voters would've voted for Clinton if they knew that Trump would win otherwise, and that Clinton "should've won" might make it possible for them to flip their electors, giving Clinton 16 more electoral votes. It's a tougher sell in Pennsylvania (32.00% of third party voters) but still maybe possible, giving Clinton another 20 elector votes, bringing us to the exactly 36 scenario above. You'd then just have to convince one other state legislature (Wisconsin being most likely), and Clinton wins. You could also try convincing these 3 states (or any of the others that voted Trump) that Clinton supporters were so confident that Clinton was going to win that they failed to vote, and that the "fairest" thing to do would be to hold another election, if they're not willing to flip votes outright. Another possibility I'd considered is passing a Constitutional amendment (calling for another election or banning Trump outright), but that would ultimately require 38 state legislatures to agree, and, since Trump won 24 states by a majority, and even allowing for Clinton supporters who failed to vote, this is unlikely. If someone's serious about doing this, the big push now would be to get Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin voters to push their legislatures to at least consider appointing electors contrary to election results. A major factor would be third party voters saying something like "if I'd known, I'd have voted Clinton" or something. Note: see https://github.com/barrycarter/bcapps/blob/master/ELECTION/README for how I made these calculations, sources, and possible errors. EDIT: just for fun, I wrote up what a sample letter to a representative might look like: > Dear [name of representative], > On November 8th, the majority of [state resident name, eg "Michiganders"] voted against Donald Trump. > If it hadn't been for a small minority of third party protest voters, Hillary Clinton would've won the election. > Those voters are kicking themselves now, because they know, as you know, and as we all know, that a Trump Presidency means disaster: not just for [state name], but for the entire United States as a whole. > Fortunately, there's something even more powerful than a bloated windbag: the Constitution of the United States of America. > Talk to your constituents, especially those who voted for third-party candidates and ask your fellow legislators to do the same. Your constituents will tell you: if they had known Trump would win, they would've happily changed their protest vote to prevent a Trump Presidency. > And then, do the right thing, and invoke your Constitutional right and duty to appoint electors the way your constituents want: for Hillary Clinton, and not for Donald Trump. > Don't let a small minority of regretful voters ruin your great state and our great nation. EDIT: (to answer some comments) - https://www.multistate.com/state-resources/legislative-session-deadlines shows that most states have long since ended their legislative sessions, but, in a remarkable coincidence, Pennsylvania and Michigan's legislative sessions are both still open. In Wisconsin, there would have to be a special session called. - The letter above is an example of "persuasive writing", and is intended to emphasize one point of view and to make speculative claims in favor of the author's position. It is not intended as an unbiased analysis. Most people write legislators with persuasive letters intended to support their position. I wrote the above in the tone of someone who desperately wants to avoid a Trump Presidency. - Even in the unbiased sense, I'm not claiming all third-party votes are really votes for Clinton. I'm stating (still speculatively) that: if third party voters were given a chance to vote again, knowing that the Trump/Clinton decision hinges on their choice, a sufficient minority (32% in Pennsylvania, smaller in Michigan and Wisconsin) would change their vote to prevent Trump from becoming President. I believe some (not all, and not even necessarily a majority) of third party voters believed that Clinton had the election locked up, and didn't realize their vote would effectively elect Trump. So, I'm not claiming third party voters all want Clinton, or even that a minority want Clinton. I'm saying that, given a choice between Clinton and Trump, and knowing their choice would actually decide the election, a minority would choose Clinton as the lesser evil. - My entire suggestion should not be taken too seriously. Although I'd love to see it happen (just because I enjoy chaos), it would annoy Trump voters AND annoy people who believe that America is (or should be) a democracy, although Clinton's popular vote victory may mitigate the latter. Even if Clinton wins via my suggestion, the repercussions might outweigh the gain, even for Clinton supporters.