There Is No Trumpism Without Trump
Updated at 6:10 p.m. ET on November 15, 2020.
In the November issue of The Atlantic, Barton Gellman reported that Republican legislators in Pennsylvania were quietly discussing a seemingly mad scheme.
These legislators foresaw that their state, and its 20 electoral votes, would probably be won by the Biden-Harris ticket. But Republicans still possessed a 107–91 majority in the state assembly, and a 29–21 majority in the state Senate. What if they could somehow set aside the vote by the people of their state—and appoint electors who would support President Donald Trump?
“In Pennsylvania, three Republican leaders told me they had already discussed the direct appointment of electors among themselves,” Gellman reported, “and one said he had discussed it with Trump’s national campaign.”
The idea rested upon language in the Constitution: “Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.” Since 1787, all the states have enacted laws mandating that electors should be nominated by the political parties, with the final selection being determined by the popular vote. Pennsylvania’s current version of the electoral law was enacted in 1937, and has been taken absolutely for granted by all Pennsylvania voters ever since.
But what is law in the age of Trump? Trumpists regard it as little more than a guideline, subordinated to the whims and moods of the president. If Pennsylvania law thwarts Trump, then Pennsylvania law must be discarded for Trump.
Gellman’s report of the Pennsylvania plan was instantly by the state’s Republican Party chairman, Lawrence Tabas. Tabas accused Gellman of misinterpreting his words and those of other state Republicans. And there things paused
