Our presidential selection process is not working well

We have a process that only considers those who are effective at promoting themselves. We are not getting good results.

We could look beyond those who run, to find people who do not or will not promote themselves to office, but who might respond to a draft.

Imagine if the state legislatures [just a few or even one(?)] decided to choose Electors to the President by seeking out people who are committed to promoting the national interest more than they are committed to promoting their party interest.

Is there sometimes a divergence of interests between the two "major" parties on the one hand and the nation as a whole on the other? Were the candidates who were nominated by those most oft-mentioned Parties in recent elections among the very best that this nation has to offer?

Because of the particulars of the Presidential selection process laid out in the Constitution, it may take only a very few Electors changing their vote--from one that would reflect a primary allegiance to Party to one reflecting a determination to put national interest first--to result in a changed outcome of an election. Only a few Electors need change because if there is no candidate who receives a majority, they take the top three candidates and let Congress decide, with each State casting one vote.


Walter Cronkite for President!

Franklin Thomas for vice President!

They would do it if we ask. Or if the Electors ask. Pass it on...

The Electors decide