The House Republicans could give it to anyone they want. McCain? Ryan? Romney? All they have to do is agree on someone.

So whomever TX puts up would be added to the list behind Trump & Hillary

Congress would just toss the TX votes and then vote for Trump when the race ends up in the House.

Each state delegation decides who of the 3 it will vote for and it takes 26 states to win.

Look to 1824 as a guide.

Say for example that the TX electoral votes are cast for Romney...a written objection, signed by at least one House member and at least one Senator, can be submitted to the President of the Senate. The count must be immediately halted, the House and Senate then split off to their separate chambers for up to two hours of debate and a vote, then upon their return, each chamber announces their decision. If the objection is upheld, the electoral votes are tossed.

In that scenario, neither Trump nor Hillary would have 270 votes, the election would go to the House, and Trump would be elected.

Congress has the right to reject any electoral votes they choose, so long as both the House and the Senate agree to do so.

I don't see it in either the Constitution or the 12th Amendment. Where do you see the provision that the Congress can object to the votes of Electors?

Can electoral votes be contested when Congress counts the votes in January?

Under federal law an objection to a state’s Electoral votes may be made to the President of the Senate during Congress’s counting of Electoral votes in January. The objection must be made in writing and signed by at least one Senator and one member of the House of Representatives. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives debate the objection separately. Debate is limited to two hours. After the debate, both the Senate and the House of Representatives rejoin and both must agree to reject the votes.

In January 2005, Ohio’s 20 Electoral votes were challenged. After debate, the Senate and the House failed to agree to reject the votes. Ohio’s 20 Electoral votes for President Bush and Vice President Cheney were counted.

I note that the citation does not cite a Federal Law, only states its existence.

?? US Code Sec. ???

I find that somewhat suspicious, and wonder if it would withstand Constitutional muster if challenged.

I didn't know that. It's sometimes interesting the little things that, though they appear to be at odds with the Constitution, sometimes get tucked into the U.S. Code by acts of Congress. It would be interesting to see what would happen if someone with standing brought that provision up to the Supreme Court.

I learn new things here every day.

While no one could ever forget the 2000 recount, I had forgotten a lot of the details about the actual vote count that followed.

I believe that some votes have actually been rejected (back in the 1800s maybe?). I'll have to look it up to see, if that was the case, what did happen.

from the territory that the Union had reclaimed, but Congress did not count them. That's the instance that comes immediately to mind.

They have to choose from among the top 3 electoral vote recipients. So, trump, Clinton, and whoever Texas chooses in that scenario.

Of course, they could negotiate with Texas on that point....

Still, there's what's technically possible and what works politically. People accept (for the most part) trump as having been legitimately elected. People won't accept McCain, ryan, or romney.

I don't see the house messing with what works politically.

I was wrong. I didn't remember that provision. I stand corrected.

The Republicans have both houses and the oval office. They can railroad through any sort of legislation they want. In the near term the only possibly check they have on unfettered power is the midterm elections. Is they threw out the 'will of the people' or at least the will of the people who voted Trump they would be annihilated between primary challenges, people voting third party, and poor overall turnout.

So why would they do anything other than rubber stamp Trump into office.

not necessarily what they WOULD do. I agree they would go with trump.

I removed the offending part of the title, Skittles.

.....really? You are someone who truly gets it......OUTSTANDING!