Republicans are considering using the Electoral College to effectively remove Donald Trump as Republican nominee. | AP Photo Will the Electoral College turn on Trump?

A Republican member of the Electoral College, citing Donald Trump's newly revealed lewd comments about women, said Saturday that party leaders should turn to their electors to sideline Trump if the GOP presidential nominee doesn't step down himself.

"I now pray for the good of the country that either Trump steps down as the GOP nominee or that the Republican Party finds a way to utilize the Electors who will be given the opportunity to vote in the Electoral College to still elect a Republican and conservative administration," said Virginia's Erich Reimer, who would be one of 11 Virginia electors tasked with backing Trump, should he win the swing state.


"I think the recent revelations do cause his already shameful history of treating women to be viewed in a new and even worse light than it already was," Reimer continued. "If the Electoral College were free to be a more deliberative body, his troubling character would be a prime and disqualifying concern in considering who to vote for."

While an election shakeup coming from Electoral College is a long-shot, it’s also an acknowledgment of the limited options left for Republicans worried about Trump’s effect on the party and the country. And it's alarming for Republican leaders hoping to salvage Trump's candidacy.

When voters cast ballots on Election Day, they're actually choosing partisan slates of electors tasked with casting the only formal votes for president in December. Those electors typically ratify the will of their states' voters, but there's no blueprint for what happens if Republican electors decide Trump is unfit for the presidency.

Though 31 states have laws that purport to force electors to support the will of the voters, Reimer noted that these laws have never been tested in court, and in fact a Virginia judge ruled in July that a similar law binding national convention delegates was unconstitutionally restrictive. Reimer also flagged a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed by a prominent conservative lawyer suggesting that all electors should consider themselves unbound.

"I hope that the RNC, party leaders, and others explore the full extent of options that are available," he said. "Once all the possible paths are known, then I feel like I can properly weigh the possibilities between now and December, if the GOP ticket does win Virginia."

John Whitbeck, chairman of the Virginia Republican Party, said that “Virginia law provides electors selected by the state convention of any political party are required to vote of the nominees of the national convention.”

Reimer isn't alone in his reservations about Trump. Several Republican electors told POLITICO in August that they had deep concerns about his candidacy. Though at the time they pledged to back him with their electoral vote, some said they wouldn't be supporting him with their personal vote on Election Day.

South Dakota Gov. Dennis Daugaard, one of the high profile Republicans to reject Trump on Saturday, is also one of the state's three presidential electors.

A Georgia elector, Baoky Vu, resigned in August when he acknowledged to a local reporter that he might oppose Trump in the Electoral College. And a Texas elector, Chris Suprun, initially suggested he might too reject Trump in the Electoral College walked back those comments.

Trump appears unlikely to win Virginia, given recent polling and the state's Democratic lean in recent years. But Reimer's sentiment may be the beginning of a cascade of concern for Republicans, as elected leaders have begun abandoning Trump. Some of them are electors as well.

"Enough is enough. Donald Trump should withdraw in favor of Governor Mike Pence. This election is too important," Daugaard tweeted Friday.

A Daugaard spokesman was not immediately available to indicate whether Daugaard's position extended to his electoral vote as well. South Dakota is one of 19 states that does not have a law binding electors to the results of the state's popular vote.

So-called "faithless electors" -- those who vote against the popular will of their state -- have been rare in American history, and they've never changed the outcome of an election. FairVote.org tallies 157, with the bulk coming before 1900. The most recent was in 2004, when a Minnesota elector cast a ballot for vice presidential candidate John Edwards instead of Democratic nominee John Kerry.

In 2000, when the election was narrowly fought between Al Gore and George W. Bush, Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio — now a prominent Donald Trump supporter — reportedly mused about backing Gore, despite his state's support for George W. Bush.