Showing posts sorted by date for query electoral college. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query electoral college. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Sunday, September 29, 2019

Fox News Political Hack Donna Brazile Runs Poll Asking If Trump Is A “Legitimate President”…It Backfires In A BIG Way

100%FedUp  "She’s the former Chairwoman of the DNC and is also a cheater who gave Hillary Clinton questions prior to a debate in 2016. She tries to come off as neutral but she’s a snake in the grass.
"Brazile is one of the latest people Fox News has hired to become more leftist in their reporting. Does Fox News go along with the poll that Brazile tweeted out?
"Does Fox News political hack Donna Brazil not know about the Electoral College?
"President Trump won the 2016 election fair and square!"
"Brazile probably wasn’t expecting the replies to her poll and the numbers that were way higher for President Trump."


I loved this reply to Brazile:


Wednesday, September 18, 2019

How Small States Lose When They Abandon the Electoral College

Intellectual Takeout
"The question then is this: Will there ever be a coalition of 270 so that America loses the electoral college? And what happens to the American republic if that does come to pass?"

Change our Constitution and upend our electoral process for this woman?
"Calls for the abolition of the Electoral College have persisted in the three years since President Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election without winning the popular vote.

"But abolishing the Electoral College in the normal way – via amending the Constitution – is a bit more arduous than proponents like. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called amending the Constitution to change or eliminate the Electoral College “more theoretical than real” according to the Chicago Sun-Times.
“ 'It’s largely a dream because the Constitution is… hard to amend,” Ginsburg said. “I know that from the experience.”
"Since it is hard to amend the Constitution, some states are trying to circumvent the process by pushing for popular vote presidential elections.
"Since Trump’s election, five states have joined the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC.) States who participate in this pledge agree to award all of their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, but only if the participating states account for an absolute majority of electoral votes.
"The shocking thing is not the fact that this compact exists – it was founded in 2006 – but that so many small states have joined. The Electoral College is meant to ensure that states with small populations are able to have some say in who is president and what the president focuses on. The issues affecting these states stay in play precisely because candidates do need to worry about how these smaller states vote. It is curious then to see small states disregard this safeguard placed in the Constitution.
"One might expect larger states like California and New York to work toward a national popular vote, for doing so would allow presidential candidates to focus on them more. It only takes 11 heavily populated states to reach the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidency after all." . . .

Wednesday, September 11, 2019

We Don't Trust You

"We can’t entrust our liberties to your dirty hands." 

Entire article Ann Coulter  "Like all Americans, I’ve been deeply moved and horrified by the recent spate of mass shootings. Surely, I thought, there must be some commonsense gun regulations that could put an end to the carnage — red-flag laws, longer waiting periods, age limits, something!
"Leaving aside the usual suspects, who are rushing to the microphones to demand the immediate confiscation of all guns, liberals are appealing to us to come together in good faith and formulate a plan to keep guns out of the hands of these monsters, using fair process and common sense. 

"The only problem is that no one on their side believes in good faith, fair process or common sense. Here’s the reality: We don’t trust the other side, nor should we. 

"Americans used to be able to rely on two bulwarks to protect us from stupidity: 

"1) Legal process — The genius of our founders was to strictly limit the power of capricious, and often armed, government officials and to create a government of laws that made major changes difficult, but not impossible. 

"You want a new amendment to the Constitution? Get 38 states to ratify it, two-thirds of the Senate to vote for it, the president to sign it. There — you’ve changed the constitution. You oppose a law? Run for office, put a proposition on the ballot, donate to a campaign, persuade your fellow citizens — or move to a different state. 

"2) Common sense — We also used to be able to assume that a basic reasonableness undergirded our society, flowing across generational lines, political divides, racial differences and policy disputes. Until the 1970s, for example, federal courts mostly enforced actual legal and constitutional rights on the books. The other branches of government tended to perform their roles in good faith — or at least not in obvious bad faith. 

"Whether you were a Taft Republican or a JFK Democrat, you believed that we had a border, that people here illegally would be processed according to law, that there were two sexes, that free speech was a hallmark of our nation, and that a kid could dress up as a cowboy or Indian for Halloween without being branded a “racist.”
"Naturally, therefore, my first instinct was to assume that our shared respect for process and decency remained. But I now realize that’s wrong." . . .

"In 1994, nearly 60% of Californians voted to deny government services to illegal aliens. Proposition 187 was approved 59% to 41%, with the votes of 56% of African Americans, 57% of Asians — and even a third of Hispanics. It won in every county of California except San Francisco. In heavily Latino Los Angeles County, Proposition 187 passed by a 12-point margin. 

"Liberals said: No problem, we’ll take the case to a left-wing, Carter-appointed federal judge who will overturn the will of the voters! District Court Judge Mariana Pfaelzer held that the perfectly constitutional law was “unconstitutional” and, today, California taxpayers are forced to spend billions of dollars on food, housing, education, health care and prison cells for illegal immigrants. 

"In 2008, Californians voted against gay marriage. Again, this was California — not South Carolina — and voters decided, 52% to 48%, that “marriage” is not between a mailbox and a chimpanzee, a rhododendron and refrigerator, but only between a man and woman. 

"Liberals said to themselves: No problem. We’ll just find a gay district court judge to overturn the vote. This will be a piece of cake. 

"They also said, Not only are we going to reverse the vote, but we will name and shame the people on the other side (except African Americans, who voted overwhelmingly for Proposition 8, much to the embarrassment of progressives). People found to have donated to the marriage initiative would be driven out of their jobs, fired from high-tech firms they founded, and chased from Mexican restaurants. 

"Apparently, everyone born in the last 5,000 years, right up until June 26, 2015, was a hateful bigot. 

"Since the 1980s, nearly every time Americans have been allowed to vote on illegal immigration, they’ve opposed it — denying government services to illegal aliens, denying bail to illegal aliens, imposing English language requirements, allowing police to request documentation from suspected illegal aliens and on and on and on. 

"All of these democratically achieved results were met with rage, insults, prejudice — and often a court overturning the vote. 

"This culminated in 2016, when Americans decided to make an utterly preposterous candidate not a mayor or congressman, not even a governor, but president of the United States based on his promise to deport illegal aliens and build a wall. 

"We know how that turned out. (Don’t weep for Brexit voters. Britons have only been waiting three years to get what they voted for. We’ve been waiting decades.) 

"It’s not the underlying issue in any of these examples that’s the problem — it’s the flouting of the democratic process. I’m not saying: We trusted you and got a bad result. I am saying: We trusted you, but you abandoned the Constitution and the law to get the result that you could not win honestly. 

"At least we still have our common sense! Surely, we can count on the next generation to believe in free speech down to the marrow of their bones. They clearly understand that college campuses, whatever else they are, must always be bastions of open inquiry and far-reaching debate. They obviously recognize the wisdom and majesty of the Constitution’s Electoral College. 

"Nope! None of that is true. 

"Actress Debra Messing is collecting names of Trump supporters for a new Hollywood blacklist. Armed and masked left-wing brown-shirts patrol the streets of Portland, Oregon, beating up suspected Trump supporters. I tweet, “It’s a nice day,” and 2,000 people respond that they hope I will die. 

"We’re dealing with people who are not honest brokers. We can no longer have any expectation of good faith, sound process or common sense. 

"In this environment, it’s preposterous to believe that we can start putting asterisks on the Second Amendment and hope that it will survive. 

"We can’t entrust our liberties to your dirty hands." 

Tuesday, September 10, 2019

The Breathtaking Arrogance Of Pete Buttigieg

"If, as some say, Pete Buttigieg is the face of the future Democratic Party, then that Party will be even more insufferable and intolerant than the current incarnation"
Pat Cross
Paul Mirengoff  "My conservative cousin formerly from New York (now from California) has closely followed presidential politics since the days of Dwight Eisenhower. He finds in Pete Buttigieg an arrogance he hasn’t come across before, not even from Barack Obama.


Pete Buttigieg may well be the most arrogant candidate ever to run for a major party’s nomination in American History. Start with his record as South Bend, Indiana Mayor.
Buttigieg admits to being a failure at managing this small city’s police department. In Mayor Pete’s view the lessons learned from this big fiasco make him the best choice for Commander-In-Chief. What arrogance!
Silly me, back in the day when I interviewed candidates for promotions I would look for people who performed well at previous jobs. Instead I should have learned from the Buttigieg school of management that failure is often a better recommendation for promotion than success.
What nonsense! What arrogance!
Then there’s his sweeping proposal to change the very nature of our Republic. Abolish the Electoral College. Pack the Supreme Court. . .End the Senate filibuster. . . .
Full article

Wednesday, September 4, 2019

We Don't Trust You

Ann Coulter
It's not the underlying issue in any of these examples that's the problem -- it's the flouting of the democratic process. I'm not saying: We trusted you and got a bad result. I am saying: We trusted you, but you abandoned the Constitution and the law to get the result that you could not win honestly.

     "Like all Americans, I've been deeply moved and horrified by the recent spate of mass shootings. Surely, I thought, there must be some commonsense gun regulations that could put an end to the carnage -- red-flag laws, longer waiting periods, age limits, something!
     "Leaving aside the usual suspects, who are rushing to the microphones to demand the immediate confiscation of all guns, liberals are appealing to us to come together in good faith and formulate a plan to keep guns out of the hands of these monsters, using fair process and common sense.
     "The only problem is that no one on their side believes in good faith, fair process or common sense. Here's the reality: We don't trust the other side, nor should we.
Americans used to be able to rely on two bulwarks to protect us from stupidity:
1) Legal process -- The genius of our founders was to strictly limit the power of capricious, and often armed, government officials and to create a government of laws that made major changes difficult, but not impossible." . . .2) Common sense -- We also used to be able to assume that a basic reasonableness undergirded our society, flowing across generational lines, political divides, racial differences and policy disputes. Until the 1970s, for example, federal courts mostly enforced actual legal and constitutional rights on the books. The other branches of government tended to perform their roles in good faith -- or at least not in obvious bad faith.
     "Whether you were a Taft Republican or a JFK Democrat, you believed that we had a border, that people here illegally would be processed according to law, that there were two sexes, that free speech was a hallmark of our nation, and that a kid could dress up as a cowboy or Indian for Halloween without being branded a "racist."
. . . 
. . . "Surely, we can count on the next generation to believe in free speech down to the marrow of their bones. They clearly understand that college campuses, whatever else they are, must always be bastions of open inquiry and far-reaching debate. They obviously recognize the wisdom and majesty of the Constitution's Electoral College.
Nope! None of that is true.
"Actress Debra Messing is collecting names of Trump supporters for a new Hollywood blacklist. Armed and masked left-wing brown-shirts patrol the streets of Portland, Oregon, beating up suspected Trump supporters. I tweet, "It's a nice day," and 2,000 people respond that they hope I will die." . . .

Friday, August 9, 2019

Will 2020 Be a Repeat of 2004 for Democrats?

Victor Davis Hanson

Fifteen years ago, the Democrats backed off from the hard left, taking the safe route in nominating a boring and sedate party man — and came close to winning against a controversial incumbent president.


"Democrats by 2004 had become obsessed with defeating incumbent President George W. Bush.
"Four years earlier, in the 2000 election, Bush had won the Electoral College but lost the popular vote. Democrats were still furious that Bush supposedly had been “selected” by the Supreme Court over the contested vote tally in Florida rather than “elected” by the majority of voters.
"By late 2003, Bush’s popularity had dipped because of the unpopular Iraq War, which a majority in both houses of Congress approved but had since disowned.
"Bush was attacked nonstop as a Nazi, fascist, and war criminal. “Bush lied, people died” was the new left-wing mantra.
"Talk of Bush’s impeachment was in the air. Democrats remembered that his father, George H. W. Bush, had lost his reelection bid in 1992. They hoped the same fate awaited his son.
"Neither presidential candidate Al Gore nor vice presidential candidate Joe Lieberman from the defeated 2000 ticket wanted to run again in 2004. Senator John Edwards was a charismatic newcomer candidate, but he was increasingly proving to be a smarmy empty suit." . . .

Tuesday, July 23, 2019

Shame on Robert Mueller—Again


BEFORE & AFTER THE MUELLER REPORT
Both cartoons by Nitwit Graphics
Conrad Black  . . . "Mueller looked the part: tall, slender, slab-faced, jut-jawed, and unsmiling, all business, and no soft bonhomous weakness for anything but a thorough plumbing of the depths of Trump’s unutterable hucksterism, skullduggery, and larceny. The commentariat, though well gone in the saddle after their long incumbency as the country’s political sages, dressed for the part again and took to the airwaves with the smug confidence of veterans and the zest of those addicted to tearing down administrations they found distasteful.
. . . 
Schiff
"The pitiful attempt by Mueller to leave Trump a live grenade with the pin pulled was made even more absurd by his attempt to run away and hide. He spoke to the press inarticulately from a printed text for less than 10 minutes, took no questions, and said he would have nothing more to say. Finally, the two egregious Democratic committee chairman who still claim to have evidence of impeachable offenses by the president but can’t cite any, Representatives Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)*, both seriously ill-favored men, called Mueller as a witness, and designed a timetable for his appearance clearly intended to prevent the Republican members from really getting at Mueller.
"If his stumbling press statement was indicative of his forensic talents, Mueller will have a real sleigh-ride with a gang of Democrats angry because he couldn’t find anything on the president and Republicans who rightly consider his entire performance an unprofessional and morally corrupt operation." . . .
*Both from NewYork and California: the two states that will elect the first President after Democrats do away with the Electoral College. TD

Saturday, July 13, 2019

‘Helping People Avoid Justice’: Border Patrol Reacts To Clinton’s Advice To Illegal Aliens

She was nearly our President but we were saved by the Electoral College.

All GIF images added by TD
Political Insider  "National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd blasted Hillary Clinton for publicly coaching illegal immigrants how to avoid apprehension from Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

“ 'I’m amazed that somebody that somebody that ran for president of the United States — that was willing to promise to uphold the laws of the United States, the Constitution of the United States — is now actively helping people avoid justice,” Judd, who leads the Border Patrol’s union of nearly 20,000 members, said Friday on Fox News.
"Judd’s comments follow a tweet Clinton sent Thursday. The former first lady and Democratic presidential candidate published an image that contained a list, written in Spanish, of recommendations for illegal aliens to follow in order to avoid apprehension and deportation from ICE agents.
"The instructions advised illegal aliens “not to open the door” for agents and to report their badge number, type of vehicle they are driving, and where they were seen.
"Clinton’s tweet was in response to President Donald Trump’s planned immigration raids. ICE agents are expected to target roughly 2,000 illegal immigrants across 10 U.S. states Sunday, the first day of an ongoing operation by the agency to apprehend and deport undocumented immigrants. The deportations target aliens who have ignored court orders to leave the country.
“ 'These people have already been ordered deported. They’ve already exhausted all their appeals processes through the court system. They’re not supposed to be here. They’re illegally here, and she’s helping them to continue to break the law,” Judd said Friday. “I don’t understand how the Left continues to move further and further left to what the American public wants.”
"The union leader explained the only people being targeted are those who entered the country illegally, exhausted their due process after being found ineligible to claim immigration judge ordering them to leave.
asylum or amnesty, and continue to live in the U.S. despite an
“ 'This is not a raid where we’re going out into the streets and grabbing anybody that we can. We’re specifically targeting those individuals that have defied an order of deportation by a judge here in the United States,” Judd said, adding that not going after those who defy court orders sends a message to foreign nationals that it’s OK to disobey the country’s immigration laws." 

Friday, June 7, 2019

Illegal Alien Invasion Part Of Left’s Plan To Control Electoral College

OAN "Following the loss of the 2016 election, Democrats are scrambling to make sure they control the electoral college the next time round. Illegal aliens could be a big part of their plan.
"One America’s Pearson Sharp explains."

Thursday, June 6, 2019

The Electoral College: America's newest "brain trust" wants to abolish it

How can people think that Hillary Clinton was ever, ever worth doing this damage to our nation and our Constitution? This has all been generated because of her bitterness, you know?
Do we want our nation's President chosen by the same people who elected Gavin Newsom and NY Mayor Bill de Blasio?  TD

Wreck the Electoral College, Destroy the Country



"While you were sleeping, the Democrats (abetted by some deviant Republicans) have been working on a plan that would destroy the diversity of the American political system and bring the nation to the brink of civil war. The plan is called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, and tens of millions of dollars have already been spent over several decades trying to implement it. Fourteen blue states and the District of Columbia have already joined the Compact, which means they are 70% on the way to making their proposal the law of the land." . . .
. . . "The Democrats’ plan is designed to eliminate the influence of the Electoral College in choosing the nation’s president, no doubt because while Hillary won the popular vote she failed win necessary votes in the Electoral College. Eliminating the influence of the Electoral College would end the diversity now embodied in the federal system with its division of powers between Washington and the fifty states. The fact that a party which presents itself as a defender of diversity should be leading the charge to eliminate the nation’s most powerful source of diversity should be all that is required to understand the threat their agenda poses to what has been the nation’s constitutional way of life for 232 years." . . .

What appears to deprive the populace of its power to decide a president is the very mechanism that preserves its power. The Electoral College works that way because the United States isn’t a pure democracy.  . . . "The purpose of the Electoral College is to balance voting power across states so no one region of the country can gain too much control. If a president is elected by a simple majority of votes, a candidate who is wildly popular in one region (e.g., Ted Cruz in Texas, Mitt Romney in Utah) can ignore smaller regions and campaign only where large majorities are possible. Or a candidate who kills in California and New York can write off “flyover country” completely.
"If, however, the Electoral College elects a president, a candidate who is wildly popular in one region must also prevail in a number of sub-elections to win. The Electoral College ensures a better result for the country as a whole than the democratic power play wherein 51 percent of us matter and 49 percent of us don’t." . . .

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

Victor Davis Hanson: “It was a coup attempt to destroy the presidency…”

Hanson on Trump, Mueller, Democrats, the media, and the deep state

Illustration added by TD; http://www.terrellaftermath.com/
Legal Insurrection  "Last week as the Mueller Report was about to drop, Victor Davis Hanson of the Hoover Institution and the National Review Institute was interviewed by The Epoch Times as part of their American Thought Leaders series. He offered his thoughts on the Mueller investigation, the Trump presidency, and much more.
"Hanson takes us back to the earliest whispers of Russia and walks us through the maddening series of attempts to prevent Trump from becoming president, even after he won the election. You may have forgotten some of the crazier details, such as the effort to get copies of the Steele dossier to members of the Electoral College.
"Hanson has forgotten nothing, and his analysis cuts like a knife despite his cool demeanor.
Hanson begins by summarizing how things got started.
"The Epoch Times provides a transcript:
I think we’re gonna get the Mueller report today or tomorrow. But if you were to summarize the Mueller investigation, there’s a lot of ways to look at it, but I think the best is that there were people within the United States government–the director of the FBI, James Comey; the director of the CIA, John Brennan; the director of National Intelligence, James Clapper; the deputy director; and an array of others; and then NSC and the DOJ who felt A: that Hillary Clinton was going to win. They had followed the analytics and the polls–90 percent surety.
But they felt as an insurance policy that Donald Trump for a variety of reasons–culturally, politically, socially–was unacceptable as president. And the very thought that he could be president was so foreign and disruptive that they felt they had a higher duty, a higher loyalty to stop that. So what did they do? They started to surveil his campaign, and they put informants we know into his campaign.
"Hanson suggests that when Trump won, actors in this conspiracy decided their only way out was to go deeper:
Then when Trump did the unthinkable, he won both in anger at that fact but also as a preemptive defense of their behavior. You see, because you’ve got to
remember the dialectic would have been “President Clinton, look at all I did for you. I should be rewarded. I went beyond the call of duty.” And now the mentality went “My gosh, I’ve got legal exposure. So we’ve got to press further.”
So then it was a methodology of getting more FISA requests and disrupting the transition. And then finally the act that resulted in the Mueller commission, and then to dethrone. And then finally the larger context of this was when he was elected there was an effort to sue three states for the voting machines and nullify the election. There was a sustained effort to give the Steele dossier to the electors and to persuade the electors not to vote according to their constitutional mandates.
"He eventually calls this what it was. An attempted coup:" . . .

Saturday, April 20, 2019

The Constitution Was Never Pro-Slavery

National Review
It was deliberately written to avoid establishing a legal precedent for ownership of human beings

. . . "What often comes next is a demand to rid the Constitution of the vestigial props for slavery that have somehow survived into our times, usually beginning with the Electoral College. Or maybe, as with University of Texas law professor Sanford Levinson, it leads to a call for junking the whole “We the People” business and starting over with a new constitutional convention.
"The accusing finger that links slavery and the Constitution would have surprised no one more than the delegates to the Constitutional Convention. At the outbreak of the Revolution, every one of the newly independent states had legalized slavery. (The numbers varied widely from place to place: Georgia had 18,000 slaves, Pennsylvania 6,000, Virginia 200,000, Massachusetts 5,200, and New York 17,000.)
"But opinion about the moral legitimacy of slavery was shifting. Benjamin Franklin bought and sold slaves in colonial Philadelphia, but by 1772 he had begun denouncing slavery as “a constant butchery of the human species' ”  . . .

Friday, April 12, 2019

Ken Starr says Hillary Clinton DID trigger Vince Foster's suicide when she humiliated him in front of White House staff and admits he omitted the finding in FBI report because he didn't want to 'inflict further pain' on her

UK Daily Mail
  • Hillary attacked and humiliated Foster in front of other White House aides a week before he took his own life on July 20, 1993 
  • 'Hillary put him down really, really bad in a pretty good-size meeting. She told him he would always be a little hick town lawyer who was obviously not ready for the big time,' former FBI agent Coy Copeland told Kessler
  • 'Foster was profoundly depressed, but Hillary lambasting him was the final straw because she embarrassed him,' former FBI supervisory agent Jim Clemente said



. . . "Ken Starr deliberately left out of his final report the FBI’s finding that Hillary Clinton 'triggered' the suicide of President Clinton's Deputy White House Counsel to spare her feelings, DailyMail.com can reveal. 
"FBI agents investigating the death of Vince Foster learned he was set off after Hillary attacked and humiliated him in front of other White House aides a week before he took his own life on July 20, 1993. 
"But for what were then unexplained reasons, Starr elected to conceal the FBI's finding that Hillary's tirade triggered Foster's suicide when he wrote his final report on the matter.
"At a reception for authors participating in the 2019 Annapolis Book Festival last weekend, I asked Starr why he omitted the damaging FBI finding.
"At first, he beat around the bush, citing well-established facts indicating that Foster was already depressed before Hillary lashed into him at the White House meeting.
"But when pressed, Starr admitted he 'did not want to inflict further pain' on Hillary by revealing that her humiliation of Foster a week before he took his own life pushed him over the edge." . . .
We appreciate your courage, Mr. Starr, because we can picture what will be coming at you from Democrats now.

Hillary Clinton Bullied Vince Foster Before Suicide, Said Ex-Clinton Friend in Final Interview  "Hillary Clinton relentlessly browbeat her clinically depressed former law partner Vince Foster shortly before he committed suicide in 1993, according to notes from a final jailhouse interview with a former close business partner of the Clintons.
"Jim McDougal, a long-time member of the Clintons’ Arkansas inner circle and a central figure in the Whitewater scandal, passed away from a heart attack in prison in 1998. But he said in a final interview before his death that Hillary Clinton had a "hard, difficult personality" and was "riding [Vince Foster] every minute" about Whitewater before Foster took his own life.
"McDougal also described his ex-friend Bill as a "master con artist" who married Hillary after a "cold-blooded search" to find himself a politically beneficial wife. Bill, according to McDougal, also privately wanted to prevent Hillary from succeeding in her own political career." 
  • "In the interviews with Wilkie, McDougal claimed Bill embarked on a "cold-blooded search" in the 1970s to find a wife who could help him politically—and decided on Hillary.
  • "The future 42nd president was a "master con artist" who "prepped for this with girls and school teachers," he added.
  • "McDougal also described Hillary as "generally a pain in the ass" and "very difficult for everyone, including Bill." He said Bill seemed to privately enjoy the Whitewater scandal because it was damaging to Hillary’s future political career."
Still want to change the Constitution, eliminate the Electoral College, and let 16-year-olds vote because of this woman?


Late update: 

Thursday, April 11, 2019

Don’t demonize the electoral college — or the framers — as racist

The electoral college is a device that balances nationalism with states’ rights and leavens democracy’s passions with deliberation and reason.
LA Times




. . . "If the American people wanted a direct election for president, they could force their states to divide their electors in proportion to the Republican and Democrat tallies, or even assign their electors to align their votes with the nationwide result. The more states that shifted from winner-takes-all, the more the electoral count would match the national popular vote. But instead, the indirect system, as the republic’s framers conceived it, has endured.
"The framers originally deliberated between selecting the president in Congress or by nationwide vote. As it turned out, the delegates to the 1787 Philadelphia Convention overwhelmingly opposed popular national elections because of the size of the new nation and its relatively poor communications. They feared two types of candidates would come too easily to the fore: “local sons” from the voters’ own state, or “pretended patriots” and “active & designing men” — demagogues who would rule through a tyranny of the majority (a la Nicolas Maduro, in Venezuela). The framers also rejected having Congress select the chief executive, as European parliamentary systems do today, because it would make the latter too dependent upon the former.
"The electoral college was proposed to be representative but also mitigate popular passions, and to prevent giving Congress too strong a hand in presidential selection. In most cases, the winning candidate has had to assemble a geographically broad, and usually ideologically moderate coalition throughout the country.
"Today’s “woke” critique, however, focuses on racism. According to some scholars and commentators, the electoral college purposefully protected slavery by allocating electors based on the number of senators (thereby giving states more voice) and representatives (the Constitution infamously allowed slaves, who could not vote, to count as three-fifths of a person, thus inflating the voting power of slave states). During the Philadelphia Convention, James Madison acknowledged that the electoral college provided a necessary compromise between free states and slave-holding states, where the popular vote was diminished because slaves couldn’t vote. But that was the only time a framer actually connected slavery and the electoral college.
"The racism critique ignores the nuances of history. When one looks closer, as Princeton historian Sean Wilentz has pointed out in disavowing his own earlier thinking, the racism charge related to the electoral college “begins to unravel.' ” . . .

Being the LA Times, one can hope ignorant leftist celebrities might possibly be enlightened. TD

Tuesday, April 9, 2019

All the Progressive Plotters

No reporter seems to care that Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to work with other foreign nationals to sabotage, first, her opponent’s campaign, then his transition and his presidency, along with the wink and nod help from key Obama officials at the Department of Justice, State Department, National Security Council, FBI and CIA.

Victor Davis Hanson  "Right after the 2016 election, Green Party candidate Jill Stein—cheered on by Hillary Clinton dead-enders—sued in three states to recount votes and thereby overturn Donald Trump’s victory in the Electoral College. Before the quixotic effort imploded, Stein was praised as an iconic progressive social justice warrior who might stop the hated Trump from even entering the White House.


"When that did not work, B-list Hollywood celebrities mobilized, with television and radio commercials, to shame electors in Trump-won states into not voting for the president-elect during the official Electoral College balloting in December 2016. Their idea was that select morally superior electors should reject their constitutional directives and throw the election into the House of Representatives where even more morally superior NeverTrump Republicans might join with even much more morally superior Democrats to find the perfect morally superior NeverTrump alternative.
"When that did not work, more than 60 Democratic House members voted to bring up Trump’s impeachment for vote. Trump had only been in office a few weeks. Then San Francisco billionaire Tom Steyer toured the country and lavished millions on advertisements demanding Trump’s removal by impeachment—and was sorely disappointed when he discovered that billion-dollar-fueled virtue-signaling proved utterly bankrupt virtue-signaling.
"When that did not work, celebrities and politicians hit social media and the airwaves to so demonize Trump that culturally it would become taboo even to voice prior support for the elected president. Their chief tool was a strange new sort of presidential assassination chic, as Madonna, David Crosby, Robert de Niro, Johnny Depp, Snoop Dogg, Peter Fonda, Kathy Griffin, and a host of others linguistically vied with one another in finding the most appropriately violent end of Trump—blowing him up, burning him up, beating him up, shooting him up, caging him up, or decapitating him. Apparently, the aim—aside from careerist chest-thumping among the entertainment elite—was to lower the bar of Trump disparagement and insidiously delegitimize his presidency." . . .
"When that did not work . . ." "When that did not work . . ." "When that did not work . . ."....And so on and on...



Saturday, April 6, 2019

Four Question for Those Who Oppose the Electoral College; What the Electoral College Saves Us From


R. E. Bowse  "Have you heard?  The Electoral College is bad.  Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and others support its abolition.  On March 28, Delaware became the thirteenth state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) in which members agree to award their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote.  The compact goes into effect only when the combined number of electoral votes of member states reaches 270, assuring their candidate victory. Legislation affixing New Mexico to the NPVIC sits on the desk of Governor Michelle Grisham (D). She's expected to sign it, giving the coalition 189 votes."
"The debate surrounding this issue is another example of proponents avoiding the salient points.  I pose the following four questions to those would undo the electoral college system, with the goal of promoting clarity and focusing on the nub of the matter."
  1. If you support the direct democracy of a popular vote system, do you also reject republicanism as our form of government? . . .
  2. If you reject the notion of disproportional representation, do you reject the institution of the U.S. Senate? . . .
  3. Parity between the states was key to ratification.  Does parity not matter anymore? . . .
  4. Is a popular vote system a cure for the disease? . . .
What the Electoral College Saves Us From"The winner of a national office should have nationwide support" . . .
. . . As with all such enthusiasms — expanding the Supreme Court, abolishing the filibuster and the Senate itself, lowering the voting age to 16, letting convicted felons and illegal aliens vote, adding D.C. and Puerto Rico as states, automatic voter registration, abolishing voter ID, etc. — the scarcely concealed argument is that changing the rules will help Democrats and progressives win more.
. . . "Picture a two-candidate election with 2016’s turnout. The Republican wins 54 percent of the vote in 48 states, losing only California, New York, and D.C. That’s a landslide victory, right? But then imagine that the Republican nominee who managed this feat was so unpopular in California, New York, and D.C. that he or she loses all three by a 75 percent–to–25 percent margin. That 451–87 landslide in the Electoral College, built on eight-point wins in 48 states, would also be a popular-vote defeat, with 50.7 percent of the vote for the Democrat to 49.3 percent for the Republican. Out of a total of about 137 million votes, that’s a popular-vote margin of victory of 1.95 million votes for a candidate who was decisively rejected in 48 of the 50 states." . . .

Friday, April 5, 2019

Democrats in 2020: Unelectable Nonentities

Conrad Black

Here are a few of Black's salient points:
. . . "The Gadarene stampede to (and over) the edge of the abyss of all who advocate open borders, 70 percent income taxes, the green terror, socialized medicine, legalized infanticide, reparations to native and African-Americans, packing the Supreme Court, and vacation of the Electoral College, has finally elicited, in a Churchillian expression, a tiny mouse of dissent." . . .
. . . "Nixon told me that neither of them said a word as [McGovern's] speech was delivered in the Mr. Peepers monotone of the nominee, and that when he ended, the president turned to his wife and uttered this reflection: “All our time in politics, we have fought the Democrats of Roosevelt, Truman, Stevenson, Jack, Lyndon, and Hubert; all substantial and formidable men. How did that great party fall into the hands of such jerks?” (The real last word is not suitable to repeat in a family magazine.) . . .
. . . "At least Beto O’Rourke, halfwit though he is, gave it a great try for the U.S. Senate from Texas. Such is the poverty of these Democratic candidates, Mayor Pete is starting to rack up some points as an antidote to the geriatric Sanders-Biden vote, which polls show, pulls about 55 per cent of Democrats." . . .
. . . "The country still seems to like to change parties in the White House every eight years, but the Democrats will have to do better than this farrago of nonsense and nonentities." . . .

Voters believe Hillary colluded

Don Surber  "After two years of the media scream Russian Collusion against President Donald John Trump, the public has its verdict in: Hillary did it.
" 'A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 47% of Likely U.S. Voters think Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign is more likely than President Trump’s to have illegally colluded with foreign operatives," Rasmussen reported.
"All that huffing and puffing -- billions of dollars in free media for Hillary and her henchmen on television -- and she still lost.
"The poll showed only 45% still believe in the media's libelous narrative.
You can fool some of the people all the time (45% it turns out) and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all ofthe time.
"Victor Rantala wrote, "The worm is turning in spite of a non-stop, years-long onslaught of lies from the never-Trump media about it all. The tipping point is now -- with the majority finally discerning the truth and slowly more and more rejecting the coordinated MSM disinformation campaign."
"Democracy dies in darkness.
"The media withers in the sunlight of the truth.
"The American political media's influence today is as dead as Hillary's presidential ambitions.
"Only 20 of the nation's 1,300 or so newspapers endorsed Donald Trump.
"He carried the most states any president did in 20 years. He had more Electoral College votes than any Republican in 28 years.
"The power of the press is as strong as a 2-year-old, which is also where its temperament is."