Electoral College 1

What it is about those in charge of the Democrat Party and a lack of possessing even a most rudimentary understanding of our Constitution?  I mean do they really not understand what it says, or is there something a bit more sinister underway here?  For instance, do they truly possess no understanding of it, or are they simply betting on the fact that those who tend to vote for Democrats don’t understand it or even know what it is.  Personally, I’m thinking that those in charge of the party have a pretty good grasp on what it is that our Constitution says, and they’re pretty confident that the vast majority of those who proudly vote for Democrats haven’t got a clue.  And that’s how those in charge prefer it.

Which brings me to another example of where we have a high ranking member in the Democrat Party attempting to take advantage of that significant ignorance regarding our Constitution.  Now I’m sure most of us are aware that genuine American History is very rarely taught in our public schools today.  And dare I say that there is a specific reason for this.  Because if the true history of our nation was actually taught then it would be common knowledge that the Electoral College has a purpose and was established by our Founding Fathers, in the Constitution, as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens.

Frankly, I can’t remember another time in my sixty five years of being on this planet where I’ve ever seen such a dedicated and concerted effort by those in the Democrat Party to convince their followers that the Electoral College is nothing more than something dreamt to somehow rig the system against them.  The most recent attempt came from none other than Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez who falsely claimed, yet again, that the Electoral College is not “a creation of the Constitution.”  During a lecture at Indiana University Law School, Perez said the Electoral College “doesn’t have to be there,” asserting that the national popular vote should be the principal standard.

And it was in lying through his teeth that Perez said, “The Electoral College is not a creation of the Constitution. It doesn’t have to be there.”  And he went on to say, “There’s a national popular vote compact in which a number of states have passed a bill that says we will allocate our vote, our electoral votes, to the person who wins the national popular vote once other states totaling 270 electoral votes do the same.”  You know, it’s the fact that he knows he’s lying is what makes his actions all the more disgusting and, dare I say, even more than just a little sinister.  But this is the type of behavior that we have now come to expect from those in charge of the Democrat Party and others one the left.

Perez’s claim that the U.S. Constitution is not a part of the Electoral College is, however, completely false and he knows it.  Because he knows as well as the rest of us that Article II clearly outlines the electoral process, dictating that states must appoint electors who meet and vote for the president.  Article II very clearly states, “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”  Pretty cut and dry.

Perez has made statements in the past implying that that President Donald Trump actually “didn’t win” the 2016 presidential election because Hiterly won the popular vote.  That’s just one of the many reasons that I have such a difficult time taking anyone in the Democrat Party seriously.  Because they’re nothing but a pack of unprincipled liars.  You can’t tell me that Perez actually believes any of the shit that is constantly coming out of his mouth.  And yet he’s hoping that those to whom he is speaking, will.  And it’s obvious that many of them do, which only encourages losers like Perez to spew even more of their rather toxic and blatantly incendiary rhetoric adding to our era of political incivility.

Look, the Founding Fathers created the Constitution, which was then approved by the people, and it’s the Constitution that makes very clear the purpose of the Electoral College and the role state legislatures play in shaping it.  Where Perez practices to deceive is when he pretends not to know that every election we have ever had has been won by the candidate with the most Electoral College votes, regardless of popular vote.  Hitlery lost in the very same fashion as has every presidential election loser that came before her, and Trump won the election in the very same way that every other presidential candidate won.  If Perez wants to change the way candidates win the presidency, there’s a process.

Nothing known to us thus far would change how the outcome of the last election was arrived at, Donald J. Trump is the constitutionally elected president of these United States.  And it’s only those afflicted with Trump Acceptance Resistance Disorder, or (TARD), which apparently includes Perez, who refuse to accept that fact.  For those unfamiliar, TARD is a pattern of pathologically dissociative and psychotic behavior, first observed in the late hours of November 8, 2016, and seems only to have increased in severity ever since.  Those afflicted with TARD often exhibit a rather pronounced cognitive dissonance, sudden bouts of rage, uncontrollable crying, suicidal ideation, and extreme butt-hurt.

Typically, those diagnosed with TARD are characterized by the possessing of a persistent unwillingness to accept that Donald Trump is going to “Make America Great Again,” and an overwhelming need to say just about anything in an effort to undermine, discredit or delegitimize our duly elected president.  Individual sufferers can be expected to display signs of paranoia and delusion; and in acute cases psychotic episodes have been observed.  Those afflicted go beyond being simply upset about the results of the 2016 presidential election, it’s those afflicted with TARD who are either completely unwilling or unable to accept reality, and very stubbornly so, despite irrefutable evidence.

And when it comes to those afflicted with this condition, the only known treatment that can be said to be in any way effective is regular exposure to some sort of psychiatric therapy.  The patient must be repeatedly exposed to heavy doses of political reality, and should be made to wear a “Make America Great Again” hat for as long as they are able to tolerate it, with each exposure increasing in length.  And it should be after no less than a week that the patient should be encouraged to be seen in public wearing the ‘MAGA’ hat.  And ultimately, the goal should be to get the patient to where they are comfortable wearing the ‘MAGA’ hat 24/7 without experiencing any outbursts of ‘NeverTrumpisms.’

Be aware that patients with TARD are typically very resistant to any form of treatment, and should always be considered as being rather dangerous whenever they are present in large groups (usually any number over 5).  Any possibility of treatment requires that they be separated from their hive-mind support apparatus since they cannot begin the process of accepting reality in the presence of encouragement towards delusion and irrationality.  Separation may require the assistance of law enforcement.  And if you have a friend or loved one who is suffering from TARD, urge them to seek treatment.  We must help those who can’t help themselves, and together we can beat this scourge, TARD.

But seriously folks, all joking aside, I can’t help but wonder just how many people actually understand all of the unintended consequences that would go along with the Electoral College being made to go away.  Now granted, the Democrats’ wish to scrap it notwithstanding, we’re still a very long way from abolishing it, courtesy of a Constitutional amendment.  But people need to be made to realize that if that were to ever happen the nation would essentially end up being run by little more than a hand full of states, all of which are of the very deepest shade of blue.  And why should the folks of, say, Nebraska be left to have what would essentially be no say in who it is that would be elected president?

Or to put it in such a way that even those in the Democrat Party can understand, there are 3,141 counties in America.  Donald Trump won 3,084 of them and Hitlery won only 57.  It would be ludicrous to suggest that the vote of those who encompass a mere 57 counties should dictate the outcome of a national election.  And yet we still have to listen to morons like Perez who continue to harp on the fact that because Hitlery won the popular vote, it’s she who should now be our president.  Why should I, as one who lives in one of those 3,084 countries that Trump won be forced to live in a country shaped by those who live in the 57 counties that Hitlery won?  Come on people, this ain’t rocket science.



In the wake of an election in which Hitlery ‘won’ the popular vote, albeit with votes from primarily one state, but Donald Trump was elected president by winning the Electoral College, we have heard an increasing level of whining coming from those within the Democrat Party as well as from a vast majority of our supposed ‘journalists’ in the state-controlled media about the need to abolish the Electoral College.  Now I’m quite sure that if the situation were to be reversed these same people now doing all the whining about abolishing the Electoral College, would instead be expending just as much energy to keep it as they are now expending in their effort to abolish it.  And oddly enough, it’s a recent Gallup survey that showed the lowest percentage of people ever in a poll saying they would support amending the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College and decide presidential elections by the popular vote.

According to a Gallup analyst, “This year, for the first time in the 49 years Gallup has asked about it, less than half of Americans want to replace the Electoral College with a popular vote system.”  Now that’s not news likely to be music to the ears of our many whining Democrats.  Gallup’s latest poll on the issue, conducted November 28-29—three weeks after this year’s election—showed that 49 percent said they would amend the Constitution so that the nationwide populate vote would decide the presidential election.  However it was 47 percent of respondents who said they would keep the Electoral College system.  Since 1967, Gallup has conducted ten polls in which they asked Americans if they would approve amending the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College.  The first five polls were conducted from 1967 to 1980. These included one poll in 1967, two in 1968, one in 1977 and one in 1980.

In this most recent poll, respondents were asked: “Would you approve or disapprove of an amendment to the Constitution which would do away with the Electoral College and base the election of a President on the total vote cast throughout the nation?”  The second five polls were conducted from 2000 to 2016. These included two polls in 2000, one in 2004, one in 2011 and one in 2016.  In this second set of polls, Gallup asked: “Thinking for a moment about the way in which the president is elected in this country, which would you prefer: to amend the Constitution so the candidate who receives the most total votes nationwide wins the election, (or) to keep the current system, in which the candidate who wins the most votes in the Electoral College wins?”  Prior to this year the highest percentage who had said that in the five Gallup polls asking the same question was 37 percent. That was in a survey done December 15-17, 2000.

In all ten surveys done by Gallup, the greatest support for amending the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College came back in a November 1968, just after that year’s election.  According to Gallup, “Support for an amendment peaked at 80% in 1968, after Richard Nixon almost lost the popular vote while winning the Electoral College.”  And it was the folks at Gallup who went on to say, “Ultimately, he wound up winning both by a narrow margin, but this issue demonstrated the possibility of a candidate becoming president without winning the popular vote.  In the 1976 election, Jimmy Carter faced a similar situation, though he also won the popular vote and Electoral College.  In a poll taken weeks after the election, 73% were in favor of an amendment doing away with the Electoral College.”  The fact that so many favor doing away with the Electoral College, makes clear just how ignorant most people are as to why it even exists.

The continuing, and somewhat overwhelming, level of whining we’ve heard coming from the Democrats about the need to get rid of the Electoral College has never really made all that much sense to me.  Because if you actually add up all of the states that are considered as being either “safe” for any eventual Democrat nominee or “favor” that nominee, you get 217 electoral votes out of the 270 that are needed to win.  Do the same for states considered safe or favoring any Republican standard-bearer and you get just 191 electoral votes.  And that Democrat advantage becomes even more pronounced if you add to the party’s total the states that typically “lean” Democrat.  Place such states as Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes), Iowa (6) and Nevada (6) into the Democrat column and the party’s electoral vote count surges to 249, or just 21 votes short of winning a presidential contest.

Back when Donald Trump was lagging badly in the polls, any time the republican candidate accused the electoral system of being rigged, Democrats would scream over each other to explain to him just how fair, balanced and sensible is the mandated framework of the US presidential election.  Well, Trump won, and the roles are now flipped, with liberal pundits from Michael Moore to Paul Krugman, slamming the concept of the Electoral College, which Trump won decisively despite losing the popular vote.  Senator Babs Boxer is retiring at the end of the current term, but that isn’t stopping her from introducing one last big bill.  Old Babs introduced long-shot legislation to abolish the Electoral College, roughly a week after her candidate lost to the political newcomer, Donald Trump.  The purpose of her bill is to leave the choosing of a president to the popular vote, and one look at the 2016 electoral map should tell you that’s a pretty nutty idea.

Look, I get it. I really do!  The Electoral College is old and dumb and undemocratic.  At least that’s what I would probably think too if I had no context or depth of understanding for why it exists.  This is the only explanation I can deduce for why outgoing Senator Babs Boxer, and any number of other Democrats, think that getting rid of it is a good idea and that a straight popular vote wouldn’t be even more problematic.  Bab’s blatant ignorance about how our federal government is set up and why shows in her statement issued regarding the bill: “In my lifetime, I have seen two elections where the winner of the general election did not win the popular vote. The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately. Every American should be guaranteed that their vote counts.”  Every American’s vote already counts.  What Babs seems to be missing here is that there’s always gonna be a loser.

Apparently, old Babs thinks that our Founders didn’t even bother to consider the option of electing our president by popular vote. That their reasons for electing the president through the Electoral College had nothing to do with the time they lived in and the problems they foresaw still exist today.  Perhaps even more so.  She, and the growing list of others who wish to see it abolished, obviously don’t understand that the Electoral College is a necessary function of federalism and the best way to ensure that the voters in each state are represented equally (in the Senate) and proportionally (in the House of Representatives).  Despite what old Babs and her many Democrat cohorts may think, I think we call safely assume that it’s not something that was devised for no other reason than to simply to screw with Democrats.  But you know how Democrats are, little more than a bunch of spoiled brats.

Babs claims that she only wants everyone to feel like their vote counts.  But somehow she is failing to recognize that under her proposal of a straight popular vote, only about four states could decide the presidency, which flies in the face of her stated goal. Our Founders thought about this and decided against it for obvious reasons.   I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that Bab’s bill goes nowhere. Even if there were enough constitutionally ignorant dopes in the Senate and House that would vote “yea,” our one saving grace it that three-quarters of the states would have to ratify it over the next seven years to get it passed as an amendment. And while I am certain some would gladly cede more power to the federal government, many more would not.  Now I have no doubt that there will come a day when the Electoral College is done away with, but I’m quite confident that it won’t be in my lifetime.

In reality, Bab’s bill is nothing more than a repeat attempt to dismantle the electoral process because Democrats are mad their corrupt candidate, for whom they sacrificed all, won’t be the first woman president after all.  That’s the way it always is with these people.  How much whining was heard from the right when Barry was elected and then reelected?   Sure we called into question his obvious lack of qualifications and complained because the guy was, and still is, the most corrupt individual to ever hold the office of president.  But then we got busy just trying to survive.  The Democrats, for whatever the reason, whether it’s because they presume their motives to be so pure or because they profess to know what’s best for the rest of us, feel that they should win every election and if they don’t it’s only because something nefarious has taken place.  Let them have their temper tantrum.



So it would appear that Barry now intends to spend a good part of the time that he has left doing little more than whining about how he thinks certain aspects of the country’s electoral system seems to be skewed in favor of the Republicans, at least in 2016.  This is rather extraordinary since during the entire build up to this last election I can’t remember how many times I heard about how the Democrat candidate, regardless of who he, or she, might be, always starts out with a pretty significant advantage, or what many referred to as being the blue wall.  A wall that consists of 18 states that produce 242 Electoral College votes.  Which in itself sounds rather impenetrable when your candidate only needs 270 to win.  So I guess I’m little confused regarding how such a scenario favors the Republicans.

But that didn’t seem to prevent Barry from complaining about the outcome of this most recent election.  And it was in so doing that he said, “As long as Wyoming gets the same number of senators as California, there’s going to be some tilt towards Republicans when it comes to congressional races.”  He went on to point out that most Democrat voters were “bunched up in big cities.”   During a press conference in Peru, Barry grumbled that Republicans took advantage of “political gerrymandering” after winning wide majorities in that helped them lock in a majority in Congress.  Barry said, “More votes have been cast for Democratic congressional candidates than Republican.”   And he added, “And yet you end up having large Republican majorities.”

And what I found as being rather funny, hysterical even, was how Barry cited “bad luck” as being the reason Republicans swept back into power in 2010, blaming the economic downturn he inherited from former president Bush and not having enough time for his policies to take root.  But Barry did appear to realize that he was complaining about the rules, admitting that the electoral system has “structural problems” that the Democrat Party has to accept.  He said, “But, look, you can’t make excuses about the rules.”  And then went on to say, “That’s the deal, and we got to do better.”  What’s he plan on doing, encouraging city Democrats to move out into the country?  That’s not likely to happen, for one thing by doing so they might actually have to go to work.

Ya know, somebody really should explain to Barry how it is that nobody likes a whiner.  How about all of the dead voters, or the fake voters bused into polling stations all over Florida, North Carolina, Nevada and Colorado?  I think it safe to say that they voted exclusively for Hitlery.  Or how about those idiots caught on tape admitting to it all as well as those who were on Hitlery’s payroll?  And Barry wants to whine about how things are skewed in favor of the Republicans?  Seriously?  And then you add in the illegals who were allowed to vote and the number of crooked voting machines that registered Hitlery instead of Trump.  If we were somehow able to take away all those instances of Democrat voter fraud, Trump would have won easily, and not only the Electoral College, but the popular vote as well.

About 60 more days, my friends, that’s all he has left.  I know, it sounds like an eternity.  Every single thing this man has touched since coming into office he has turned to dog squeeze.  And I mean absolutely everything!  America wasted eight long years on this ‘community agitator’ and for no other reason than because of white guilt and affirmative action.  Please, no more white guilt.  Don’t feel it.  Don’t think it.  Don’t tolerate it in our schools, or anywhere else.  Be as aggressive against racism toward white people as non-whites are toward us.  Look, we simply cannot afford any more “leaders” like Barry who seek nothing more than to divide us so they are then better able to destroy us.  We need to be better informed when it comes to who we vote for.  We need to vote for those who truly do love America.

Democrats want to limit smaller states, so that they would have very little say in who wins a presidential elections. That means that mostly Florida, New York, Texas and California would decide elections.  Democrats not only want to change the system during the game, they want to change the rules AFTER the game has been played, and a game which they lost.  It is just like the “nuclear option”, which Democrats favored for their advantage.  Now that the shoe is on the other foot, they want to change that filibuster rule back to the past. It looks like voters were not quite as stupid as the Democrats believed.  The Democrats, along with most of the state-controlled media have become, for the most part, irrelevant. Constant lies and political assassination get old very quickly.  And that’s all they have.