Hillary Clinton complained that she lost the Electoral College vote, and thus the election, but won the popular vote.
And so whaddya know… she has suggested that we move to popular voting for the presidency. This is an extremist view for such a high-ranking Democrat but then again this is the radicalism of the modern-day Democrat party. So for those who don’t understand the Electoral College here it is in a nutshell:
If the president were elected by popular vote presidential candidates would campaign only in places with large numbers of voters, largely along the East Coast and in California, and around big cities and suburbs. Sparsely-populated regions and states would be ignored.
Under the Electoral College system different states can offer differing amounts of electoral value to a candidate. For instance candidate Trump knew that Wisconsin, Iowa and Michigan would help him win the White House and thus he visited them over and over in 2016 and sought to appeal to their interests.
If it were a popular vote he might never have done so. Thus the Electoral College is a smart tool for a Constitutional republic to scatter electoral power rather than concentrating it in the same places around population centers at every election cycle.
Today we have a new issue emerging after the confirmation of justice Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court and it breaks along the same lines.
An NBC News reporter named Ken Dilanian has suggested that the confirmation of judge Kavanaugh by the US Senate is illegitimate because sparsely populated Republican states like Wyoming have the same representation and power in the US Senate – two senators for each state – as a huge liberal state like California. Dilanian tweeted:
It may not happen in our lifetimes, but the idea that North Dakota and New York get the same representation in the Senate has to change. “Senators representing less than half the U.S. are about to confirm a nominee opposed by most Americans”
One supporter of Dilanian tweeted that
That is exactly right. How absurd is it that Wyoming (population 579,319 as of 2017) and California (39.54 million as of 2017) each share the same level of representation (power) in the U.S. Senate?!? This *must* change, and soon!
This is the usual baloney that we hear when Democrats lose. Two tweeters who have actually studied the American founding responded properly:
It’s called the US House of Representatives. The Senate is to avoid mob rule. The Constitution is to explicitly protect against a direct democracy.
It’s called a Constitutional Republic. The Founders set up for precisely this reason – so the large states couldn’t impose their will on the smaller states. If you don’t like it, move.
Naturally Dilanian never mentions the reverse situation where small states with two Democrat senators like Hawaii, Rhode Island, Vermont and Delaware each have the same representation in the US Senate as a big Republican state like Texas. Noooo, that would not fit his militant narrative.
Meanwhile it gets worse. Steve Hilton wrote on the Fox News website about something much more sinister called “packing the Supreme Court”:
Here’s the idea: the Democrats win back the White House in 2020 and, based on the constitutionally spurious but politically expedient talking point that the Supreme Court is made up (of four) justices appointed by Republican presidents who lost the popular vote (i.e., Trump and George W. Bush) (and confirmed by senators representing a minority of Americans) (i.e., by senators from low-population conservative states) the newly elected Democratic president immediately nominates two liberal justices, thereby bringing the court, as liberals say, “in line with” the views of the nation as a whole. This would increase the number of justices on the court to 11.
Put aside the fact that this entire line of reasoning totally misunderstands the point of the Supreme Court, which is to interpret the law and not make it. The notion of the high court pursuing a political agenda of any kind, in any direction, is itself a left-wing idea.
And try to stifle, if you can, the ribald laughter that such a plan would evoke, given that its advocates are constantly lecturing everyone about “authoritarianism,” threats to “democratic norms” and all the rest of it. And that these same sanctimonious leftists who want to pack the court to pursue their political ends in America are simultaneously in uproar over alleged assaults on the judiciary by populist leaders in Eastern Europe.
However outlandish it may sound, the Democrats packing the Supreme Court is a plan we should all take seriously. The activists will demand it; the donors will back it; liberal opinion leaders are already debating it.
Just like “Abolish ICE” lurched in a matter of months from lunatic fringe to party orthodoxy, I predict the Democratic plan to pack the Supreme Court is going to become a mainstream position before long – and a key litmus test for 2020 presidential candidates.
Of course this is simply evidence of the Democrats’ desperation, on a par with their plan – now endorsed by Hillary Clinton – to try and abolish the Electoral College for presidential elections. When they can’t win the game, they just try to change the rules.
But that doesn’t mean we should just dismiss it. MSNBC host Chris Matthews accurately captured the mood on the left when he said: “This is the time for vengeance for what happened two years ago.”
Notice what Matthews says… “This is the time for vengeance for what happened two years ago.”
Vengeance for losing a presidential election according to our Constitutional system? These leftists are very scary people. In short they want the Constitution shredded.
There are three interesting US Senate races that are going to be strongly affected by the vote over Kavanaugh:
*Joe Manchin of West Virginia is one of the last ‘moderate Democrats’ in America. He is up for re-election to a second full term on November 6.
He voted for judge Kavanaugh in order to preserve his chances to be re-elected in increasingly conservative West Virginia. He hopes that his vote will cement his image among conservative Democrats and some Republicans whom he needs to win re-election.
But Nikitas3.com believes that Manchin is a dead duck. Liberal Democrats in West Virginia, of which there are certainly many in the state capital of Charleston and other population centers like Wheeling and scattered throughout the population as they are in all conservative states, are furious with Manchin. They won’t vote for Manchin; they simply won’t vote for anyone. This will suck many votes out of Manchin’s column, giving the election to his opponent.
Meanwhile Republicans and even some conservative Democrats are going to fully support the Republican candidate Patrick Morrissey in this increasingly pro-Trump state. Nikitas3.com believes that the math is totally against Manchin.
*Republican US senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska has been under the gun for years for not being conservative enough.
After not supporting judge Kavanaugh – she voted ‘present’ and not against him – many Republicans in Alaska are furious with her. Thus Sarah Palin has suggested that she may run in a Republican primary against Murkowski in 2022. Hot Air reports:
The Palins and Murkowskis do not care for each other, due in part to Sarah ending Frank Murkowski’s governorship by crushing him in the Republican primary in 2006. (Frank is Lisa’s father.) A Palin-endorsed challenger successfully primaried Lisa herself in 2010, leading to some casual sniping between them during the campaign. … (Murkowski) went on to win the general election as a write-in candidate and hasn’t looked back.
This Kavanaugh vote probably changes everything for Murkowksi. Nikitas3.com believes that that vote is going to be her undoing. Unfortunately we have to wait until 2022 to see her get undone.
*US senator Susan Collins of Maine, a moderate Republican, cast one of the deciding votes in favor of judge Kavanaugh. This endeared her to conservatives, Republicans and to president Trump but threatens her standing among moderate Democrats and Republicans and anti-Trump Republicans who would help to keep her in the Senate from a ‘purple’ New England state when she runs again in 2020.
Expect a vigorous and well-financed campaign against Collins if she runs for re-election. On the other hand Collins has reported large amounts of threats and hate-mail directed at her after her passionate, courageous and thoughtful Senate speech defending her vote for judge Kavanaugh. This could help to build sympathy for Collins and aid in her re-election.