You might want to start at the page about voting in general, especially if you
were sent to this page by a search engine.
Not everyone should vote
The Editor's opinion:
You should not vote if you are not a citizen of the United States. You should not vote if you are a
convicted felon. You should not vote more than once, even if a
says it's okay. You should not vote if you are dependent on welfare programs of any kind, with the exception of Social Security
benefits for which you have paid all your life. You should not vote if you cannot read a ballot that is written in
English. You should not vote if you could not pass the basic civics test given to those applying for naturalization.
You should not vote if you get all your information about current events from social media on your smart phone. You should
not vote if you were driven to the polling place by someone you met for the first time on election day. You should not vote
in a presidential election if you are not expected to live past inauguration day. You should not vote if you cannot identify
yourself beyond a reasonable doubt (with a government-issued license or ID card). You should not vote if you were registered
to vote in a state mental hospital. You should not vote if you are so confused that you don't know whether you are male or female.
You should not vote if you think the government can pass a law that will prevent climate change. You should not vote if you do not
have a permanent residence. You should not vote if anyone has offered you money, food, or adult beverages for doing so. And
above all, you should not vote if you are dead, although many people apparently do.
changes rules to count DEAD people's votes this year, if they voted before they died. New voting rules in
Massachusetts will now allow ballots cast before Election Day to be counted even if the voter has died. The state
legislature has changed earlier voting rules due to the coronavirus pandemic and will now allow the inclusion of votes by
anyone who died after casting an early ballot. Any concerns about the temporary law and its impact on the total voting
numbers were downplayed by Massachusetts Secretary of State Bill Galvin as "not a significant number of ballots."
The Editor says...
To reiterate, if you do not expect to live beyond Election Day, you should not vote.
Mayor Pete's Rainbow Army.
From day one, orientation day, when your son or daughter is asked which gender pronoun he or she prefers, young Americans are
overwhelmed with obsessive, unrestrained, unhinged identity ideology. They are force-fed a nonstop toxic diet of race,
gender, and sexual identity. Thus, in 2008, college students wanted Barack Obama to be president because, first and
foremost, he's African American. In 2016, college students wanted Hillary Clinton to be president because, first and
foremost, she's a woman. In 2020, college students want Pete Buttigieg to be president because, first and foremost,
he's homosexual. Race, gender, sexual orientation: their trinity, their alpha and omega.
town launches experiment to give 16 year olds the vote. If the state gives its approval, the town of Brookline,
Massachusetts will gain a lot of new voters in the future. At a town meeting last week, residents voted to extend the
right to vote in municipal elections to 16 and 17-year-olds. The vote wasn't even close either, with the measure
passing by a two to one margin. [...] Are kids at the age of sixteen old enough to be considered adults? Not if you ask
the state government. In fact, if you commit a crime, the state is currently looking at treating you as a juvenile
until the age of 21. Here are some other fun facts. As of this year, you can't decide whether or not you should
buy tobacco until you are 21. Similarly, you can't buy a beer in the Bay State until you are 21. You can't even
get married until you're 18 without the permission of either your parents or a judge.
The Editor says...
If 16-year-olds are allowed to vote, they should also be tried as adults in criminal courts,
potentially drafted, and held responsible for any contracts they sign.
Legislators Push To Lower Voting Age To 16. In the never ending race to the bottom, Oregon state senator Shemia
Fagan is introducing legislation that would lower the voting age in the state to 16. Citing abortion and stripping away
2nd Amendment rights, Fagan introduced the legislation on Monday [2/18/2019], at the behest of doorbelling-for-democrats operation
known as the Bus Project. [...] Not only are the democrats targeting more naive voters, but this is partially in response to the
pushback against a massive gun grab bill, that was supposedly written by high schoolers.
The Editor says...
Anyone who has never held down a job should not vote. Those who do not pay taxes should not vote.
Anyone whose most valued possession is his or her cell phone should not vote. Anyone whose primary news source
is Facebook should not vote.
and the Vote. Each election year liberal politicians brazenly and shamelessly make election promises telling
the unemployed that if they put them in office, they will forcefully confiscate financial resources from working citizens and
convert it into free stuff to give away. [...] Radical situations call for radical solutions. Along with being a U.S.
citizen, being employed should also be a prerequisite for gaining the right to vote. In this way, only those who
contribute to wealth control its application.
Row voter fraud: Prosecutors say homeless [people were] offered cash, cigarettes in exchange for hundreds of
signatures. An alleged voter fraud scheme in which Skid Row's homeless were being offered money and cigarettes
in exchange for "false and forged signatures" on ballot petitions and registration documents has been uncovered in Los
Angeles, prosecutors announced Tuesday. The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office says it is charging nine
people in total with felony counts related to the offenses, which are said to have happened during the 2016 and 2018 election
cycles. "The defendants are accused of engaging in the solicitation of hundreds of false and/or forged signatures on
state ballot petitions and voter registration forms by allegedly offering homeless people $1 and/or cigarettes for their
participation," a statement from the attorney's office reads.
DC, could let 16-year-olds vote for president. WTOP-FM reports the bill won 3-0 approval in the Judiciary and
Public Safety committee Thursday [11/1/2018] and will get a final vote before the full council this month. The 26th Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution guarantees citizens 18 and older the right to vote, but scholars have said it doesn't prevent a state,
or in this case, the nation's capital, from setting a lower age.
Stupid people should not vote! Why
college students don't vote absentee? They don't know where to buy a postage stamp. A Fairfax County
focus group this summer found many college students who have gotten an absentee ballot simply fail to send it back because a
U.S. Postal Service stamp seems to be a foreign concept to them. "One thing that came up, which I had heard from my own
kids but I thought they were just nerdy, was that the students will go through the process of applying for a mail-in absentee
ballot, they will fill out the ballot, and then, they don't know where to get stamps," Lisa Connors with the Fairfax County
Office of Public Affairs said. "That seems to be like a hump that they can't get across."
Election's Ominous Results. Yes, it is good that Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton, especially in light of
revelations of her private email security breaches and pay-for-play administration of the State Department. If true,
she belongs in prison. However, what is ominous is the number of voters who, despite all that was known of her crimes,
still voted for her. This is not a sign of a healthy American electorate. It seems the same citizens who voted
for Barack Obama in 2012 after his disastrous first four years voted for her. Many people who go the polls in our
generation are simply not thinking. They are less informed and thoughtful citizens than idolaters.
Most Voters Are 'Idiots'. [M]ost people who go into the voting booth today will be primarily choosing a
president based not on a reasoned, dispassionate assessment of which candidate will best serve the interests of the larger
society. Rather, they will be voting for the candidate who confirms them in their personal prejudices, limited
perspectives, and self-centered desires.
Should "stupid" Americans
be allowed to vote? It was the "stupidity of the American voter," as Obamacare architect Gruber said, that
Obama counted on, and it is that same voter that Hillary is counting on to get her to the White House.
Florida: Taco Trucks Used to "Lure" Democrat
Voters to Polls. Video out of Florida shows the Clinton machine is busing people to the polls and luring them
to vote using taco trucks. Now we know what the DNC meant when they said they needed more "taco bowl outreach."
SEIU, which has endorsed Hillary Clinton, appears to be behind the scam.
governor signs bill allowing felons to vote from their jail cells. Convicted felons serving jail sentences in
California county jails will now get to participate in an activity besides three meals a day and recreation time: voting in
elections. Governor Jerry Brown signed new legislation into effect as part of a reform backers say will help prisoners
transition back into society while still serving time for their crimes. The bill he signed would let thousands of
felons doing time in county jails to vote in California elections, the LA Times reported.
Could Let Felons Behind Bars Vote, Despite What the State Constitution Says. California Gov. Jerry Brown
is considering whether to sign a bill that would allow tens of thousands of incarcerated felons to vote, while continuing to
deny the vote to others. The Legislature sent a bill to Brown's desk that would restore voting rights to an estimated
50,000 convicted felons who are behind bars in county jails, but not to felons who are serving their sentence in prisons.
voter registration' is a bad idea. Mandatory Voter Registration — Progressives want to sign up
everyone automatically without affirming citizenship or an opt-out. What they call "automatic voter registration" is
really "mandatory voter registration." Here's why it's a bad idea: • Not everyone wants to be
registered to vote. Forcing inclusion against their will is an act of a top-down, authoritarian government.
• It violates a citizen's basic free speech rights, such as expressing displeasure with the electoral process by
not participating. Then there's the issue of privacy — voter registration lists are publicly available.
• It opens the door for vote fraud, because it fills voter rolls with people who may have no intention of
ever voting, or transients, or college students who would be able to vote again in their home districts. •
There is no reliable way to ensure that all registrants are actually U.S. citizens. Some states now issue
driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.
Opposing viewpoint: A
Feasible Roadmap to Compulsory Voting. In years with presidential elections, voter turnout peaks at just above
60 percent. In off-year elections, turnout dips to 40 percent or less. In November 2014, only 36 percent
of eligible voters went to the polls — the lowest share in more than 70 years. Participation this paltry calls
into question the political system's legitimacy. It also hints that election outcomes might be quite different if more people
bothered to show up.
Zakaria calls for mandatory voting. Demonstrating that no idea is so bad that it will lack adherents, CNN's
most fatuous pundit advocated on air for mandatory voting. Just what we need: another restriction on our freedom, the
government telling us what we must do. And what kind of votes will be cast? Will they be knowledgeable electors,
or merely casual drive-by votes in which a trivial factor or a vague impression, not powerful enough to impel a person to
vote, now becomes the basis for a choice? This spectacularly awful idea has only one merit for one party. It
would almost certainly assure that Democrats would establish a one-party state.
Felons Are Trying to Get Their Gun Rights Back in Virginia. As congressional Democrats spent the week pressing
for the passage of new gun control legislation, violent felons in Virginia were able to take steps towards having their right
to own a firearm restored thanks to action taken by the state's Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe. When McAuliffe
restored the voting rights for 206,000 felons in a move critics say was politically motivated, he also opened the door for
those felons to have their right to own a firearm restored. Previously, felons would individually have to petition the
executive branch to have their civil rights restored. Petitioners would have to fill out an application to the
secretary of the commonwealth and submit a letter to the governor explaining why they deserve to have their rights restored.
The Editor says...
I can see where a state might restore a convicted felon's rights after a period of 15 or 20 years of good behavior,
post-incarceration, but to forgive and forget as soon as his prison sentence is completed is reckless and highly premature.
The lasting stigma of a felony conviction is supposed to be part of its value as a deterrent.
must weed out ignorant Americans from the electorate. Never have so many people with so little knowledge made
so many consequential decisions for the rest of us. A person need only survey the inanity of the ongoing presidential
race to comprehend that the most pressing problem facing the nation isn't Big Business, Big Labor, Big Media or even Big
Money in politics. It's you, the American voter. And by weeding out millions of irresponsible voters who can't
be bothered to learn the rudimentary workings of the Constitution, or their preferred candidate's proposals or even their
history, we may be able to mitigate the recklessness of the electorate.
The Prison Vote. The corrupt governor
of Virginia, Terry McAuliffe, announced the other day that ex-cons will be granted the vote just in time of the presidential
election. His assumption is that, identity politics being what it is, the ex-con vote will naturally flock to Hillary
Clinton, supporting someone they see as their own. There has always been an assumption that convicts, if given the
chance, will vote for people like themselves. That's the assumption. The reality is something different.
Ex-cons tend not to vote at all. Those who would be inclined to vote are those who have gone the other way with their
lives, embracing religion or social advocacy to help ex-cons get on the right path. It's a small club that will not
make a difference in an election.
McAuliffe to Ex-Cons: 'I Want You Feeling Good About Yourself and Voting'. Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe
(D) says he issued an executive order restoring the voting rights of convicted felons to say, "I want you feeling good about
yourself and voting. "I'm restoring voting rights, I'm not giving people back gun rights. I'm not commuting
anyone's sentence," McAuliffe told PBS NewsHour on Friday [4/22/2016].
Criticizes Difficulty of Voting in U.S.: 'Australia Has Got Mandatory Voting'. Speaking at the University of Chicago Law School
yesterday [4/7/2016], President Barack Obama criticized what he described as the difficulty of voting in the United States of America.
"We really are the only advanced democracy on Earth that systematically and purposely makes it really hard for people to vote," he said.
"Maybe the single biggest change that we could make in our political process that would reduce some of the polarization, make people feel more
invested, restore integrity to the system, would be just make sure everybody is voting," said Obama. "Australia has got mandatory voting.
You start getting 70-80 percent voting rates, that's transformative."
The Editor says...
The president is lying when he says this country intentionally makes it difficult to vote.
Compulsory voting will not "make people feel more invested" any more than jury duty does.
Most Americans see jury duty as a chore, despite the government's efforts to make it look like a great
honor (in the propaganda film shown to the jury pool when they arrive). Nor is there any
reason to believe that mandatory voting would "restore integrity to the system." The
Democrats could "restore integrity to the system" by supporting Voter-ID laws that keep dead people
from voting, and by prosecuting voter fraud more vigorously. Barack H. Obama, a/k/a Barry
Soetoro, hates this country and wants to change it into something it has never been. I want this
country to be led by a President who will preserve and defend the Constitution, as well as our cultural
traditions, and make America what it was before the Left ruined it. We don't need laws that
are "transformative." If anything, we need fewer laws on the books and less transformation.
A Crisis in Civic Education.
At present, a majority of the four-year college graduates answering a multiple-choice survey were unable to identify the method for amending
the Constitution or the process for presidential impeachment. Nearly half failed to identify the correct term lengths for the houses of
Congress. Ten percent thought that Judith Sheindlin — "Judge Judy" — is on the Supreme Court. A Crisis in
Civic Education offers recommendations to colleges, alumni, foundations, and lawmakers to turn from civic illiteracy to vibrant, empowered
participation in the nation's civic process.
Poorly Educated Electorate. Nearly half of college graduates do not know the correct term lengths of Congress.
One-third of college graduates, and more than half of the general population, cannot identify the Bill of Rights as a group
of constitutional amendments. The results are grave, but they are not surprising considering the poor curricular quality
in high-school and college education. The Department of Education's National Assessment of Educational Progress has shown
that virtually all eighth graders, and 75 percent of high-school seniors, are not proficient in civics. The DOE has since
dispensed with the high-school exam, but ACTA's recent surveys of college graduates show that eight years of education, from middle
school to a bachelor's degree, matter little when it comes to proficient civic knowledge. Of the more than 1,100 college and
university curricula that ACTA studies annually, only 18 percent require a course in U.S. history or government.
Dumb, Dumber and Democrat.
Today, Loser-ism thrives as Bernie Sanders, the proud socialist who would have been considered a veritable whack job in previous times,
promises his beguiled and oblivious audience free college, health care, housing; you name it. Watching his audience of losers
presents the best argument yet for voters being taxpayers at least 35 years old. Here we are again with deranged youth swaying
an election. These are the same catastrophic mindless beings who helped win two terms for Barack Obama; the most destructive and
divisive President in U.S. history.
Forced voting follies. [T]he notion that forcing
people who don't care about politics to vote will make them more engaged and thoughtful citizens is ludicrous. We force juvenile
delinquents (now called "justice-involved youth" by the Obama administration) and other petty criminals to clean up trash in parks
and alongside highways. Is there any evidence this has made them more sincere environmentalists? If we gave every student in
the country straight A's, that would make all the education trend lines look prettier, but it wouldn't actually improve education.
Electorate, Not Trump, Is Real Danger. The media seem to think that participation in elections is a big deal.
[...] Despite many people who urge us all to vote, as a civic duty, the purpose of elections is not participation. The
purpose is to select individuals for offices, including president of the United States. Whoever has that office has our
lives, the lives of our loved ones and the fate of the entire nation in his or her hands. [...] If you want to fulfill your
duty as a citizen, then you need to become an informed voter. And if you are not informed, then the most patriotic
thing you can do on Election Day is stay home.
Unleashes His Pro-Criminal Agenda. Because it needs their votes, the Left is pressing for the restoration of felons' voting
rights. Of course, a criminal record carries with it a degree of social stigma, as it should. Removing or watering down that
socially beneficial stigma reduces disincentives to commit crimes and hinders the marginalization of the antisocial. Without stigma
and social ostracism, society would eventually collapse. This is fine by our malignantly narcissistic Marxist president who, seeing
the law in capitalist America largely as an instrument of oppression, seeks to blunt and retrofit it.
would restore voting rights for ex-felons. A Democratic bill unveiled this week would
allow former convicted felons released from prison to vote in federal elections. The measure
would create a uniform federal standard applicable to ex-felons who are no longer in prison. It
would not apply to state elections.
The Editor says...
Except for the few who have been pardoned, there is no such thing as an ex-felon.
Election Day for dummies. When President Obama was elected president in 2008 on a
promise to "transform" America, most voters didn't have a clue to what he meant, and he has
transformed as much as he could get by with. He's harder at work than ever. One
of his baddest bad ideas is mandatory voting.
Voting is Unconstitutional. President Obama recently praised the idea of "mandatory
voting," saying it would be "transformative" and "completely change the political map in this
country," showing again how unbound he feels by the limits imposed on the power of government by the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The president apparently does not believe that the right
to speak, which is protected under the First Amendment, includes the right not to speak. And
there is no question that we are speaking when we make our choices in the ballot booth. When we
don't vote, we are again making a choice, a choice not to speak that also sends a political message.
Mandatory Voting Proposal: Typically Fascist at Heart. Nothing our president, Barack
Hussein Obama, does at this point in his benighted administration should come as a shock to anybody
who heard him utter the words "fundamental transformation" back in late 2008, once he knew the
McCain fix was in and the election was in the bag. But his suggestion a few days ago that voting
should be mandatory needs to be studied by all to see the pure essence of Obamaism — and
then beware of it. Like everything Obama and the Left propose, this crackpot idea is couched and
masked in all the usual "progressive" disguises. It's "fair," and about "equality." When
in fact it's neither of those things.
retreats from mandatory voting push amid backlash. The White House Thursday [3/19/2015] walked
back President Obama's comments in favor of mandatory voting in the U.S. "The president was not
making a specific policy prescription for the United States," said White House press secretary Josh
Earnest. At a town-hall event in Cleveland on Wednesday [3/18/2015], Mr. Obama described
compulsory voting as "a better strategy" in the short term than pushing for a Constitutional
amendment to counter increased campaign spending in the U.S. since the Supreme Court's ruling
in the "Citizens United" case.
Leadership, Not Voting, Mandatory. Take two major ails of the U.S. political system:
1. Declining voter participation, particularly among young and minority voters who are most likely
to feel disenfranchised. 2. An unhealthy approach to financing campaigns after Citizens United,
the Supreme Court ruling that outlawed restrictions on political spending. Obama's prescription?
Force everybody to vote.
The Editor says...
If you don't vote, you can feel "disenfranchised" all you want, but you have no room to complain.
Urges Soviet-Style Voting Laws. Forcing Americans to vote under threat of legal
penalty would help to fundamentally transform America, President Obama told a town hall-style
meeting in Cleveland yesterday [3/18/2015]. It is the latest radical leveling scheme that flows
from the president's totalitarian impulses. It is also consistent with his support for "Net
Neutrality," which is a form of censorship and his opposition to the landmark Citizens United
decision that affirmed a conservative activist group's constitutionally guaranteed right to make a
movie critical of Hillary Clinton. It is an assault on American democracy itself because one of the
ways that people express themselves politically is to stay home on Election Day. Compelled speech
is not free speech.
Voting? Is Obama Kidding, Or Just Plain Dumb? This isn't a new concept. Liberals have
been pushing the idea of forcing people to the polls for years as a way to increase turnout. What's
surprising is that Obama would grab on to this sophomoric idea. Just making voting mandatory, for
example, won't guarantee high participation rates. Turnouts in mandatory voting countries vary
widely, from as low as 47% to as high as 90%. And participation has been dropping steadily since
the 1980s in countries with and without compulsory voting laws. A 2014 study found that "compulsory
voting laws fail to correlate with a statistically significant boost in turnout" in several countries.
Obama And Hillary's Fun Camp. The White House appears to be walking back President
Barack Obama's call for mandatory voting. "The president was not making a specific policy
prescription for the United States," press secretary Josh Earnest was quoted as saying. Well, he
did stop short of a "specific policy prescription." But somehow when he transitioned from "I don't
think I've ever said this publicly, but I'm going to go ahead and say it now" to "In Australia and
some other countries, there's mandatory voting," it didn't sound like he was just sharing a tidbit
he learned from pub trivia.
Why Mandatory Voting
Is a Bad Idea. President Obama thinks that forcing us to vote might be a good idea.
That he could favor punishing people for not voting — which means taking their money by
force and imprisoning them if they resist — is unsurprising. The essence of government is
violence — aggressive, not defensive, force. Government is not usually described in such
unrefined terms, but consider its most basic power: taxation. If you can't refuse the tax collector
with impunity, you are a victim of robbery. It doesn't matter that government claims to render "services"
if you don't want them.
calls for mandatory voting in U.S.. President Obama, whose party was trounced in last
year's midterm election due to poor turnout among Democrats, endorsed the idea of mandatory voting
Wednesday [3/18/2015]. "It would be transformative if everybody voted," Mr. Obama said during a
town-hall event in Cleveland. "That would counteract [campaign] money more than anything.
If everybody voted, then it would completely change the political map in this country." Mr. Obama
raised the subject during a discussion of curbing the influence of campaign donations in U.S. elections.
The president said he had never discussed the idea publicly before, but said Australia and some other
countries have compulsory voting.
The Editor says...
Which countries enforce mandatory voting? Lists can be
non-citizens in the U.S. vote? As of Jan. 1, 2012, an estimated 13.3 million lawful
permanent residents lived in the United States, and 8.8 million of them were eligible to apply for
U.S. citizenship but had not done so. In California, 2.48 million out of 3.4 million green-card
holders were eligible to apply but chose not to. And, of course, not all non-citizens residing in this
country are "lawful." An estimated 11 million people live here without permission, though President
Obama recently took action to defer the deportation of as many as half of them.
Brown signs package of bills to encourage
voting. Months after statewide voter turnout hit a historic low of 25% in this year's primary election, Gov. Jerry Brown on
Friday [9/26/2014] signed eight bills aimed at getting more Californians to participate in the political process.
as Low Information Voters. For several years now we have heard much of the plague of
"low information voters" — those legions of the supposedly ignorant who walk, clueless on
the issues, into our polling places, casting their votes for candidates the details of whose
programs are as familiar to them as quantum mechanics. But we may have a more significant problem.
[...] I'm talking about the workaday liberal, the well-educated professionals who are our friends,
relatives and neighbors. They are, increasingly, low information voters, living in willful or
perhaps willed blindness.
Watch, AEF Challenge Obama Admin For States' Right To Block Noncitizen Voters.
Judicial Watch has launched a nationwide effort to support election integrity. That effort continued
this week, as we once again joined forces with the Allied Educational Foundation (AEF) to file an
amicus curiae brief with the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in support of
Arizona's and Kansas's efforts to add proof of citizenship requirements to a federal voter
registration form. What is behind this legal challenge to the common-sense effort to make sure all
votes cast are legitimate? A leftist radical special interest group? Well, yes and no. It's the
Federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC), run by leftists in the Obama administration, which is appealing a
lower court order requiring the EAC to allow the states to add the proof of citizenship requirements.
Movement to Give the Vote to Non-Citizens Begins. The New York state legislature is currently reviewing
a bill to give the right to vote to nearly three million non-citizens. The New York City Council is simultaneously
reviewing similar legislation to allow non-citizens the right to vote in local elections. There is a good chance
that the legislation will pass. This is, no surprisingly, supported by progressive New York Mayor Bill de Blasio.
Non-citizens can already vote in municipal elections in several cities in New York, Maryland, and Illinois. San
Francisco has been pushing this idea for years, and it is only a matter of time until it passes there.
York Dem: It's time to give the vote to illegal aliens. Daily Caller tells us it's
the first bill of its kind in the nation; giving adults here illegally the opportunity to vote in
state and local elections. The legislation is being introduced by state Sen. Guestavo Rivera and is
designed to "integrate illegal immigrants, who are estranged from participation in civic, economic
and political life." What could go wrong?
York Dem: Illegals Should Have The Right To Vote. New York state Sen. Guestavo Rivera
wants to pass legislation to give illegal immigrants the right to vote in local and state elections,
Reuters reports. In terms of the broad benefits available to non-citizens, this bill is the first
of its kind in America. The main objective of the New York Is Home Act, according to Rivera, is to
integrate illegal immigrants, who are estranged from participation in civic, economic and political
life. The legislation not only gives illegal immigrants the right to vote, but establishes a kind of
second-tiered citizenship on a state level, in which illegal immigrants can apply for tuition assistance,
health insurance and driver's and professional licenses, among other benefits.
In D.C. mayor's race, Vincent Gray has secret weapon: Support of
growing ex-prisoner vote. Above an official portrait of Mayor Vincent C. Gray, crisp silver
lettering spells out a welcome to one of the shiniest new places in D.C. government — the Office on
Returning Citizen Affairs. [...] The bustling facility is designed solely for convicted criminals, a center
for training, job placement, housing services and other programs for a slice of the population growing by thousands
each year. Ex-offenders account for at least one in 10 D.C. residents and perhaps many more.
DOJ Argues to Court Against
Rules to Prevent Foreigners From Voting. Justice Department lawyer Bradley Heard was in court today trying to stop Kansas from ensuring
that only citizens register to vote. Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, relying on a United States Supreme Court opinion of last year, asked
the federal Election Assistance Commission to permit him to ensure that only citizens were registering to vote. The Election Assistance Commission
said no, so Kris Kobach went to federal court. Enter Eric Holder's Justice Department, as usual, opposing election integrity measures.
Holder: State Laws That Bar
Felons From Voting Are 'Too Unjust to Tolerate'. Three days after announcing that the U.S. Justice Department will recognize same-sex
marriages in all legal matters, even in states that forbid it, Attorney General Eric Holder took a swipe at states that don't allow felons to vote.
"In many states, felony disenfranchisement laws are still on the books. And the current scope of these policies is not only too significant to
ignore — it is also too unjust to tolerate," Holder told a criminal justice forum at Georgetown University Law Center.
Holder: Repeal laws restricting voting by
ex-felons. Attorney General Eric Holder is calling Tuesday for the repeal of state laws that restrict the voting rights of millions of
former prison inmates. In a speech to the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights at Georgetown University Law Center, Holder said it
is "time to fundamentally re-think laws that permanently disenfranchise people who are no longer under federal or state supervision.''
Jail survey: Nearly three quarters
of felons register as Democrats. The authors, professors from the University of Pennsylvania and Stanford University, found that in
some states, felons register Democratic by more than six-to-one. In New York, for example, 61.5 percent of convicts are Democrats, just
9 percent Republican. They also cited a study that found 73 percent of convicts who turn out for presidential elections would
vote Democrat. But despite recent moves in states to notify convicts that they can vote again, the study finds little evidence that they
do, undercutting Democratic efforts to get them to the polls.
Study: Most Convicts Vote
Democrat. A scholarly study newly released in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
has revealed that most convicts in jail register as Democrats. The study stated, "Democrats would benefit from additional
ex-felon participation." The professors who authored the study came from the University of Pennsylvania and Stanford University.
Va. ramps up restoration of voting rights to some felons. Gov. Robert F. McDonnell (R) could
restore the voting rights of 10,000 non-violent felons by the end of his administration — nearly twice the number he has granted
in 3½ years in office, administration officials said Monday. With no statewide felon database and no electronic records
before 1995, the administration faces an uphill battle over the next six months to locate the thousands of former, non-violent felons scattered
across the commonwealth.
If you vote for someone who is in prison and cannot represent you in Congress, you are a fool. Democrat
Robin Kelly wins special Illinois House election, but what about prison? Despite the endorsement of President Obama, Robin Kelly
easily won election Tuesday night [4/9/2013] in a special House election to represent Illinois' troubled Second Congressional District. The
sprawling urban-suburban district, containing Chicago's ugly South Side, was formerly represented by Jesse Jackson Jr., who like a number of
Illinois politicians will be residing in a federal penitentiary for a while.
The Watercooler — Let's
Allow Felons to Vote. One of the primary reasons I battle depression and discouragement related to political matters is because of the
state I live in — California. The state that I have watched self-destruct from — by today's standards — a
relatively conservative state that gave us Ronald Reagan and that used to be the standard bearer in quality education, to being the laughing stock
of the nation as we have allowed the Dems to gain a super-majority in both chambers in Sacramento. Well, now we are only starting to see the
foolishness that a super-majority of Dems can fabricate as they tamper with legislation to — among other things — change
Why Obamacare Offers Voter Registration: Because it
has always has been a vote-buying scheme. During the past week conservatives have been all atwitter, as it were, about a
development that shouldn't have surprised anyone with the slightest familiarity with the Obama administration or the Democrat party.
It seems that the online application drafted by HHS for those who wish to buy health coverage through Obamacare's insurance exchanges asks
applicants if they would like to register to vote, and facilitates that process if the answer is "yes." Conservatives are outraged
that "reform" is being used to bolster the roles of registered Democrats.
Wrong Battle, Wrong Enemy. Here is the problem:
low-information voters are a big chunk of the electorate, especially in the Democratic Party, but the Republican Party isn't free of them
either. These are the voters who could not tell you if the national debt is $16 million or $16 trillion. They don't
know anything about the criticisms of how our government handled Benghazi. Ben Ghazi? Isn't he an actor? Fast &
Furious is a movie, not a scandal. They know that gay marriage is a good thing because all their favorite actors and musicians
think it is so cool! And "assault weapons" are those guns they see in movies, firing hundreds of rounds a minute.
Low-Info Voters Just Not Interested In Politics.
How many times have you tried to have a serious conversation about current events only to have your listeners say, "I'm not interested in
politics"? These are the low-info voters that the Republicans have never been able to communicate with but the Democrats know exactly how to
reach them. That is why they concentrate their connections in the mainstream media and Hollywood and why these voters know more about the
Kardashians than what the fiscal cliff means to the economy or where Benghazi is.
The suspect numbers coming out of Florida.
Locals will have to provide the specifics, but the reason Obama won the election comes down to two major variables: advertising and vote
harvesting. [...] The vote harvester's mission is to gather unthinking collectives of potential voters — nursing home residents,
college students, skid-row dwellers — and get them to vote. Harvesting does not necessarily mean fraud, but it clearly
encourages it. Early voting makes harvesting all the more economical. Fewer people on the ground can get more accomplished.
accused of taking patients to vote for Obama, as agency disputes claim. The father of a mentally handicapped woman claims his daughter
and others were "carted off" to a North Carolina polling site last week and "coaxed" into voting for President Obama by workers of the group home where
she stays — a claim the owner of the home disputes and that apparently has not yet triggered an investigation by election officials.
Concerns raised over possible exploitation of mentally
disabled voters. Jimmy Green's stepdaughter had never voted before. The 57-year-old is mentally disabled, and Green
said she doesn't understand the concept of casting a ballot. But this week, she called her parents to say she had voted for President
Obama. The care home in Fayetteville where she lives registered its residents to vote and drove them to the polls, Green said.
"My concern is that somebody told her who to vote for," he said. "She didn't even know there's two different parties."
Chapel Hill Killer Registered At and Voted From Mental Hospital.
Recent stepped-up voter registration efforts at state mental hospitals and facilities for the developmentally disabled resulted in the registration of Wendell
Justin Williamson, who in 1995 killed two people in Chapel Hill and was judged not guilty by reason of insanity. Election records show Williamson, a
patient at Central Regional Hospital in Butner, was registered on Sept. 13 as an unaffiliated voter. He cast an absentee ballot that was accepted
Oct. 15 by the Granville County Board of Elections.
The Editor says...
How many non-Democrats are in favor of "voter registration efforts at state mental hospitals"? Does the average American want this country's course
plotted by insane and/or retarded citizens who have been "assisted" by ACORN activists, or the equivalent? Certainly not!
Voting is a Right, Not a Duty. You have
the right to vote, not a duty to do so. In much the same way, you have the right to worship freely, the right to express your views,
the right to run for public office — but no obligation to do any of them. Just as freedom of religion encompasses the freedom to practice
no religion, your freedom to vote for the candidate of your choice includes the freedom to vote for no candidate at all.
Those who cannot read a ballot should not vote. Education And The Texas Vote.
For years the left leaning political movement has placed trained political activists in the poorest of [Rio Grande] Valley
neighborhoods. These people, who are paid by the number of people they get to the polls, recruit their own following
of voters. Those who have little education are encouraged to request absentee ballots. When the ballots arrive
these activist leaders "help" the recipients with their voting. These same activists also arrange for their charges
to attend the free food, drink and music "Pachanga" (party or bash) events of supported candidates for office. Those
not be able to read are instructed on where the single party voting lever on machines can be found or which block to mark
on paper ballots. On Election Day and even during early voting, their charges are picked up and delivered to the polls.
The Data Behind Romney's 47% Comments.
In his comments to fundraisers captured on video, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said 47% of Americans would almost
automatically vote for President Barack Obama because they were "dependent" on the government, in part because they received government
benefits and paid no federal income taxes. In a press conference late Monday [9/17/2012], Mr. Romney said his comments were "not
elegantly stated" while at the same time reiterating the main point. Our translation: If you don't pay federal income taxes,
you may not be swayed by a candidate that wants to cut them.
The Editor says...
Allow me to propose a solution: If you are under 65 and you pay no taxes, you should not be allowed to vote. Voting
should be limited to those who work and produce — not the sponges who absorb billions of taxpayer dollars every year.
The way things stand now, there is a point — which we may have already reached — where the freeloaders reach critical mass, and only
vote for the politicians who promise to keep the gravy train moving at full speed.
For Mature Audiences
Only. Almost four decades ago, the 26th Amendment lowered the US voting age to 18. At
the time, most neurologists believed that the human brain was fully developed by about age 12, so
allowing Americans to vote at 18 seemed like a safe move. But parents of teenagers knew that was
nonsense, and new research is confirming those parental observations.
Repeal the 26th Amendment!.
Adopted in 1971 at the tail end of the Worst Generation's anti-war protests, the argument for
allowing children to vote was that 18-year-olds could drink and be conscripted into the military,
so they ought to be allowed to vote. But 18-year-olds aren't allowed to drink anymore. We no
longer have a draft. In fact, while repealing the 26th Amendment, we ought to add a separate right
to vote for members of the military, irrespective of age. As we have learned from ObamaCare,
young people are not considered adults until age 26, at which point they are finally forced to get
off their parents' health care plans.
If You Don't Know What's Going On, Don't Vote.
No doubt many of you could get caught up in that excitement and be tempted to exercise your Constitutional
privilege to vote. Not because you know what's going on, but because somebody told you it's the "right
thing to do." Trust me, it's not. There are millions of Americans with a huge stake in
Tuesday's outcome, and the thought of some vapid nitwits negating our carefully considered choices is a bit
nauseating. One day off from self-inflicted ignorance in order to "Rock the Vote" simply doesn't
Freedom is Hard Work.
The Founders were endlessly concerned about giving ordinary Americans an unprecedented measure of liberty as offered by the
Constitution they were drafting. They wondered if regular folk could muster the sophistication necessary to make
rational, intelligent decisions at the polls... Fast forward to 2009 and it's easy to see why the Founders were so
worried. In spite of various streams of round-the-clock news and data, most of our electorate is misinformed,
blissfully ignorant or simply apathetic with respect to the means by which they are governed.
be better off if fewer people voted. Does this seem out-of-line? Suggesting that people who
vote should be American citizens, non-felons, informed, not-crazy, and able to speak English if they're going to
be voting? I don't think so. That's why if anything, we'd be better off encouraging people like
that to stay home, instead of encouraging them to vote.
home; don't vote. Here they come — the earnest exhortations
to get out and vote. You'll be hearing it from television newscasters, MTV,
newspaper ads, radio talk show hosts, weathermen, schoolteachers ... you get the
idea. Everyone has a duty to vote, they will say. No they don't. If a
person is utterly ignorant about matters of public policy, then he or she has a solemn
obligation to refrain from voting. The percentage of people who fall into
the utterly ignorant category is estimated to be about 25 percent of eligible voters.
obsolete? People who have made up their minds and don't want to be confused by the facts are a
danger to the whole society. Since the votes of such people count just as much as the votes of people
who know what they are talking about, politicians have every incentive to pass laws and create policies that
pander to ignorant notions, if those notions are widespread.
While it is true that each succeeding generation is more deeply immersed in a decadent popular culture and more
devoid of important knowledge than the one that preceded it, the existence of uninformed people is not
unprecedented. What is unprecedented, though, is our obsession with encouraging such people to exercise
greater control over our lives and those of our progeny, over policies that can send us down a road toward
prosperity or one toward destruction, by encouraging them to vote. What I'm talking about is that another
election is approaching and, as always, we see organizations that launch "Get Out the Vote Drives."
A Skeptic's View
of Voting: Let's face it, ladies and gentlemen, if we raised the voting age to, say, 25, the
Democratic party would go the way of the dodo and the Whigs. Liberals want young kids voting for pretty
much the same cynical reason they want to extend suffrage to illegal aliens, convicted felons and dead people.
It takes a certain mentality, a certain degree of gullibility, after all, to believe that "hope" and
"change" are any more profound and meaningful than "Tastes great, less filling" or "My bologna has a first name."
Today, Americans under the age of 30 are by far the most Democratic age group in the electorate. They
are also by far the most liberal age group. In the 2006 national exit poll, self-identified liberals
outnumbered self-identified conservatives 34 percent to 25 percent. In contrast, self-identified
conservatives outnumbered self-identified liberals by 33 percent to 18 percent among those 30 and
American voter. Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University, observes in a new
study for the Cato Institute that voters tend to be "abysmally ignorant of even very basic political
information." This may not be news to scholars, who have documented it in depressing detail, "but
the sheer depth of most individual voters' ignorance is shocking to observers not familiar with
to Vote? A very high percentage of the U.S. electorate isn't very well qualified to vote, if by
"qualified" you mean having a basic understanding of our government, its functions and its challenges.
Almost half of the American public doesn't know that each state gets two senators. More than two-thirds
can't explain the gist of what the Food and Drug Administration does.
Could It Be that Florida Democrats Are
Too Stupid to Vote? Of course, the "uncounted votes" which somehow always are found in boxes, or
in this case, machines, that were "sitting in a warehouse uncounted" have also been unsupervised by
pollwatchers. In both Chicago and in Miami-Dade, this problem only seems to afflict Democratic
Precincts in close elections.
On the other hand... Pandering
to the crackpot left: You'll recall that last month, Mrs. Heinz Kerry put on
her shiniest tinfoil hat and blamed the Democrats' loss in November on rigged voting
machines. As reported in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Mrs. Heinz Kerry openly
questioned the election results and fixated on areas of the country where optical scanners
were used to record votes. "Two brothers own 80 percent of the machines used
in the United States," Mrs. Heinz Kerry intoned, and it is "very easy to hack into the
Can Your Vote Be Bought?
Given his incompetence in handling the devastating aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, it was surprising to many that Mayor
Ray Nagin was reelected. A poster on the Huffington Post put this absurdity down to the stupidity of the New Orleans
voters. Next month, we'll see if New Yorkers will rate the same judgment. Both Mayor Bloomberg and many City
Council members will be seeking reelection despite residents voting for term limits twice.
This sounds like an idea you'd expect to hear in a communist dictatorship. Desperation: Obama
Surrogate Calls to Make Voting Mandatory. Peter Orszag, former head of the Obama Office of Management and Budget, is desperate.
With even Roll Call recognizing that President Obama is fighting an uphill battle for re-election, Orszag is floating a trial balloon:
Voter Apathy Isn't a Crime. It's a sure sign someone is
losing when he demands that the rules be changed. That might explain the renewed interest in forcing people to vote against their will. Peter Orszag, President
Obama's former budget director and now a vice chairman at Citigroup, recently wrote a column for Bloomberg View arguing for making voting mandatory.
Illegal aliens are illegal voters.
Illegal Aliens can vote in some US cities. The U.S. Constitution grants voting
rights only to American citizens. However, in Montgomery County, Maryland, six cities (Garrett Park, Takoma Park, Somerset, Chevy Chase, Martin's Additions and
Barnesville) allow illegal aliens to vote in local elections.
Purging illegal aliens from voter rolls isn't easy. President Clinton signed the
motor-voter legislation into law, hailing it for increasing voter participation by simplifying registration. But many states do not verify citizenship when
residents apply for licenses, which allows noncitizens to get on voting rolls.
[Thanks a lot, Bill.]
The illegal alien swing vote: Why is it that we can't protect our elections
from people who have no right to vote, no right to be here, and no right to undermine our safety or sovereignty?
Let immigrants vote? No! Our Constitution begins "We the people of the United
States" not "We the inhabitants" or "We the taxpayers" or "We the consumers." Our political institutions therefore ought to be reserved for the American
people — citizens either by birth or by choice, joined in the common goal of forming a more perfect union.
No history, no study, no debate. The Associated Press and various
newspapers reported this month that the University of California at Los Angeles' Chicano Studies Research Center released a "study" that recommended allowing California's
4.6 million non-citizens to vote in local elections. But there was no study. There was no new research or in-depth information.
Tampering with the Electoral College
'Burn It Down!' Democrats. In our system, the states matter. Under the Democrats' vision, some states
matter: California, Texas, Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Ohio, which, without the institutions of federalism, have
among them the numbers and the power to effectively dominate the rest of the country. At the time of the Founding, the people of
the smaller states did not desire to enter into a union in which they and their interests would be dominated by the larger ones.
The people of the smaller states still do not wish to be politically dominated by the larger ones. For that reason, the interests
of the states as such — not mere aggregates of voters — are taken into consideration. The Senate, as originally
organized, existed to preserve the interests of the states as such against the opportunism and predation of the more populous House of
Representatives — and against the ambitions of the executive, too. [...] The Electoral College ensures that the citizens in the
less popular states are not reduced to serfdom by the greater numbers (and greater wealth) of the people in the more populous states.
Electoral College Is Vital. The key to the nation's success has been federalism. Put simply, we are not
the United STATE. We are the United STATES. That 'S' makes all the difference. We are really a layered
collection of fifty laboratories in which each state may pursue policies it deems best suited for its culture, geography,
business environment, demographics, etc.
against mob rule. Most of the Founders were scholarly, erudite men. Our founders were not only writers
but readers of the great teachers of bygone eras. Not only did they search the Bible, but the classic works of teachers
and students of Grecian and Roman governmental innovation. • Nowhere in the Bible is authorization for
man to enjoy the right to govern himself through majority rule. • The most infamous vote for justice
(or injustice) was in the ballot to save Barabbas over saving God himself. • The execution of Christ
is one of history's most significant examples of "mob rule." • When humanity received the Ten
Commandments, there was no vote on its legitimacy As they were writing the Constitution and its Amendments, the writings
of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were fresh in the founder's minds. In reading their work, no Constitutional amendments
uses the phrase "right to vote." Not in the original text nor the Bill of Rights.
Democrats are sneakily destroying the Electoral College. Add the Electoral College to the list of American
institutions that the Democrats have destroyed (along with education, media, entertainment, Silicon Valley, sports, big
cities, the justice system, the family, the FBI-CIA, the Supreme Court, etc.). By manufacturing massive fraudulent vote
counts in the big cities they control, Democrats invalidate suburban and rural votes in key battleground states like Georgia,
Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Arizona. Elections simply become who can produce the most votes, which
is most easily accomplished in large Democrat-run cities like Atlanta, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Milwaukee. The
Democrat machines that control those cities can effortlessly run up large vote counts for Democrats without fear of being
found out by manipulating the voting rules and by manufacturing ballots. Local Democrat judges "on the payroll" look
the other way, while Big Media leads in the cover-up with information blackouts. Large Democrat donors, Silicon Valley
bigwigs, and geopolitical rivals like China bankroll the operation. By relying on big city votes to swing the national
elections, our electoral system degenerates into a de facto direct voting structure, thus invalidating the Electoral College
and violating the Constitution.
the Consequences of Fraud in National Elections. The Electoral College's design is that each state casts its
votes for president and vice president based on the outcomes of elections within that state in a manner that the state's
legislature directs. Each state is afforded the number of votes equal to the whole number of senators and
representatives for the state, with the District of Colombia also receiving three total votes. Because each state has
two senators and at least one representative, a feature of the Electoral College is that it provides those least populous
states with three votes, whereas an allotment based strictly on their population would only allow them one electoral
vote. Because of this attribute, there are times when the popular vote breaks for one candidate and the electoral vote
for the other. Some consider this an undesirable artifact of an outdated election system and propose eliminating the
Electoral College, replacing it with a national popular vote. Within the current Electoral College, fraud in one
location is limited in its effect on the national outcome. The only electoral votes affected are from that state where
the fraud occurred. The votes from other states are unaffected. This is an essential feature of the Electoral
College — it provides a firebreak against the consequences of fraud.
are the new SCOTUS justices thinking? The reason for the Electoral College was to ensure that a few highly
populated states could not always control election of the president. If that were the case, the founding fathers
reasoned that presidents would be elected who were beholden only to those states, and the other states would suffer because
of it, through biased regulations or taxation. If this fraudulent election is allowed to stand, then Joe Biden will be
beholden to only a few corrupt politicians in four or five states, not even to people in the states themselves. In the
future, those who committed this fraud will only refine their tactics to make them more difficult to discover...and election
fraud will become pervasive and permanent.
Editorial Board: It's Time to End Election Protections for Rural America. The Washington Post on Sunday
penned an editorial calling for the elimination of the Electoral College. According to the editorial board, it's time
for America to be covered by the majority without the protections for the minority. [...] Without even trying, WaPo made the
case for why the Electoral College is important. Our Founding Fathers worried about a majority rule without a
protection for the minority. People in California and New York shouldn't matter more than those in Montana, Kentucky or
Iowa. Those who live in "flyover" shouldn't have their voices squashed because they live in areas that are rural and
not densely populated.
If you think the Lefties hate the Electoral College now, just imagine this: 'Faithless
electors' present scenario that could keep Trump in White House. Remember "faithless electors" —
those almost mythical rogues who Hillary Clinton fans once desperately hoped could save them from a victorious Donald Trump
four years ago? Well, there is still such a thing as faithless electors, they are still an incredible longshot, and
Trump fans too can now place the very slimmest of hopes in them.
defense of the Electoral College. In the last twenty years, Democrats have twice lost presidential elections
when the Electoral College has "trumped" the popular vote, leading to Republican victories. First came George W. Bush's
presidential victory over Al Gore in 2000, then Trump's shocker over Hillary Clinton in 2016. Thus, radical Democrats
demand the abolition of the Electoral College. "It's undemocratic," they say. "The will of the people should
rule," they cry. Yes, it's undemocratic, which, believe it or not, is an exceptionally good thing. That's because
the United States is not, and never has been a "democracy."
Electoral College Produces Legitimate and Fair Outcomes. By and large, we have bipartisan vigilance and the
Electoral College System to thank for the viability of our Constitutional Republic. Unlike local races, presidential
elections and the Electoral College are decentralized. They're comprised of 51 smaller elections adjoined into one,
with local, state, and federal checks on accountability. That doesn't mean fraud doesn't ever occur. It's real,
it happens in all 50 states, and it's something we must take seriously — especially when considering that, in
2016, a 40,000 or less margin determined the outcome of three key swing states. Lawmakers need to take extra steps to
crack down on fraud, particularly in problem states like California and Pennsylvania. But in any potential periods of
uncertainty — particularly in this absentee ballot-heavy election — we should show patience and confidence
that the current system will work. Rather than labeling the Electoral College as bad, we should devote our energy to
quickly rooting out the fraud while holding our election officials and representatives to a high standard of transparency.
Electoral College did more in 2016 than you might think. As the attacks on the Electoral College continue, we
can see how important the Electoral College is from the 2016 presidential election results. Many observers have noted
that Clinton's margin in California was greater than her plurality nationwide. Many observers have also argued that
without the Electoral College, a couple or a few large states would dominate elections. What few if any have noticed is
that in 2016, the Electoral College prevented 3 out of 3,141 counties with about 5% of the electorate and population
from picking the president.
Before Election, Schiff Says He'd Support 'Doing Away With Electoral College'. California Democrat
Rep. Adam Schiff revealed over the weekend that he would "favor doing away with the Electoral College system."
During an appearance on "Real Time with Bill Maher," Schiff made a slew of controversial comments about the election and
Electoral College. California Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff revealed over the weekend that he would "favor doing away
with the Electoral College system." During an appearance on "Real Time with Bill Maher," Schiff made a slew of
controversial comments about the election and Electoral College. "I think we're better off focusing on discrete
amendments to the Constitution to overturn Citizens United and make sure that we can have elections untampered or
uninfluenced by excessive expenditures and dark money," Schiff said.
Schiff Calls for Electoral College to Be Abolished. Anti-Trump Democrat Rep. Adam Schuff (D-CA) has called
for the Electoral College to be abolished during a new interview. On Friday night [10/9/2020], Schiff, head of the
House Intelligence Committee, told HBO host Bill Maher that the U.S. Constitution "needs fundamental change." The
conversation saw both agreeing the Electoral College should be eliminated from the American election system. Schiff
said that he supports a rewrite of the U.S. Constitution and amendments that would abolish the Electoral College.
Electoral College as Affirmative Action: Urban privilege and the marginalized pastoral. In the effort to
promote the interests of Americans who have been "historically marginalized," one group that is often overlooked is rural
people. [...] Perhaps the primary way that rural people are marginalized, though, is by the cultural attitudes that pervade
mainstream American life. Most television shows take place in urban settings. In fact, most media reflects the
values of urban society — mobility, independence, secularism, novelty, titillation, cosmopolitanism, eclecticism,
and liberation (particularly liberation from tradition). By contrast, rural life, which tends to value rootedness,
cooperation, faith, restraint, continuity, localism, unity, and tradition, is poorly represented. The ceaseless
cultural advertisement of urban values blinds urban youth to the mere existence of alternative values, even as it seduces
rural youth and encourages them to view rural life as backwards, antiquated, and inferior. Many of those country kids
grow up and leave for the big city, just like I did.
In defense of the Electoral College.
Though often lost in the debate over the Electoral College, Article II in our Constitution created a system in which the
people of each state actually vote for a slate of electors representing each presidential candidate. The presidential
candidate whose slate wins the popular vote in each state then gets to cast its ballots to elect the president. Each
state gets electoral votes equaling the number of representatives and senators. That is why the only number that truly
matters on Election Day is the number of electoral votes each candidate will receive when the electors meet and vote over a
month later. While the national popular vote total tends to correlate with the outcome of the Electoral College, it
sometimes does not, largely due to a few large non-politically diverse states voting so heavily for the Democratic candidate
that it puts the losing candidate ahead in the national popular vote. When this happens, the losers predictably scream
'foul', but their complaint illustrates a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Founding Fathers did to ensure that every
state and their people got a say in who became president.
the Electoral College Means Destroying America. Democrats plan to end the filibuster and pack the Supreme Court
with radical judges. These changes would give the left license to radically transform the nation. There is,
however, another threat they've dusted off ahead of the Nov. 3rd election that — if executed — wouldn't
just be transformative, but totally destructive. They want to abolish the Electoral College. Destroying this
institution will mean the end of national campaigning (and the engagement, negotiation, and localized promises that go along
with it). What politician will ever again stump in Kenosha or Breckenridge? What will a vote get you in Idaho or
Montana? It will mean fewer crucial checks on voter fraud. It will mean tyranny by the coastal hives; by
California technocrats and by Wall Street corporatists. It will mean a nation highly susceptible to one-party rule and
inevitably totalitarianism, which, if still called America, would be America in name only.
Dems Plan to Steal the Presidency. [Scroll down] Apart from having Antifa intimidate at the polls, the
Biden Campaign has hired hundreds of lawyers to supposedly prevent Trump from stealing the election, but who, in reality, are
intended to muck up with legal technicalities and lawsuits what is looking more and more to be a Trump landslide. At
least until they "find in someone's trunk" or manufacture enough votes to turn the election. Republicans have always
seemed remarkably flaccid in their response to these "lost" and "found" votes always being cast for the Democrat. [...] In
addition, look for the fabled "October Surprise." For instance, the NY attorney general will probably attempt to charge Trump
with some imaginary crime before election day. It is common knowledge a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, and there
is no bigger ham than Trump — all they need do is make the sandwich. If they have problems vote-harvesting
enough votes to steal the election, Dems will, as they did in 2016, roll out media heads, celebrities, and prominent
Democrats to convince members of the Electoral College not to award their votes to Trump. This time they will coerce
through doxing, violence, economic intimidation, tweetstorm, and social media ostracism to impel electors to award their
votes to Biden.
Are Waging War Against Tradition And The Constitution. Several of the 2020 Democratic primary candidates
favored the abolishment of the Electoral College. Or, as once-confident candidate Elizabeth Warren put it, "I plan to
be the last American president to be elected by the Electoral College." Furor over the Electoral College among the left
arose from the 2000 and 2016 elections. Al Gore and Hillary Clinton, respectively, won the popular votes. But,
like three earlier presidents, they lost the Electoral College voting — and with it the presidency. The
Founding Fathers saw a purpose in the Electoral College. It ensured that small, rural states would retain importance in
national elections. The Electoral College lessened the chance of voting fraud affecting the outcome of a national vote
by compartmentalizing the outcome among the various states. It usually turns the presidential election into a contest
between two major parties that alone have the resources to campaign nationwide.
A Supremely Interesting Decision. Last
week, the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously that states have the power to bind their state presidential electors to vote for
the state popular vote winner. [...] This was an issue that went all the way to the Supreme Court because there were several
electors in the 2016 election that even though they were bound to vote for Hillary Clinton, they actually changed their vote
and voted for Colin Powell instead. And they did so really because they wanted to convince Republican electors in other
states to ditch their obligation to cast their electoral vote for Donald Trump and basically cause a little bit of a
rebellion in the electoral college. [Podcast transcript]
Test of Electoral College Is Yet To Come. Now that the Supreme Court has vouchsafed the power of a state to
require its presidential electors to vote in line with their state's popular vote, a new question glimmers in the
constitutional mist: Could a state require its electors to vote against the wishes of the state's own
voters? That might seem a ridiculous question. Feature, though, the National Popular Vote Interstate
Compact. It's a workaround designed to commit the states to use the Electoral College to deliver the presidency to the
winner of the national popular vote. It's the first thing that came to mind when the Supreme Court today unanimously
concluded that states have the power to punish faithless electors. Most justices credited the language in Article 2,
which grants states the power to appoint electors. The key phrase is that each state shall appoint its electors "in
such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct."
SCOTUS to Electoral College: Keep the faith — or else. Today's [7/6/2020] unanimous decision
on so-called "faithless electors" is less surprising than some might think. The Supreme Court earlier had settled the
argument over whether states could require electors to follow the popular vote in presidential elections. Today, they
ruled that punishing electors for refusing to comply passes constitutional muster as well.
rules that 'faithless electors' must vote for popular-vote winner. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday
[7/6/2020] that the 538 people who cast the actual votes for president in December as members of the Electoral College must
vote the way the laws of their state direct. The high court ruled unanimously against advocates who were attempting to
change the Electoral College and shift the country toward a nationwide popular voting system for the presidency. SCOTUS
ruled that presidential electors must vote as their state requires them to, which in most states means voting for the
candidate who won the popular vote in the state.
Court Seems Ready to Allow Crackdown on 'Faithless' Presidential Electors. The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard
two cases asking whether members of the Electoral College are bound by laws requiring them to support the winner of the
popular vote in their state. Wednesday's [5/13/2020] cases involve six electors who were fined or disqualified because
they voted for candidates of their own choosing in 2016, instead of abiding by the result of the vote in their state.
The justices seemed ready to say that laws punishing so-called faithless electors are constitutionally permissible.
Thirty-two states and the District of Columbia have such laws.
National Popular Vote Compact is halfway there in Virginia. In November 2019, Virginia voters sowed the wind
when they handed the entire state government over to Democrats. They began to reap the whirlwind when the new
government launched a full-scale war against Virginians' Second Amendment rights. It was exciting when myriad counties
declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries. That excitement, however, did not alter the fact that a Democrat
government was going on the rampage. The next step in this rampage broke on Tuesday [2/11/2020], when the Virginia
House of Delegates voted to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact ("NPVIC"), an attempted end-run around the
Electoral College. A little background explains why this is such a pernicious idea, one intended to give Democrats a
permanent grip on the White House.
Court to hear 'faithless elector' case ahead of 2020 presidential election. The Supreme Court said Friday
[1/17/2020] it will hear a case over whether presidential electors have to vote in accordance with their states' popular vote
in the Electoral College. The court said it would take up the case of Chiafalo v. State of Washington, where
three so-called "faithless electors" who were fined after voting in 2016 for Colin Powell are challenging whether a state can
bind an elector to select the state's popular vote winner. In the faithless elector case, advocates for the court's
intervention say the issue needs urgent resolution in an era of intense political polarization and the prospect of a
razor-thin margin in a presidential election, although so-called faithless electors have been a footnote so far in American
history. The justices will hear arguments in April and should issue a decision by late June.
Must Confront The Enemy From Within. We are witnessing a full-fledged attack on the Electoral College to rig
our elections once and for all to always go Marxist. In fact, eventually, they will find a way to do away with
elections altogether in the name of 'fairness'. Between that and opening our borders to unfettered invasion, the left has a
plan to control this country and rewrite our Constitution once and for all. They have rigged election after election
and won't stand for anyone on the right winning. That inspired this attempted soft coup against Trump. The left
literally rigged getting the House of Representatives back and again, we did nothing to stop them.
New Nihilists: Political Nihilism and the Progressive Movement in America. In spite of [Obama's] efforts,
Hillary lost, and President Trump began unwinding Obama's legacy. In the end, Obama's above-the-fray, laissez-faire
approach to leadership was a mistake — a mistake that today's progressives will not repeat. They are the new
nihilists, activists openly calling for the destruction of America's existing social and political institutions so that new,
progressive ones can arise from the rubble. No more electoral college, no more borders, no more constitutional
restrictions is their cry, and all the Democratic Party's presidential hopefuls say amen.
End of the Electoral College Is Closer Than You Think. When Al Gore won the national popular vote in 2000, but
lost the election, he was the first to do so in over 100 years. Following this loss, California millionaire John Koza
came up with a plan to reinvent the rules of the game. Koza proposed an "end run" that would allow states to circumvent
the Constitution without amending it. Rather than state electors making their decisions based on their state's
composition, states would instead give way to the most populous cities.
Dems Flood Colorado With Cash Ahead of National Popular Vote Referendum. California Democrats have been cutting
six-figure checks to promote the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPV) in Colorado ahead of a referendum vote in the
state next November. The NPV would change how the Electoral College operates without amending the Constitution.
It pledges a state's Electoral College votes to the candidate receiving the most votes nationwide in a presidential
election. The Colorado political committee Yes on National Popular Vote has collected just under $750,000 since its
creation in late July. Over 98 percent of that money is from California donors, most of which is courtesy of a $500,000
donation from Stephen Silberstein, a board member of the National Popular Vote nonprofit that has driven the movement for
more than a decade.
using impeachment to consolidate power. Democrats have been hell-bent on abolishing the electoral college since
at least 2005, when Democratic representative from Texas Gene Green first proposed the constitutional amendment.
Lately, those calls have been amplified by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who claims that the electoral college is
racist, and presidential loser Hillary Clinton, who didn't mince words when she called for it to be "eliminated." This
coupled with the fact that Democrats are staunchly opposed to voter ID or even a citizenship question on next year's Census
means strategically entrenching power in a few major cities, stealing the popular vote every single time.
No, the Electoral College Isn't "Electoral Affirmative Action" for Rural States. Attacks on the electoral
college are nothing new, but there's no question that it's been under heavier fire than usual lately. Presidential
candidates Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg and Beto O'Rourke have all said they want to scrap it.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) has repeatedly tweeted against it as well. "Every vote should be = in
America, no matter who you are and where you come from," she said. Ocasio-Cortez went on to argue that the electoral
college allows smaller, rural states outsized influence over the presidential election process, claiming it is akin to
"electoral affirmative action." But how much does the electoral college really advantage smaller states?
Court [has been] asked to decide if Electoral College voters are bound to the state's winner. If the Supreme
Court agrees to hear the appeal of the so-called "faithless electors," it could thrust the justices into yet another
high-passion political fight in the heat of the 2020 presidential election. It comes as some predict that the volatile
political atmosphere and disputes over redistricting could further emphasize the role of the Electoral College in the
upcoming election. "The issue is undeniably important: presidential elections in the Electoral College will be
increasingly close, and could literally turn upon whether electors have a constitutionally protected discretion," Lawrence
Lessig, a lawyer for the so-called "faithless electors," told the justices in court papers.
Not the Hand of Providence, Then Timeless Political Principles. Should our 232-year-old United States
Constitution still be binding? For the last few years, progressives increasingly have begun to answer with an emphatic
"No!" The most visible such criticism of our fundamental law is the attack on the Electoral College, which provides for
indirect election of the president by electors who, if the truth be told, represent the states far better than the popular
vote of the people. Progressives believe that democracy demands a majority of the popular vote select the president,
rather than a majority of the Electoral College, which latter body, after all, reflects political subdivisions and
geographical areas as much as it does the will of the majority.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg calls eliminating Electoral College more 'theoretical than real'. Supreme Court Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg characterized calls for eliminating the Electoral College as more "theoretical than real." The
justice commented on the proposed changes to the U.S. Constitution that some progressive lawmakers have been pushing during
an appearance Monday at the University of Chicago, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. "It's largely a dream because
our Constitution is ... hard to amend," Justice Ginsburg said. "I know that from experience."
to Small States: Drop Dead. The left has a hot new cause: getting rid of the Electoral College. And
if the left succeeds in doing away with that venerable institution, its next target, the U.S. Senate, will fall like a dried
apple. As is so often the case with leftist causes these days; the spearhead is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of
New York; being social-media-savvy and telegenic, she's the star of the progressive A-Team.
Streisand: The Electoral College 'an Assault on Our Democratic Principles'. Speaking to The Washington
Post for an article on what the U.S. Constitution represents to herself as well as other progressive figures such as
Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Streisand described the system as "antiquated" and advocated replacing it with
a system that allows the winner of the popular vote to win the election.
chairwoman questions legitimacy of Trump's election, Electoral College. The chairwoman of the Federal Election
Commission has raised new concerns about the legitimacy of elections like that of President Trump, who lost the popular vote
but won an Electoral College victory. Ellen Weintraub, who has stepped up criticism of Trump's claims of voter fraud,
said she is worried that Americans will lose faith in elections where the Electoral College and not the popular vote rules.
Appearing on MSNBC, she said that when she explains the U.S. system to foreign observers, they appear confused. Weintraub
said she explains that typically a presidential candidate wins both the electoral and popular vote "and everyone's happy."
The National Popular Vote Con
Job. TShe latest attempt by the Democrats to avoid the exigencies of the Electoral College is the National
Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). They have been selling this scheme as a conservative compromise between progressives
who would abolish the "obsolete" institution outright and reactionaries who wish to preserve an "inequitable and racist"
provision of the Constitution. In reality, NPVIC is just another effort to endow the heavily-populated, Democrat-dominated
regions of the country with even more political power than they already wield. Fortunately, it is doomed to failure.
Court Deals Serious Blow To The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. On Tuesday [8/20/2019], the
Denver-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ruled that the Colorado secretary of state violated the Constitution
when he removed an Electoral College delegate who had chosen to vote for John Kasich instead of Hillary Clinton. The
secretary of state nullified the vote of the delegate and installed a new delegate who voted in accordance with the popular
vote of the state of Colorado.
to Colorado national popular vote law will be on 2020 ballot. Voters in Colorado will do something next year
that hasn't been done in more than 100 years: Decide on repealing a law passed by the general assembly and signed by
the governor[.] The secretary of state's office announced Thursday the repeal of the national popular vote law has made
the November 2020 ballot after opponents of joining the national popular vote compact gathered enough valid signatures.
to confront the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. It is truly time to effectively confront and oppose
the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), which is nothing less than an attempted end run around the
constitutionally established operations of the Electoral College embedded by America's Founders in Article II of the United
States Constitution. The NPVIC is largely funded and promoted by wealthy, politically leftist donors primarily living
in and around large cities on the West and East Coasts of the United States. Because the Electoral College is an
integral part of the Constitution, the proper and perhaps only valid legal course of action to change the operations of the
college is through the amendment process allowed and stipulated in Article V of the Constitution.
of US Slavery. [Scroll down] The U.S. Constitution is replete with anti-majority rule, undemocratic
provisions. One provision, heavily criticized, is the Electoral College. In their wisdom, the framers gave us the
Electoral College so that in presidential elections, heavily populated states could not run roughshod over sparsely populated
states. In order to amend the Constitution, it requires a two-thirds vote of both Houses, or two-thirds of state
legislatures, to propose an amendment, and requires three-fourths of state legislatures for ratification. Part of the
reason for having a bicameral Congress is that it places another obstacle to majority rule. Fifty-one senators can
block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators. The president, with a veto, can thwart the will of all 535
members of Congress. It takes a two-thirds vote, not just a majority, of both houses of Congress to override a
Returns to Twitter to Slam Electoral College: GOP 'Scared' of Popular Vote. Rep. Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who has been noticeably absent from Twitter for the majority of the week, returned on Friday [8/23/2019] in a
Twitter thread, ranting about the Electoral College and accusing the GOP of being "scared" of a popular vote because "they *know*
they aren't the majority." While Ocasio-Cortez has been relatively silent on social media over the past week, she made
waves after posting a video on Instagram Monday, mocking the Electoral College, and by consequence, Middle America's voice.
National Popular Vote Bandwagon. The sudden and palpable distaste for the Electoral College appears to be
motivated by the festering anger of two stinging electoral defeats for the Democrats in 2000 and 2016, not by a sincere
desire to improve our great Republic in a bipartisan way. The counterfactual proof of this claim is the insight that if
George W. Bush and Donald Trump had won the national popular vote but had lost the Electoral College, the Democrats today
undoubtedly would be singing the praises of the Electoral College as a necessary check on mob rule. The movement
conveniently glosses over the fact that the Electoral College merely reflects how states send representatives and senators to
Washington. Even small states with only one representative have two senators, but the movement is not proposing to
abolish the Senate. Our Republic was founded on semi-autonomous states that do most of the heavy lifting for day-to-day
governance (police, schools, courts, roads, etc.) and therefore need a voice at the federal table to avoid having a few large
states control all the small states.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: Electoral College a racist 'scam' that 'has to go'. Rep. Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez says the Electoral College is a racist "scam" that should be abolished. The Democratic congresswoman
posted an Instagram story Monday that started with her driving along a deserted highway and joking about how many votes there
are in rural America. "We're coming to you live from the Electoral College," Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said, National
Review reported. "Many votes here, as you can see. Very efficient way to choose leadership of the country.
I mean I can't think of any other way, can you?"
The Electoral College Is a 'Scam'. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) on Monday called the U.S.
Electoral College "a scam" that negatively affects minorities. "We're coming to you live from the Electoral College,"
the New York Democrat said in a video on Instagram, which featured her driving along a sparsely populated highway in what
appears to be a desert somewhere in the western part of the country. "Many votes here, as you can see. Very
efficient way to choose leadership of the country. I mean I can't think of any other way, can you?"
Court Rules Electoral College Members [are] Not Bound by [the] Popular Vote. The 10th US Circuit Court of
Appeals in Denver ruled Tuesday that the presidential electors can cast their vote for the presidential candidate of their
own choice and are not bound by the popular vote in their states. A panel of federal judges ruled 2-1 saying that
Colorado was wrong in 2016 to force an elector to vote for Hillary Clinton in the Electoral College.
journalists don't understand the Electoral College. [Scroll down] The lesson for voters who want their
votes to be important is this. Make your state purple, not red or blue. Candidates don't waste time campaigning
in California or Texas, because those states are already in the bag. But they do campaign in Ohio and Florida, because
those states can go either way. Your state can be purple by being receptive to candidates from the other tribe. A
purple state is a close state, and the votes in a close state are important.
and Nevada Show Why the Electoral College Helps Small States, Not Red States. The National Popular Vote
compact, which is an agreement between states, requires a participating state to award all of its electoral votes to the
presidential candidate who receives the most votes across the nation, not to the candidate who actually won the vote in that
state. In other words, states are agreeing to ignore what the majority of voters in their state decides when it comes
to who they believe should be president. This interstate compact has been sold to state governments as a means to
abolish what supporters wrongly claim is the "outmoded, undemocratic Electoral College." What is "undemocratic" is an
agreement that means that even if every single voter in a state voted against a presidential candidate who won the national
popular vote, the state would still have to give all its electoral votes to that candidate.
Democrat Candidates' 21 Most Insanely Scary Proposals. [#12] Abolish the Electoral College: So far,
Warren, Harris, O'Rourke, Buttigieg, Julian Castro, Booker, and Gillibrand want the electoral college banished. Joe
Biden has remained silent. Abolishing the electoral college shifts all political power to the population centers of
America, the deep blue cities, and renders most red states absolutely powerless in the choice of president.
One-Two Punch to Knock Out Electoral Democracy. If you thought, or hoped, that the brave (or nobly self-interested)
Democratic Governor of Nevada, Steve Sisolak had done in the push for a National Popular Vote by vetoing the bill, think again.
[...] The scheme, of course, is an effort to change the Constitution without the bother of securing the consent of three-fourths
of the states that the Article V Amendment procedure requires. It is also of questionable validity without the consent
of Congress. While the Supreme Court might rule against allowing an interstate compact to go into effect without the prior
Congressional consent that the Constitution's Article I section 10 requires for states to enter into interstate compacts,
it also might not. And since the National Popular Vote folks think they can change the Constitution while flouting the rules
for changing the Constitution, they might feel equally free to ignore whatever the Supreme Court tells them the Constitution
requires. And whatever can or cannot get through today's Congress is no guarantee that some future Congress might not find
the National Popular Vote acceptable while ignoring the pesky requirement of prior Congressional consent.
the 2020 Election: How it Could Happen. Why would workers toil for hours to change individual
ballots? The same result was achieved in 2016 when only two people were persuaded to change their votes. These
two people, who were totally anonymous and unelected, nullified hundreds of thousands of lawfully cast ballots as they
succumbed to a secret campaign of intimidation and persuasion in the weeks after the 2016 presidential election.
Politico noted that activists publicly doxxed personal contact information for many electors — "and it's
been used to bury them with massive email campaigns." Famous actors made a public appeal to the electors to nullify
American votes using out-of-context quotes from the Federalist Papers. Sharon Geise, an elector from Mesa,
Arizona, estimated 8,000 emails flooded her inbox in the days leading up to the official Electoral College vote in the 2016
presidential election. The four electors from Idaho reported harassing phone calls from activists pressuring them to
nullify the ballots cast for Donald Trump.
Pushes Liberal Dream to Abolish Electoral College. As NBC Nightly News continued its monotonous drumbeat
on Thursday to elevate liberal policy positions ahead of the Democratic debate they were holding, the network gave the
megaphone to South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg in order to push for abolishing the Electoral College.
Correspondent Harry Smith let Buttigieg freely suggest the country had to "strengthen American democracy" because we were
supposedly in an era of deteriorating voting rights. In reality, his "Big Idea" would damage the framework our founders
put in place to protect the people from tyranny.
Levin: Smaller States Are Destroying Power, Vote of Their State by Supporting Nat'l Popular Vote. On his
nationally syndicated radio talk show "The Mark Levin Show" on Tuesday [6/11/2019], host Mark Levin warned that smaller
states are destroying the power, the vote in their state by supporting the national popular vote. "And then you have
these idiots in these smaller states that go along with it," stated Mark Levin. "They don't even realize that they're
giving up their own autonomy. It's incredible. They're destroying the power of their state, the vote in their state."
for the National Popular Vote movement? AT readers don't need to be introduced to the National Popular Vote
Interstate Compact, the desperation measure concocted by the Democrats in an effort to make an end run around the Electoral
College by pledging states to abide by the popular vote. Fourteen states, along with D.C., have so far passed the
compact. [...] That was where it stood until the week before last, when on May 30 Gov. Steve Sisolak of Nevada vetoed
the bill, which had been passed by the state senate nine days before. This action may very well break the momentum of
the march to 270, marking the high tide of the Democrat's latest attempt to subvert representative democracy.
You Don't Want. 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.
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.
Gov. Steve Sisolak Vetoes National Popular Vote Bill. Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak (D) on Thursday
[5/30/2019] vetoed a bill which would have pledged the state's six electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote for
President of the United States. Assembly Bill 186, which recently passed the Senate on a 12-8 vote, would have seen
Nevada join with 14 other states in an agreement to vote for the winner of the popular vote. The Assembly had voted in
favor of the measure 23-17.
How Democrats Are Trying
To Steal The Next Election. Democrats are clearly very worried about President Donald Trump sailing to
re-election, so much so they're coming up with every scheme in the book to reduce his chances of winning. Several blue
states have not only passed bills that would keep President Trump off the ballot if he doesn't release his tax returns, but
some states are also pledging to give their Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national
popular vote, among other things. [Video clip]
National Popular Vote Scheme. In Nevada last week, the state senate approved National Popular Vote
legislation. The NPV would render the electoral college irrelevant by requiring electors to vote for the national
vote-winner instead of the candidate capturing the most votes in their states. Ross finds the basic structure of the
NPV to be dishonest. The Constitution provides that America's state-by-state presidential election system cannot be
changed without the consent of three-quarters (38) of the states. The NPV, Ross notes, "seeks an end run around this
process. It wants states to sign a simple interstate compact instead." In that deal, states agree to give their
presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of the outcome within a state's borders.
The compact kicks in when states holding 270 electors have signed on.
Closer to Mob Rule: No Choice, No Voice. The Electoral College system is under attack as never
before. With Nevada about to join the other fourteen states in joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, we
are moving closer to both the possibility of mob rule and, unfortunately, a terrible confrontation. Democrats were
stunned by their loss in 2016. They were sure they had the election won months before it took place. People were
chosen, plans were made. But, it didn't happen. The states chose differently: by people, by region, by
interests, by values. It was designed that way. It was constructed to give voice to every state's burdens, every
state's concerns. The Electoral College was devised to give every state a voice in choosing the President of the United
States, the only national election. A pure democracy does none of that.
Americans would be serfs if we abolished the Electoral College. Should rural and small-town Americans be
reduced to serfdom? The American Founders didn't think so. This is one reason why they created checks and
balances, including the Electoral College. Today that system is threatened by a proposal called the National Popular
Vote Interstate Compact, or NPV. Rural America produces almost all our country's food, as well as raw materials like
metals, cotton and timber. Energy, fossil fuels but also alternatives like wind and solar come mostly from rural
areas. In other words, the material inputs of modern life flow out of rural communities and into cities. This is
fine, so long as the exchange is voluntary — rural people choose to sell their goods and services, receive a fair
price, and have their freedom protected under law. But history shows that city dwellers have a nasty habit of taking
advantage of their country cousins.
passes National Popular Vote bill in bid to upend Electoral College. The Nevada Senate approved Tuesday
[5/21/2019] a National Popular Vote bill on a party-line vote, sending the legislation aimed at upending the Electoral
College to the governor. Assembly Bill 186, which passed the Senate on a 12-8 vote, would bring Nevada into the
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an agreement between participating states to cast their electoral votes for the
winner of the popular vote. If signed as expected by Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak, Nevada would become the 16th
jurisdiction to join the compact, along with 14 states and the District of Columbia. The compact would take effect
after states totaling 270 electoral votes, and with Nevada, the total would reach 195.
Somewhat related: New
effort launches to democratically elect the vice president in 2020. There's a national push for voters to elect
the U.S. vice presidentseparately from the president. Vice.run, is a campaign that seeks to create a separate and independent
ballot line for the vice president in 2020. The group is trying to collect — from all 50 states — voter
signatures and pledges in support of the separate vice president election. "An independently-elected vice president would
give American voters a new level of direct control over who serves in the White House," Vice.run says on its website.
The Editor says...
Fractionalized governments are unstable. Maybe that's the point.
Trump Derangement Syndrome. The derangement we are facing is not Orange Man Bad; it is America Bad. The
Democrats don't believe in our two-party system anymore. [...] Democrats hate our electoral system as unjust because it
doesn't deliver to them guaranteed victory. All their efforts towards 2020 will be focused on changing our election
laws and norms. They don't want the electoral college, which guards against domination of the country by politically
narrow urban population centers.
to Defeat the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. It is obvious why liberals, whose political philosophy
and preferences are anathema to much of the nation, would want to do this. Eliminating the Electoral College means
Democratic presidential candidates never having to say they're sorry to, or consider the opinions and values of, those
ignorant, gun-totin', Bible-thumpin' rubes in flyover country. That it would also destroy our federal system,
transforming the 50 independent states into satraps of an all-powerful federal government is icing on the cake. But if
there is one thing on which liberals and conservatives can agree, it is that, the odds of convincing enough smaller states to
cut off their own electoral [power] lies somewhere between zero and zilch.
Three Key Russian Collusion Hoax Plot Lines. There were three principle plotlines advanced to reverse the
election. The first was the Hillary Clinton campaign's brazen effort to sway the Electoral College. The campaign
pushed initially for an "intelligence briefing" of the electors that we can reasonably suspect would have included the
now-disproven dossier. Clinton's allies also engaged in a comprehensive campaign to harass electors by inundating with
them thousands of emails, phone calls, and videos. Death threats were reported. This plot failed when an
anonymous bureaucrat balked at declassifying the dossier's contents in December 2016. Even so, two electors representing
hundreds of thousands of votes did indeed succumb to the pressure.
College scheme: Grounds for civil war? In their bid to establish dictatorial, totalitarian, socialist
rule in the United States, Democrats all over the country are pushing a plainly anti-constitutional scheme to erase the
constitutional method for electing the president of the United States. [...] The states have no lawmaking power to alter the
authority of electors chosen by the people. States can regulate the manner of choosing the electors, but they cannot
dictate the terms of their vote, as if the electors themselves do not exist. Such legislation is not a law; it is an
act of rebellion against the duly constituted government of the United States. If they pretend to claim power as a
result of this anti-constitutional scheme, their rebellion will properly be the signal for civil war.
liberal opposition to [the] Electoral College [is] not about democracy, but about power. As they did after
losing George W. Bush's 2000 election by a majority of the Electoral College but not the popular vote, Democrats attack the
Constitution's method for selecting the president as fundamentally undemocratic. [...] But the Electoral College's exaggeration
of the power of the states is not some bizarre mistake or a constitutional version of the appendix. The Framers specifically
designed the Electoral College to dilute democracy and favor the states. Democrats who disagree are at war with the
federalism that the Framers hardwired throughout the Constitution itself.
set to join 'compact' of states that would award electors to winner of national popular vote. Oregon is on the
way to joining a group of states looking to overhaul the Electoral College system. In a 17-12 vote, the Oregon Senate
passed a bill that would award Oregon's seven electoral votes to the winner of the U.S. popular vote instead of the candidate
who won the state. It now goes to the state House, which has passed it several times already, and then head to Gov. Kate
Brown, who says she supports it.
Left's Most Serious Attack On Federalism. Much of the Left's current wish list — the Green New Deal,
reparations — is fantasy. Those proposals are purely for political effect, and aren't going anywhere.
But there is an important exception: there is a serious risk that the Left will succeed in effectively abolishing the
Electoral College. That will never be done via constitutional amendment, of course. The small states, a majority,
won't vote for it. But liberals are promoting an Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote.
Question for Those Who Oppose the Electoral College. [#2] If you reject the notion of disproportional
representation, do you reject the institution of the U.S. Senate? Certain opponents of the electoral college accept the
notion of our republican system but take umbrage at the disproportionate representation that contributes to the way in
which states' electoral votes are determined. The electoral college allots votes based on the number of a state's
federal legislative representatives, meaning the disproportionate representation of the Senate creates a system where certain
voters have relatively less or more power than others. Those who oppose the electoral college must therefore also
oppose the representative scheme of the Senate and would look to rework or eliminate this institution.
Wise Purpose of the Electoral College. The Electoral College system — especially the original system
before it was altered by the 12th Amendment in 1804 — was part of a republican system of government designed by
the founders to secure the liberty of the individual: "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among
Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" (Declaration of Independence). It was the design of the
Founders to create a government that would "secure these rights" and thus preserve our liberty. They recognized that a
popular government — a democracy — would soon enough begin to subject freedom and rights to a popular
vote: here a little, there a little; lie upon lie; pretext upon pretext. With that, freedom would gradually be
minimalized, eroded, discarded, and replaced by equality. But it would a dreary, regulated equality of limitations,
deprivations, and misery. Ultimately, it would become a fearful tyranny. That's why James Madison warned that the
democracies of history "have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with
personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in
their deaths" (Federalist #10).
Voting Changes Are About Power, Not Principles. From 2017 on, Trump has sought systematically to dismantle the
progressive agenda that had been established by his predecessor, Barack Obama — often in controversial and
unapologetic style. The furor over the 2016 Clinton loss and the new Trump agenda, the fear that Trump could be
re-elected and anger about the Electoral College have mobilized progressives to demand changes to the hallowed traditions of
electing presidents. The Electoral College was designed in part to ensure that candidates at least visited the small
and often rural states of America. The generation of the Founding Fathers did not want elections to rest solely with
larger urban populations. The Electoral College balances out the popular vote.
Are 4 Egregious Ways the Left Wants to Transform American Politics. The Electoral College can be a convoluted way to pick a president,
but that's by design. The Framers rightly feared the tendency of pure democracy to descend into mob rule and run roughshod over the rights of
disfavored minorities, so they created a Constitution chock-full of anti-majoritarian safeguards. That includes an Electoral College that
can — though seldom does — seat a president who loses the popular vote. There is a method to that madness. The nation is a diverse
place, and voters living in rural Indiana quite likely have a different set of issues and concerns than do voters living in downtown San Francisco.
The Electoral College gives greater weight to the former group, encouraging campaigns to focus on assembling broad coalitions that span regions and
interests. The alternative — election by pure popular vote — flips the tables. If pure turnout is the end goal, candidates will
inevitably focus their efforts on the biggest states — California, for example — and major urban centers like Chicago and New York City.
Bankrolling the National Popular Vote Movement. The nonprofit organization building a coalition of states that
favor choosing the president by popular vote promotes itself as nonpartisan, but is financed by millions of dollars from
left-leaning groups. Some of the leaders of the movement are prominent Republicans, and most of the funding for the
nonprofit, National Popular Vote Inc., has come from a wealthy Democrat and a billionaire independent. However, many
large, liberal organizations back the movement, according to the Capital Research Center, a conservative investigative think
tank that monitors nonprofits. It gathered donor information on National Popular Vote Inc. using a commercial database.
Catastrophic Ramifications of Abolishing the Electoral College. There is a well-founded saying that the
definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. If that is the case,
socialism is definitely the epitome of insanity, in that it has been tried over and over and always arrives at the same
result — utter failure. It's a system that watches as its government grows so bloated with bureaucracies to
watch the other bureaucracies, while administering everything from food distribution to doctor visits, with the legislative
element passing ridiculous laws and promising more and more benefits until there are no more lines of credit, the tax base
has maxed out, the party is over and the government is forced to take further action to control riots and
demonstrations. Socialism in its purest form always morphs into totalitarianism.
Group Hopes to Overturn National Popular Vote Bill at Ballot Box. A small group of Colorado citizens is hoping
to overturn a bill passed earlier this year joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPV), a workaround to
implement a major shift to the Electoral College without amending the Constitution but which detractors argue is unconstitutional.
Although 12 states and the District of Columbia have already passed NPV legislation, the effort could create one of the first
times a citizenry will vote on the idea, and could make the state a proxy in the ongoing debate over the Electoral College as more
Democratic presidential candidates are campaigning on abolishing the constitutionally created institution. Colorado's
constitution allows citizens to reject laws passed by the state general assembly with a ballot referendum, a challenge that's
been eagerly accepted by Mayor Don Wilson (R.) of Monument, a small suburb just north of Colorado Springs.
College and Slavery: A Reality Check. In the wake of Hillary Clinton's 2016 loss to Donald Trump, we have
been subjected to increasingly shrill calls from the left to abolish the Electoral College. Several Democratic
presidential candidates, including Elizabeth Warren, have added their voices to this dissonant chorus. But their
arguments suggest that the framers were wise to be wary of the mischief caused by unscrupulous politicians who play on the
emotions of the voters. An exquisitely apposite example of such demagoguery is the claim that the Electoral College
itself is a relic of slavery. This was recently repeated by Congressman Steve Cohen (D-TN) [...]
old college try. No, the Electoral College isn't a plot. Yes, it is needed. Without it, the recount
in the 2000 election could have gone on forever. Without it, we could never have founded the union, as the small states
would have never accepted the loss of their power. Without it, candidates could win by running up numbers among their
own backers, whereas now it takes a diverse coalition with backing both deep and wide. This isn't to say that we
haven't seen oddities, such as for instance in 2016. Never had two candidates been so disliked and dishonest,
never were votes cast with such apprehension, and never had the gap between the electoral vote and the popular vote been so
wide and so glaring, or so entirely caused by one state.
States' Rights to Presidential Elections. Colorado has bought into the popular vote mythology in presidential
elections and the need to nationalize the process of electing presidents. Although wrong-headed, the right of the
Colorado Legislature to make these changes is constitutional. Republicans ought to use the power of those state
governments they control to enact real reform by providing that the electoral votes of the state be cast by the state
Legislature directly and not by voters choosing those electors. [...] Control of both houses of the Legislature and the
governor is required to pass a law reverting power to the state Legislature to cast the electoral votes of a state, but once
that becomes the law, only control of the state Legislature would be required to cast the state's electoral votes in all
the Electoral College Would Be a Mistake. Senator Elizabeth Warren has reignited the debate over the Electoral
College — she wants to get rid of it, naturally. I say "reignited" because this is a very old argument. [...]
Arguments against it tend to boil down to two gripes: It's very old-fashioned, and it's undemocratic.
Away With' the Electoral College. Julian Castro joined a bevy of other 2020 Democrats on Wednesday [3/20/2019] by
calling for the abolition of the electoral college. Castro, who previously served as mayor of San Antonio and secretary of
housing and urban development in the Obama administration, told BuzzFeed News he supported efforts to "do away with" the
institution. The admission makes Castro the latest candidate vying for the Democratic presidential nomination to
endorse eliminating the electoral college. Such an idea has been increasingly discussed in liberal circles since the
2016 election. In that race, Hillary Clinton lost the presidency to Donald Trump, despite winning the popular vote.
the Electoral College Is Unconstitutional and Wrong. In theory, a democracy or a constitutional republic makes
major decisions based on the desires of the majority of the people. Indeed, it was rule by a generally elite minority,
rather than the majority, that was the basis for the founding of our country. However, our forefathers also recognized
that the United States of America, while honoring rule by the majority, also realized that individual states must have
basic rights and a should have a voice in presidential elections.
the Electoral College Is Not a 'Shadow of Slavery's Power'. "There you go again," Ronald Reagan famously joked
in 1980 when President Jimmy Carter painted an inaccurate picture of one of his policies. Perhaps he'd say the same of
those who are distorting the history of the Electoral College today. New York's newest congresswoman, Democrat
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has been quick to jump onto this bandwagon, recently labeling the Electoral College a "shadow of
slavery's power on America." Others have called it a "living symbol of America's original sin," an "antiquated relic of
slavery," or even a "pro-slavery compromise." Mere hours into the new Congress, a bill was introduced to eliminate this
"outdated" system. Such a view of the Electoral College's roots threatens to become conventional wisdom, but nothing
could be further from the truth.
Democrats want to abolish Electoral College, pack Supreme Court. Elizabeth Warren wants to get rid of the Electoral
College. [...] She argued that presidential nominees no longer campaign in places like California and Massachusetts because they're
not swing states, instead focusing on battlegrounds that are up for grabs. That's true, but if you abolished the college
tomorrow, candidates would camp out in such megastates as New York, California, Florida, and Texas in an effort to run up
their popular vote totals. The college forces them to move around the country, especially to smaller states whose handful of
electoral votes could tip the balance.
you need to know about abolishing the Electoral College. Amid a number of proposals pushed by 2020 Democratic
presidential candidates trying to stand out in a crowded field comes an idea that totally doesn't scream "sore loser" at all:
abolishing the Electoral College. During a CNN town hall on Monday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said, "My view
is that every vote matters. And the way we can make that happen is that we can have national voting, and that means get
rid of the Electoral College." But the disdain you're seeing from Democrats to get rid of a system that's been a thorn
in their side is a sentiment that was once held by some Republicans, namely President Trump.
The Enemy Within.
We are at the point where the Democrats feel safe in openly ignoring the Constitution and the Rule of Law when it suits them
in furthering their totalitarian ideological agenda. A very glaring and dangerous example is the move by some 13
Democrat dominated states — California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New
York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington state, and the District of Columbia — to ignore the Electoral College and elect the
president by popular vote.
Warren wants to abolish the Electoral College. Presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren on Monday night [3/18/2019]
called for abolishing the Electoral College. The Massachusetts Democrat said during a town hall on CNN that she would back
a plan to scrap the process and move the country to a national popular vote. "My view is that every vote matters," Warren
said to applause. "And the way we can make that happen is that we can have national voting and that means get rid of the
Electoral College — and every vote counts." The electoral process, she said, effectively disenfranchises voters
in states dominated by one party.
The Editor says...
Hmmm. "States dominated by one party." Like California?
Colorado law will give state's electoral college votes to national popular vote winner. Colorado could be part
of voting history next general election day, joining 11 other states looking to ensure that their electoral college votes
echo the will of the American majority to elect the next president. Gov. Jared Polis signed a law Friday that
would allot the state's electoral college votes to whichever candidate won the national popular vote. The Washington
Post previously reported the law's signing.
Left Anti-Electoral College Plan Building Momentum. Democrats have long opposed the Electoral College because
with overwhelming margins of victory in high-population states like California they could dominate future presidential
elections based on the popular vote, so they have concocted a plan to try to bypass the constitutional amendment process by
constructing a multi-state compact to allocate their Electoral votes according to the popular vote. [Hans] von Spakovsky
says the movement going on in all 50 states is sponsored by the National Popular Vote, an advocacy group in California, that
claims they can get rid of the Electoral College's effects by having the states agree to a state compact.
to the electoral bottom. Colorado is poised to become the 13th signatory to the National Popular Vote initiative,
adding to the eleven states plus the District of Colombia that have already signed on to this interstate compact, whereby
the electoral votes from these states would be cast in favor of whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote.
This bill would take effect when enough states sign on to add up to at least 270 electoral votes. The addition
of Colorado's electors will bring that total to 181, or about two thirds there. We may be a few short years away from
fundamentally transforming how we elect our presidents.
Holder calls for an end to the electoral college: 'It's undemocratic'. Former Attorney General Eric Holder, who
is considering a 2020 presidential bid, called Tuesday to abolish the electoral college, saying it's a "vestige of the past."
"It's undemocratic, forces candidates to ignore majority of the voters and campaign in a small number of states. The presidency
is our one national office and should be decided - directly - by the voters," Mr. Holder said on Twitter. The
potential Democratic presidential candidate issued the tweet while linking to an article from The Washington Post that notes nearly
a dozen traditionally blue states have passed legislation to circumvent the electoral college.
shooting themselves in the foot with Electoral College compact. Despite the Dems' wish, the [Electoral] College
won't be abolished. That would require an amendment to the Constitution. The odds of that happening are 0.00 percent.
Here's their fallback idea. The states would enter into a "compact" that would work something like a multiparty contract.
They would each agree that they would cast their respective College votes for the candidate that wins the national popular vote.
If all the states entered into this compact, and if it survived Constitutional challenges, then the winner of the popular vote would
thereby win all the electoral votes. Every election would be a 538-to-0 decision in the College. But in the real world,
not all states will enter into this compact.
Reevaluating the Electoral
College. Since Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 presidential election with 2.9 million more votes than Donald
Trump, and Al Gore lost the 2000 election despite outpacing George Bush by half a million votes, little has had a greater
effect on the presidency in modern times than the institution of the Electoral College. At the founding of the United
States, there was plenty of controversy regarding the means by which the president would be elected. Many thought that
Congress should elect the president directly, although others feared that such an establishment would give Congress a
tyrannical degree of power. James Madison worried extensively about a true democratic election, fearing that the masses
would vote to elect men who would encroach on the constitutional rights of other citizens in the name of the public good (an
eerie thought in light of Senator Bernie Sanders' recent announcement of his second presidential bid).
Hijacking of a Presidential Election. [Scroll down] Some progressives think we should junk the Electoral
College and elect presidents with the popular vote. Other progressives think we should rejigger the College and
allocate its votes in a way that is closer to the popular vote. But if one believes in federalism, the above data
argues just the opposite. We can't have the preferences of two populous coastal states being imposed on the other
48 states merely because they have some tiny majority. That's especially so when those two states are so very different
from the rest of the country. Let California have its tent cities, its free healthcare for illegal aliens, and its San
Francisco values, but leave us "hicks" in the heartland alone.
The Electoral College
Power Grab. [Scroll down] The only principle at work here is partisan advantage. Consider how the
Democrats have behaved concerning the alleged plague of gerrymandering. Every time the Democrats have won a majority in
the House — every single time, as far back as we have records — they have over-performed their
percentage vote, sometimes by astonishing amounts. Between 1966 and 1970, the Democrats' share of the aggregate House
popular vote would have entitled them to majorities of 11, seven, and 39 seats. Their actual majorities were 61, 51,
and 75. There was no movement among Republicans to move Congress to a system of proportional representation.
Suddenly, when the Republicans outperform their aggregate popular vote, and by far lower margins, it's a crime against humanity.
Unite Against H.R. 1, 'Ultimate Fantasy of the Left'. Over 150 conservative leaders nationwide released a "Memo
to the Movement" from the Conservative Action Project on Monday, declaring that they are opposed to the Democrats' kick-off
legislation H.R. 1, which would profoundly shift elections toward liberal candidates and open the door to rampant voter
fraud, calling Speaker Nancy Pelosi's bill "the ultimate fantasy of the left." "Conservatives are united in opposing
H.R. 1, the attempt by House Democrats to fundamentally undermine the American electoral system," the Memo begins.
Ocasio-Cortez [and] other Dems want you to embrace a socialist agenda. [#4] Abolishing the electoral
college: Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., introduced legislation to create a constitutional amendment that would
eliminate the electoral college system and replace it with a model based entirely on the outcome of the national popular
vote. (Democratic presidential candidates Al Gore (2000) and Hillary Clinton (2016) both won the popular vote but lost the
presidential election because their challengers won more electoral college votes.) The electoral college system for
electing presidents is an essential part of our federalist system of government and was a key component to the passage of the
Constitution in 1787. The electoral college enhances the power of voters in smaller states. Without the electoral
college, voters in a handful of highly populated states would have significantly more power to determine the outcome of every
presidential election, which is exactly what Democrats want. About three in 10 votes cast in the 2016 election occurred
in just seven Democratic-leaning states: California, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Virginia and
Washington State. If the electoral college is abolished, voters in much of the Midwest, South and Mountain West
regions — especially in rural areas — will be ignored in future presidential elections.
Electoral College Must Remain. Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., recently introduced a proposed constitutional
amendment that would eliminate the Electoral College. This was obviously done in response to the fact that Hillary
Clinton lost the 2016 election despite winning nearly 3 million more votes than President Trump. According to Cohen,
the Electoral College is outdated and distorting. [...] Cohen's position is clearly partisan, will almost certainly fail, and
will face stiff resistance from many smaller states.
Rid Of The Electoral College? It Would Lead To The Break-Up Of America, Or Worse. The first acts of a new
Congress usually hold great significance. They set a tenor, a tone, for what is to come. If so, Americans should
be very worried about the new Democrat-led Congress. One of the first acts of business last Thursday [1/3/2019], mere
hours after the new Congress was sworn in, came from Tennessee Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen, as reported by The Daily
Caller. His big idea: amend the Constitution to abolish the Electoral College.
Dem Wants to Eliminate Electoral College. A Democratic member of the House introduced Constitutional amendments
Thursday that would eliminate the Electoral College and limit presidential powers concerning pardons. Rep. Steve
Cohen, D-Tenn., submitted the measures hours after the new Congress was installed. One of them would erase the
Electoral College, which is outlined in Article II of the Constitution.
We're Going To Have Smart Government, Kids Must Learn Civics. Waleed Shahid, a former advisor to New York
Congressional Candidate and Democratic Socialist heartthrob Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said the Senate is not democratic
enough because less populous states receive the same representation as high-population states. But this is the very
point of the Senate. Without equal representation in one house of Congress, large states would be able to run roughshod
over smaller states. Yet this fact is continually ignored by civically-illiterate citizens eager to support their
points of frustration against Trump's agenda. And Shahid wasn't alone in his sentiment about the Electoral
College. Hordes of American citizens decried its unfairness following the election, and it has become unmistakably
clear that yesterday's bored high school government student morphed into today's angry voter.
Rep Proposes Constitutional Amendment to Eliminate 'Outdated Electoral College'. Rep. Steve Cohen (D.,
Tenn) on Thursday proposed a Constitutional amendment to eliminate the "outdated Electoral College," saying he believes the
individual who wins the popular vote deserves to win the election. A press release from Cohen's office listed the two
amendments the congressman was introducing, including the elimination of the Electoral College and an amendment that would
limit presidential pardon power. "In two presidential elections since 2000, including the most recent one in which
Hillary Clinton won 2.8 million more votes than her opponent, the winner of the popular vote did not win the election
because of the distorting effect of the outdated Electoral College," said Cohen's press release.
Riots In France Perfectly Illustrate Why We Need The Electoral College. The debate over the Electoral College
comes up constantly during American elections, including the midterms last month, with many on the left calling for a popular
vote instead. The process of electoral delegates voting for one particular party even if the popular vote of their
state had only a slim majority makes the presidential elections seem generally unfair. Under the electoral system,
lower-population states have outsized influence, higher-population states have somewhat limited influence, and swing states
enjoy all the attention. With a popular vote, so the thinking goes, each citizen would have a voice, and the president
and his administration would consequently have more legitimacy and better serve the American population.
the Senate and Electoral College? Why Not Tear Up the Constitution? Former Congressman John Dingell, Jr.,
a partisan Democrat whose immediate family has controlled the same seat in the House of Representatives for 86 years, has
some suggestions for fixing Congress. We should abolish the Senate and the Electoral College because they're undemocratic,
"despite the constitutional hurdles of doing so." In 2015, Dingell retired from the U.S. House seat he's held since 1955,
the seat he inherited from his father, John Dingell, Sr., who first won it in 1932. The seat has passed to John Jr.'s
much-younger wife, Rep. Debbie Dingell, who was just re-elected in November.
Trump: The Last President?
Trump's victory did expose part of the genius of the founding fathers. Despite the popular vote being in favor of Clinton,
Trump concentrated on and won the Electoral College. The Electoral College isn't a genius move because Trump won —
the Electoral College was a guarantee of the essential promise of the Constitution to the States that the small states wouldn't get
dragged around like a St. Bernard's chew toy, but it also provided a trap against voter fraud and a mechanism for nearly
instant legitimacy of the elected President. In order to cheat on a national election, you'd have to cheat in state after
state after state. Cheating in New York City or even statewide in Texas alone won't do elect a fraudulent President.
And while it's uncommon it's not unheard of: Trump is the fifth President to be elected by winning the Electoral College
without winning the popular vote.
Left Trashes the Constitution: Sacking the Senate. The Democrats' trashing of the Constitution did not
end with the Kavanaugh confirmation battle but now rambles on with their denunciations of the fundamental institutions of
American republican government. They will continue their attack on the electoral process with their disparagement of
the Electoral College. Next up, we hear rumblings about the supposed "undemocratic" nature of the Senate. Can
anyone imagine the winner of the World Series being determined by which team scored the most runs in seven games, and not who
won the most games? Then it would no longer be baseball. Scrapping the Electoral College would have the same
effect — it would transform not just the election but also campaigns and the conception of the voter and
citizen — all for the worse.
Electoral College Debate. Democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, seeking to represent New York's 14th
Congressional District, has called for the abolition of the Electoral College. Her argument came on the heels of the
Senate's confirming Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. She was lamenting the fact that Chief Justice John Roberts
and Justice Samuel Alito, nominated by George W. Bush, and Justices Neil Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, nominated by Donald Trump,
were court appointments made by presidents who lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College vote. Hillary
Clinton has long been a critic of the Electoral College. Just recently, she wrote in The Atlantic, "You won't be
surprised to hear that I passionately believe it's time to abolish the Electoral College."
the rules? Why the Left is slamming the Senate and Electoral College. Liberals who are unhappy with the
confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh are starting to complain that the Senate itself is undemocratic. Liberals who are
unhappy with Donald Trump as president are starting to complain that the way he was elected is undemocratic. [...] I just
don't think it's a winning argument to say that the problem is these institutions, and rules that have been in place for more
than 225 years, rather than the failure to prevail in debates and win elections.
The Editor says...
The Colbert program is taped at the Ed Sullivan Theater in New York City (according to Wikipedia) and the majority
of the people in New York City may be "very Liberal," but that doesn't mean the rest of the country agrees.
Clinton Knocks Electoral College, Calls It An 'Odd System'. Hillary Clinton, who beat Donald Trump in the popular vote,
continued her attack on the Electoral College on Friday, calling it an "odd system" and not in keeping with the idea of "one person,
one vote." "I know this is another really obvious thing to say. Vote in every election, not just presidential elections,"
Clinton said at Harvard University, in a clip from NTK Network. [...] While Clinton finds the Electoral College system "a little
troubling," she admitted it's the system we have.
Bashes 'Troubling' Electoral College as 'Odd System'. Hillary Clinton continued to attack the Electoral College
system used to elect U.S. presidents on Friday, calling it an "odd system" and contrary to the idea of "one person, one
vote." "I know this is another really obvious thing to say. Vote in every election, not just presidential
elections," Clinton said at Harvard University, in a clip flagged by NTK Network. "You know, it is maddening because
one of the panelists said we get the government that we vote for. Now, we have this odd system with the Electoral College."
Subverts the Electoral College, Rejecting Its Own History. Opponents of the Electoral College achieved an important
victory last weekend when Connecticut's legislature passed the so-called National Popular Vote compact. [...] Most Americans have
never heard of the National Popular Vote compact, but it is shockingly close to causing a major political and legal firestorm.
It is a clever scheme to change how we elect the president without the bother of having to pass a constitutional amendment.
States that approve this legislation enter a simple compact with one another. Each participating state agrees to allocate its
electors to the winner of the national popular vote regardless of how its own citizens voted. The compact goes into effect
when states holding 270 electoral votes (enough to win the presidency) have agreed to the plan. With Connecticut's vote,
11 states and the District of Columbia have now approved the measure, giving the compact a total of 172 electors.
It needs only 98 more to reach the 270 mark.
The Left's End-Run Around
the Constitution. This week, my state of Connecticut hopped aboard the "Resistance" bandwagon, loaded up a gun made
by one of the many firearms manufacturers who have been driven from the state, and shot itself in the foot. It did so by officially
signing on to an unconstitutional enormity called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an ingenious mechanism for disenfranchising
residents of small states in order to nullify the Electoral College, and make them feel good about their own suicide.
Activists Look to Courts to Undermine the Electoral College. Having failed to generate enough support to
abolish the Electoral College through a constitutional amendment, the institution's detractors are now looking to the courts
to upend it. A new lawsuit, spearheaded by Harvard University law professor Lawrence Lessig and filed in four states,
charges that the "winner-take-all" element of how states divvy up their Electoral College votes is unconstitutional.
The District of Columbia and 48 states use this winner-take-all system. The only exceptions are Maine and Nebraska,
which use a proportional allocation of votes.
challenge Electoral College system in four U.S. states. Critics complain that the Electoral College system
allows a candidate to win a presidential election despite losing the nationwide popular vote. In 2016, Trump won the
Electoral College vote while Clinton won the popular vote by nearly 3 million ballots. In the 2000 election, then-Vice
President Al Gore, the Democrat, got the most votes but Republican George W. Bush won the presidency. The lawsuits
contend that system denies citizens their constitutional right to an equal vote by discarding votes for candidates who lose
in a state and magnifying the votes of those who win there. Among those leading the litigation is David Boies, a prominent
lawyer who represented Gore in the U.S. Supreme Court case that settled the disputed 2000 election in favor of Bush.
Ignorance — Perhaps Contempt. Many people whine that using the Electoral College instead of the
popular vote and majority rule is undemocratic. I'd say that they are absolutely right. Not deciding who will be
the president by majority rule is not democracy. But the Founding Fathers went to great lengths to ensure that we were
a republic and not a democracy. In fact, the word democracy does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, the
U.S. Constitution or any other of our founding documents.
Electoral College Works, Leave It Alone. How could the concerns of those little pipsqueak states matter when
the massive voting blocs of the Upper West Side and West Hollywood and Nob Hill and the South Side of Chicago are saying,
"You people go back to your bass boats and your cattle ranches and your plaid work shirts and let us run the country as we
see fit." The founders never intended 100 percent popular voting except at the lowest levels of government, town halls
and city councils, where everyone knows one another. Anything beyond that, they wanted some kind of check on the passions
of the mob, so that nobody got railroaded just because they were too small to defend themselves. In other words, the
Electoral College is set up to defend minorities. That's why Wyoming gets three votes out of 538. This one half
of one percent apparently outrages the East Coast Brahmans who would prefer to ignore the small-government radicals from Laramie
and Casper who keep rabble-rousing for causes like better management of the wolf population and more equitable policies for grazing
livestock on federal land.
the Facts Straight on the Electoral College. The most misunderstood institution in our constitutional
government is the Electoral College. Most recently, the Chair of the Democratic National Committee claimed that "the
Electoral College is not in the Constitution." Others on the right of the political spectrum claim that the process by which
the members of the Electoral College are selected is our "founders' vision for our Republic" and constitutionally
mandated. Both are dead wrong. Let's begin with the actual words of the Constitution: "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 Congress..." That's all the Constitution says about how the members
of the Electoral College are to be selected. There is other language in the Constitution about the EC beyond this one
clause, but it is all administrative process language about the House contingent election, not selecting the electors.
All decisions about the method of selecting members of the Electoral College is left to the states.
Chairman Tom Perez: 'The Electoral College is not a creation of the Constitution'. Tom Perez, chairman of the
Democratic National Committee, said during a lecture Tuesday the Electoral College isn't "a creation of the Constitution."
Perez made the comment while speaking at Indiana University Law School's Sixth Annual Birch Bayh Lecture. "The Electoral
College is not a creation of the Constitution. It doesn't have to be there," he said. "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."
Democrat Wrongly Asserts Electoral College Isn't in Constitution. The head of the national Democratic Party
incorrectly said the Electoral College is not "a creation of the Constitution." In a lecture at Indiana University Law
School, Tom Perez, a lawyer who is chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said the Electoral College "doesn't have to
be there" and asserted that the national popular vote should be the principal standard. "The Electoral College is not a
creation of the Constitution. It doesn't have to be there," said Perez, who was secretary of labor during President
Barack Obama's second term and is a former assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights.
bruised from Clinton loss, left takes aim at Electoral College in court. A liberal-led push to overhaul the
Electoral College could be moving from the op-ed pages to the courtroom, as a Harvard professor who flirted with a dark-horse
Democratic presidential bid last year vows litigation to change the system. Criticism of the Electoral College was
resurgent in the wake of Hillary Clinton's 2016 loss. Clinton recently said she wants the system "eliminated." The
latest effort isn't aimed at dismantling the structure entirely — but rather, the winner-take-all system used by
48 states in awarding electors, which ends up focusing presidential races on a handful of battlegrounds. "With
a winner-take-all, most of America is ignored," professor Lawrence Lessig said in previewing his legal case — which,
like any challenge to the Electoral College, faces a steep uphill climb.
Loser Hillary Broke Campaign Promise Without Winning. Like the Senate, the Tenth Amendment, and the existence
of state governments, the Electoral College reminds us that we live in the United States. These free and independent
states, as the Declaration of Independence put it, elect a president, as the Constitution decreed it. CNN, in their
ostensibly straight news account on Clinton's remarks, described the Electoral College as "arcane."
Clinton: Time to abolish the Electoral College. Hillary Clinton told CNN on Wednesday that it is time to
abolish the Electoral College, part of a sweeping interview where the former Democratic nominee sought to explain why she
lost the 2016 election. Clinton, in the interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper, displayed her animus for fired FBI
Director James Comey, reflected on her love for the people — namely former President Bill Clinton — who
helped her get through the crushing loss and blasted the arcane election body that she believes helped Donald Trump win the
presidency. "I think it needs to be eliminated," Clinton said of the Electoral College.
The Editor says...
Who cares what she wants anymore? She's a loser! She is not an elected official of any kind.
Jackson: Electoral college must be abolished. The Rev. Jesse Jackson on Sunday [8/20/2017] gave a
strong endorsement to the movement for removing monuments to leaders of the Confederacy and called for the electoral college
to be abolished. Speaking at the Islamic Center of Southern California, Jackson blamed the electoral college system,
giving disproportionate influence to less populated states, for the 2000 and 2016 loss of Democratic presidential candidates
Al Gore and Hillary Clinton despite their winning the popular vote.
festering problems the Democrats cynically ignore. [#5] The connection between illegal immigration and California's electoral power:
California declared itself a sanctuary state and now houses a quarter of the nation's illegal immigrants. The elected officials at all levels of
that state government will openly defy any attempts to enforce existing federal law that could reduce the number of illegal immigrants. The
massive presence of illegals distorts our representative system. There are at least 4 million illegals in California. It
requires a special liberal variety of naïvité to believe that none of them votes. Even if none does, they are all counted in the census,
which determines congressional representation and some federal funding allocations. If only citizens were counted, California would have
five fewer congressional seats and electoral votes. Those seats would go to, for example, Ohio (2), Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The
Democrats who've declared California a sanctuary state know exactly what they are doing.
Gores a Sacred Cow, and Liberals Lament. Ours is not a direct democracy. The president is not elected by a direct vote
of the people. The Electoral College stands between the people and the president because most of the Founders feared the masses and
wanted an institution in place as a balance against their numbers. Our "checks and balances" system includes this check against the
people themselves. Essentially, it is the first and final check to protect us from ourselves.
wants to change the Electoral College. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she wants to change the
Electoral College. Asked at Stanford University on Monday night about what she would like to change, Ginsburg
exclaimed, "the Electoral College!" She also decried partisanship and lamented the death penalty during her appearance at
Stanford, according to the Mercury News. "If I were queen, there would be no death penalty," Ginsburg said.
Popular Vote Compact Threatens Republic. "The Electoral College is a vestige, it's a carryover from an
earlier vision of how our federal government was going to work that put a lot of premium on states." That is what
former "constitutional law professor" and now-former U.S. President Barack Obama told reporters at a press conference on
December 16, 2016. The president's remarks echoed those shared by a great many Americans outraged at how, despite
"officially" losing the national popular vote to Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump won the presidential election because of the
Electoral College. In a day and age when presidents from both political parties, and other elected officials across the
political spectrum, perpetually refer to the United States as a democracy, with millions more being taught the same in public
schools and colleges across the country, it comes as no surprise that many millions of voters feel disenfranchised.
York Times Quietly Runs Stunning Correction On Editorial Attacking Electoral College. The New York Times
quietly issued a major correction to an editorial attacking the electoral college in December, admitting it has in fact
defended the electoral college at a time when it was politically expedient for Democrats. The paper ran the editorial
calling for an end to the electoral college in December, when Democrats were harping on the fact that Democratic nominee
Hillary Clinton beat President Donald Trump in the popular vote, and calling for reforms to make the system more "fair."
Obviously seeking to avoid the editorial position as politically motivated, the editorial emphasized what turned out to be a
false claim that the paper has opposed the electoral college system for 80 years.
Girl Scouts and the War on
Trump. To a large and vocal minority on the left, Trump isn't just the guy who shouldn't have won; his presidency is illegitimate.
We needn't waste time debunking arguments that back up this assertion. If you don't like the Electoral College, take it up with James Madison and
Alexander Hamilton, not Trump. And as despicable as Moscow's tactics were, it's ridiculous to assert that leaked emails saying almost nothing about
Hillary Clinton herself had more of an impact on public opinion than the Democratic candidate's credibility problems. Trump isn't going to be a normal
president anymore than he was a normal candidate, but none of that takes away the legitimacy that his 306 Electoral College votes conferred upon him.
Still Doesn't Get America. For Obama, the US Constitution is just an obstacle to be circumvented or simply ignored.
A few weeks ago he told us that the Electoral College is "outdated" apparently because the American States are now largely under the
thumb of the Feds. The Electoral College was originally designed to give States a voice in the election of the Chief Executive
of the nation. My interpretation of his casual put-down was this: The States used to be the major unit of governance in
America, subordinate only to the US Constitution. But today the power-hungry left has succeeded in slicing our people by race,
by gender, by class, by favorite sexual objects, and now by religion — if one considers Islam as mainly a religion rather than
as a theology of conquest. (It is both). In Obama's mind, maybe the Electoral College should represent his favorite
demographics: blacks, liberal whites, gays and lesbians, and so on. Those artificial "identity blocks" are what
he really cares about.
gavels down die-hard Clinton loving Democrats who launch futile protests against the electoral vote. Democrats
were shut down in their final, futile attempt to protest President-elect Donald Trump's electoral college win —
and this time it was Vice President Joe Biden wielding procedure against them. Congress met in a Joint Session Friday
to certify the electoral college, which met in December in state capitols across the country. 'It is over,' Biden said at
one point, after shutting down an array of Democrats who tried to force a debate on the certification of the vote.
More States Should Sign on to End Run Around Electoral College. Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) vowed last week to
spend the new year and new Congress pushing for a "one person, one vote" scrapping of the electoral college. Durbin acknowledges this
won't come easily with a Republican House, Senate and White House, so he's hoping a state-by-state workaround does the trick.
electoral-college rebellion bodes ill for future elections. The last-ditch effort by some Democrats to thwart a
Donald Trump presidency ended in a fizzle on December 19th. The 538 members of the electoral college — the
body that officially elects America's chief executive, as ordained by Article II of the constitution — handed the
real-estate magnate 304 votes, two shy of the total he was projected to win after the people voted on November 8th but a
comfortable 34 votes more than the 270 he needed to win a majority. Mr Trump is set to be inaugurated as America's 45th
president on January 20th. The ill-fated Hail Mary was lobbed by a number of liberal intellectuals, including Lawrence
Lessig, a Harvard law professor and short-lived 2016 presidential candidate.
Electoral college 'rebels' who wanted to stop Trump Were in touch with Clinton campaign. Senior advisors to
Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign kept in touch by phone and email with a driver of the ill-fated, last-ditch effort to
dump Donald Trump at the electoral college. The advisors kept tabs on Colorado elector Micheal Baca, who was helping
try to persuade Republican members of the Electoral College to vote against Trump. The effort ultimately flamed out,
although a handful of Clinton electors ultimately ended up voting for other people. Baca himself is facing prosecution
for his decision to cast his vote for Ohio Republican Governor John Kasich rather than Clinton, notwithstanding a state law
directing him to back Clinton and the oath he swore.
Loser Theater: Washington Post Pushes To End Electoral College. They just can't move on. Can't let
go. Though, let's face it, the Washington Post's EJ Dionne is a bit late to this pity party. On the other hand,
Democrats will surely be whining about the Electoral College for years to come. If they can still whine about Al Gore
losing to George Bush legally in Florida 2000, well, they can whine about Hillary losing the election fair and square for
at least till the next election.
Quietly Supported Electors That Didn't Vote For Her. Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton's staff supported the
"Hamilton Electors" and their potential coup behind the scenes, the same group that voted against her in the Electoral
College, according to a Thursday report from Politico. Clinton staffers Jennifer Palmieri and Jake Sullivan never
officially endorsed the movement, but email records obtained by Politico show that the aides discussed strategy with the
electors by email, text, and phone conversations weeks in advance of the Dec. 19 vote of the Electoral College
nationwide. Even though the Clinton camp was willing to discuss strategy, some of the electors think the effort
could have been more successful if they were willing to help publicly.
College Defectors Maintained Contact With Hillary Campaign. Well, look at this! Politico has revealed
that those in the electoral college who wanted to cause a ruckus on Monday kept in close contact with Hillary Clinton's top
aides Jake Sullivan and Jennifer Palmieri. [...] They only needed 37 of the 306 Republicans within the college to defect.
Their efforts died, though, and in fact did the exact opposite. Hillary lost more electors on Monday than Donald Trump.
[Micheal] Baca kept his word to Palmieri, but not to the state of Colorado. Baca voted for Republican Ohio Gov. John
Kasich moments after he took an oath to vote for Hillary Clinton. Electors at the Colorado capitol booed and shouted at him
for defecting. Baca now faces prosecution.
Clinton aides kept tabs on anti-Trump elector gambit. Hillary Clinton's top advisers never publicly backed an
effort by Democrats on the Electoral College to block Donald Trump's election. When it failed on Monday [12/19/2016], one
aide mocked it as an unserious "coup" attempt. But a batch of correspondence obtained by POLITICO shows members of Clinton's
inner circle — including senior aides Jake Sullivan and Jennifer Palmieri — were in touch for weeks with
one of the effort's organizers as they mounted their ill-fated strategy. And despite repeated requests for guidance,
Clinton's team did not wave them off.
the Dems who want to abolish the Electoral College. Democrats in both the House and Senate have introduced
legislation aimed at building pressure to scrap the centuries-old system, and replace it with a simple popular vote.
Under the change, Clinton would have become the 45th president of the United States, since she won about 3 million more votes
than Trump. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., proposed a resolution to amend the Constitution to end the Electoral College,
and dozens of House Democrats are supporting three separate House resolutions that would do the same thing. Some Democrats
have indicated support for the idea, even if they haven't yet joined the legislation.
Senseless Electors. Faith Spotted Eagle is a Yankton Sioux Nation protester of the Dakota Access
Pipeline. Without ever running for president, she is now one of two women in American history to win an Electoral
College vote for president. (In 1972, Tonie Nathan won one vote for vice president, and Geraldine Ferraro and Sarah Palin
received plenty in their respective years.) My view on Hillary Clinton is pretty clear, but she went out and earned 228
electoral votes this year. She got shortchanged, and so did Trump. Neither Kasich nor Ron Paul qualified as
write-in candidates in Texas this year, meaning they received no votes. Powell, Spotted Eagle, and Paul didn't even run
for president this year; Kasich explicitly said he didn't want faithless electors to vote for him. Please explain to me
what's good and noble and inspiring about these faithless electors making a big show about how they just can't go along with
everyone else's decision and their previous pledges, and how different and special they are compared to everyone else.
Claiming They Were Always Against Electoral College, New York Times Backtracks. As if the New York Times
didn't already issue enough corrections, they did it again Wednesday [12/21/2016]. After publishing a long-winded rant in Tuesday's
paper calling for the electoral college system to be abolished, the editorial board was forced to apologize for making inaccurate claims
about the paper's historical stance on the electoral college. The original article entitled, "Time to End the Electoral College,"
was just as bad as it sounds. The article was full of false claims, from claiming the electoral college was built on slavery, to
claiming that voters in California and New York get less representation than voters in Texas and Idaho. On top of that, apparently,
the paper can't even get their own history right.
Democrats' new attack line: The Electoral College is racist. Democrats still mourning the outcome of last
month's election have added a new step to their grieving process: leveling charges of racism against those who support the
constitutional method of electing the president. In keeping with the process stipulated in the Twelfth Amendment,
538 electors representing all 50 states gathered on Monday [12/19/2016] to cast their ballots for the 45th president.
The result — that Donald Trump will officially enter the Oval Office on Jan. 20 — was affirmed by the
Electoral College, an institution the Left is now casting as racist and anti-Democratic.
College is actually awesome. That "faithless elector" project wound up backfiring on Clinton supporters and
Trump opponents. While activists predicted a significant drain of support from Trump — activist attorney
Larry Lessig claimed that nearly two dozen electors had contacted his organization for potential legal support —
only two electors changed their vote from Trump, both in Texas. Meanwhile, Clinton lost five electors from three
different states, which had the net effect of increasing Trump's margin of victory from 74 electoral votes to 77 (306-232 to
304-227). Now that electors have fulfilled their roles almost entirely as written, Trump opponents have shifted away from
casting the Electoral College as a last bulwark against the bad choices of the voters, and back to a historical anachronism
that defeats the purpose of democracy. While electors gathered to cast their votes and it became clear that the
faithless-elector project had laid an egg, The New York Times editorial board demanded an end to the Electoral College.
Michael Moore's bribe to get electors to switch votes a felony. In a desperate effort to get GOP electors to
switch their votes, wealthy filmmaker Michael Moore offered to pay whatever fines might be leveled against the electors by
their states. But, Christine Rousselle noted at Townhall, that bribe is actually a felony. "As pointed out by
political comedian Tim Young, Moore's offer to pay the fine for voting for someone other than Trump is a violation of 52 USC
10307 (c), and is punishable with up to five years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine," Rousselle said.
DOJ Lawyer: Threatening Electors Is 'Political Terrorism'. Despite intimidation and even death threats
received by Republican members of the Electoral College, President-elect Donald Trump still received enough votes Monday to
become the nation's next president. However, should the Department of Justice be investigating these threats? One
former DOJ official thinks so. Joining "Fox & Friends" Tuesday, J. Christian Adams called these death threats
"political terrorism" punishable as federal crimes.
Times calls for end to Electoral College. The New York Times is calling for an end to the Electoral
College. Americans would prefer by overwhelming majorities to elect a president using a popular vote system, the
newspaper's editorial board said in a piece published Monday. "They understand, on a gut level, the basic fairness of
awarding the nation's highest office on the same basis as every other elected office — to the person who gets the
most votes," the editorial said.
Electoral College Stopped California From Picking Our Next President. That's A Good Thing. I was born in
California, raised in California, and went to public school in California until I graduated High School. I love
California. I also believe that the Electoral College did its job and prevented California from being the
kingmaker queenmaker in 2016. You're likely familiar with the argument that the Electoral College
is designed to put a check on direct democracy and prevent bigger population centers — like coastal urban
cities — from having too much influence over the country. That's why, though Hillary Clinton won the
popular vote, she lost the election.
Need To Win Elections, Not Flip Electors. At the risk of engaging in a hit-and-run argument, I wanted to go on record to say that
I think this is a bad idea. My reasons are best encapsulated in this tweetstorm by the political scientist Matt Glassman, who notes that
there is a strong precedent toward electors abiding by the vote in their states. Other than a few one-off cases like Leach, the historical
norm has been that electors stick with the voters' choice unless the candidate died, as in the case of Greeley or the losing vice presidential
candidate James S. Sherman in 1912.
Conway: Electors' concern over Russian hacking allegations is 'nonsense'. Earlier this month, the CIA
concluded in a secret assessment that Russia meddled in the election to help Trump win the presidency. FBI Director
James B. Comey and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. agreed with the CIA's assessment. The
reports have prompted some electoral voters to call for an intelligence briefing on the extent of any Russian interference before
the electoral college vote on Monday [12/19/2016]. John Podesta, former chairman of Hillary Clinton's campaign, has publicly
supported those electors' demands.
much for Clinton's rebellion. Donald Trump has officially crossed the 270-vote mark to win the Electoral
College as plans for a shock rebellion vote crumbled. Electors from Texas casted their ballots at around 10.30 pm GMT
(17.30 EST) to confirm Trump's momentous win. Despite calls from a number of electors urging for other Electoral
College members to vote against Trump, just two 'faithless' Republican electors voted against the Republican candidate —
while four deserted defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton.
'faithless elector' breaks law to cast dissenting vote. Hawaii's four electors cast their votes for president
Monday at the state Capitol building, and one broke the law. Elector David Mulinix cast his vote for U.S. Sen. Bernie
Sanders rather than Hillary Clinton, who won the presidential election in Hawaii. Hawaii law requires electors to vote
for the winner of the popular vote in the presidential election.
Blasts Efforts to Flip GOP Electors: 'They Don't Believe in Democracy'. With the electors of the Electoral
College set to convene in state capitals across the country Monday [12/19/2016] to make the results of the presidential
election official, many are calling on Republican electors to go against President-elect Donald Trump. On "Fox &
Friends" this morning, Tucker Carlson said any electors who go against the public vote are betraying their pledge and their
commitment to democracy.
college formally elects Donald Trump as president. The denouement of the 2016 election came on Monday, as
electors in all 50 states and the District of Columbia formally elected Donald Trump as president of the United States.
An effort by anti-Trump activists, who had urged electors to back efforts led by celebrities and academics to cast their
ballots at variance with election results to keep Trump from reaching the necessary 270 electoral votes, came to practically
nothing. With counts still ongoing in California and Texas, the number of electoral college members who attempted to
cast a protest vote was likely to reach at least nine. In some state capitals, proceedings were met with protests.
Trump wins Electoral College as attempts to cause rebellion turn to farce with Democrats deserting Hillary.
Donald Trump officially crossed the line to 270 electoral votes with electors in Texas casting a ballot for the Republican
shortly before 5:30 p.m. EST. Calls for Trump to be voted down by members of the Electoral College were roundly
ignored on Monday — with only two 'faithless' Republican electors rejecting the president-elect and four deserting
Democrat Hillary Clinton. Several more electors tried to ditch the Democratic loser, in an effort to pressure
Republicans into doing the same and selecting a more moderate GOP president.
Is a Beautiful Day: The 2016 Election Ends. [Scroll down] No, see, when you pledge, 'I will do X,"
and then turn around and say, 'on second thought, now that it's too late to replace me, I have decided I will not do X,' then
most people define that as being faithless, or a betrayal of other's faith placed in you. The seriously under-covered
aspect of today is how many foolhardy Democratic electors may decide to not vote for Hillary Clinton in a long-shot hope that
lots of Republicans will prefer some other GOP candidate.
Inflate Electoral College Vote into Another Burst Bubble for Clinton. It's hard to keep track of how many times
Clinton has lost the 2016 election now. Jill Stein's absurd recount theatrics wasted millions of left-wing
dollars — and millions of taxpayer dollars, too! — to accomplish a second validation of Clinton's loss
in several key states. Democrats then sank deep into a fantasy about Clinton's popular-vote lead somehow overturning
the results of the actual election, but everyone and their uncle knows that the winner is not decided by the total number of
ballot-box votes. Now the "faithless elector" fantasy is blowing up in their faces.
College Members Receive Death Threats for Promising to Back Trump as President. Members of the Electoral
College have received troubling messages and death threats as they get closer and closer to the moment where they will
presumably confirm Donald Trump as America's next president. Demonstrations against Trump continue across the country,
and people have been pressuring electors to revolt by not voting on Monday for their state's popular vote winner. CNN
spoke with Michigan elector Michael Banerian, who has received a variety of messages demanding that he change his vote (even
though Michigan state law forbids people like Banerian from doing so).
Electoral College voter deserts Clinton for Sanders — as calls for them to dump Trump are roundly
ignored. Calls for Trump to be voted down by members of the Electoral College were roundly ignored on
Monday — with only two 'faithless' Republican electors rejecting the president-elect and four deserting Democrat
Hillary Clinton. Several more electors tried to ditch the Democratic loser, in an effort to pressure Republicans into
doing the same and selecting a more moderate GOP president. Trump applauded his victory when that scheme didn't work
and flaunted it in front of the media.
Protesters harangue electors for voting for Trump. Protesters harangued electors not to cast their votes for
President-elect Trump during Monday's Electoral College meetings around the country. The protests took place at state
capitol buildings around the country, with protesters attempting to shame electors into casting their votes against the New
What Happens If 'Faithless' Electors Try To Overturn Election Results. What happens if, on December 19, more
than three-dozen Trump electors abandon their pledges, their party and their promises, and vote for Hillary instead of Trump?
Is that it? Election over? Coup finished? Three dozen no names and nobodies just reversed the votes of more than
60 million in more than 30 states? Not so fast, as the football analyst legend Lee Corso would say.
Congress and courts established a range of precautions against such rogue actions.
elector announces he'll vote for Bernie Sanders instead of Hillary. Virtually all of the agitation within the
electoral college in favor of dumping Trump is coming from blue-state electors who are pledged to Hillary. If they
decide to vote for John Kasich or Mitt Romney or "Anyone But Trump" instead of her, that costs Trump nothing. Those are
votes that come out of Hillary's column, not his. At least in that scenario, though, where electors are switching from
Clinton to some anti-Trump Republican alternative, the elector's intent in casting a protest vote is clear. They don't
really prefer President Kasich to President Clinton, they're just trying to encourage red-state electors to withhold their
votes from Trump by reassuring them that someone from the GOP will benefit if they join an anti-Trump revolt.
What Happens If 'Faithless' Electors Try To Overturn Election Results. At the outset, it is important to note
that the mythical version of the electoral college — as a "check" against the electorate with a right to vote
one's "conscience" against the people — was rejected in the very first election it was used, subsequently
invalidated formally in the adoption of the 12th Amendment, and recognized by the Supreme Court and leading jurists and
scholars alike. The twinned SCOTUS decisions of McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892) (states enjoy
plenary and exclusive power over electors) and Ray v. Blair, 343 U.S. 214 (1952) (finding since the first
election of electors role as "simply to register the will of the people") made that history clear. Whatever Hamilton thought,
the actual voters rejected it, and the Twelfth Amendment chose the voters' method rather than Hamilton's.
and Destructive. There are 538 Electoral College delegates. This year, 306 are Republicans and 232 are
Democrats. To win, a candidate needs the votes of 270 electors. In other words, for the plotters to succeed, at
least 37 electors must switch their votes from Trump to some other candidate. Since the election of 1832, no more
than one elector in any cycle has ever has ever voted against his or her pledged candidate.
Larry Lessig Concedes Efforts to Turn Electoral College Against Trump on Road to Failure. Just days before the
Electoral College is slated to hold its vote, Harvard law professor and progressive activist Larry Lessig conceded that as of
today, only a "handful" of electors will likely ultimately vote against Donald Trump unless the number of electors who pledge
to do so climbs above 40. Lessig co-founded a group called the Electors Trust, which is leading a last-ditch effort
to stop Trump from becoming president by providing legal representation to renegade electors and offering them a confidential
space to air their intentions.
electors get police protection: 'This is stupid'. On Monday [12/19/2016], they will travel to the state Capitol
to cast their votes to assign Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes to Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence during what has,
in the past, been a ceremonial and largely unnoticed event. Not this year. This time around, the electors will be
greeted by organized protests, urging them to assign Pennsylvania's electoral votes to anyone but Trump. One elector,
Ash Khare, said he and each of the 19 others have been assigned a plainclothes state police trooper for protection.
won't get intelligence briefing: report. Voters in the Electoral College will not receive an intelligence
briefing about Russian meddling in the U.S. presidential election, according to a new report. Sources told NPR the
electors would not receive any national intelligence before they cast ballots this Monday. Fifty-four of the 232
Democratic electors had signed a letter asking for a briefing before the Electoral College's vote, according to reports.
record of 'faithless elector' Chris Suprun as a 9/11 first responder. [Scroll down] The City of Manassas
Park confirmed to WFAA that it hired Suprun on October 10, 2001, one month after the 9/11 attacks. The fire chief there
added that his department never even responded to the Pentagon or any of the 9/11 sites. "It's no different than stolen
valor for the military; dressing up and saying 'Hey, I earned a Purple Heart' when you weren't even in combat.' There's
a big difference between shopping at Old Navy and being a Navy SEAL," said the first responder who knows him. But Suprun's
résumé raises even more questions. It shows he was, at the time this story aired on WFAA, a paramedic with
Air Methods air ambulance service. But Christina Brodsly, a spokeswoman for that company, said he is not an employee there.
'The Electoral College is a vestige'. President Obama cast doubt on the continued need for the Electoral
College on Friday [12/16/2016], seizing on a popular Democratic argument that has emerged since Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by
millions of ballots but lost the Electoral College handily. "The Electoral College is a vestige. It's a
carry-over from an earlier vision of how our federal government was going to work," Obama said during his final press
conference of the year. "There are some structures in our political system as envisioned by the founders that sometimes
are going to disadvantage Democrats," he added.
rejects Washington electors' attempt to avoid fine. A longshot bid to deny Donald Trump the presidency suffered another setback
Wednesday [12/14/2016] after a federal judge rejected an effort by two Democratic electors from Washington state to avoid being fined if they
ignore the results of the state's popular vote.
Myth of Hillary's Popular Vote 'Victory'. Many modern liberals are fascists at heart who can't accept losing power; that's
why Bush wasn't "their" president. Those liberals are currently bemoaning the fact that Hillary won the popular vote which,
according to them, means she should really be president, though were the case reversed we all know they'd be extolling the virtues of
the Electoral College. Driven by a lust for power liberals don't get that everyone has to follow the rules; demanding the rules
change when you lose so that you can win is a sign of immaturity and an unhealthy need for control.
beg electors to be 'heroes' and vote against Trump. Celebrities are teaming up to beg Republicans in the Electoral College
to vote against President-elect Donald Trump, pledging their "respect" for potential "heroes." A slew of other has-been and B- or
C-list celebs have piled on, calling for 37 "conscientious Republican electors" to swing the Dec. 19 Electoral College vote away from
Trump. The Republican is expected to win 306 votes — more than the 270 necessary to win — based on the results
from last month's general election.
Electors,' Who Would Make Hillary Clinton President, Are as Dead as Their Namesake. Donald Trump's surprise
election has made the Electoral College a thing again. Sad Democrats and progressives, still looking for anyone and
anything to blame besides their feckless candidate and the inept, celebrity-obsessed campaign she ran, are repeating their
stages of grief from 2000, when Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the White House to George W. Bush. In
both cases, the Dems could fixate on the Electoral College, that awful holdover from the country's slave-owning past.
But despite high-profile attempts to bend the rules before the Electoral College votes on December 19, there's
no way [...] that Trump is not going to be the next president. Whatever you think of either him or Clinton,
that's not a bad thing. It's the way the rules are supposed to work, and for good reasons.
are being harassed, threatened in bid to stop Trump. Electors around the country are being harassed with a
barrage of emails, phone calls and letters — and even death threats — in an effort to block Donald
Trump from being voted in as president by the Electoral College on Monday. The bullying is overwhelming Sharon Geise's
tech devices, but not her resolve to support Trump. The Mesa, Arizona, grandmother woke up Wednesday morning to more
than 1,500 emails demanding she not carry out her legal duty to vote for the president-elect. "They just keep coming
and coming," Geise told The [New York] Post, estimating she's received more than 50,000 emails since the election.
college voters will NOT rebel against Trump they say. Republican electors are being swamped with pleas to buck
tradition and cast ballots for someone else at meetings across the country Monday that are on course to ratify Trump as the
winner. Associated Press interviews with more than 330 electors from both parties found little appetite for a revolt.
Electoral College voters who will back Trump are sent death threats. Members of the Electoral College are being
threatened as they plan to vote on Monday for Donald Trump. The New York Post found a number of Republican electors who
find themselves being berated by Americans who would prefer them not to cast a vote for the Republican president-elect, who
won the Electoral College, but not the popular vote. One elector, Michael Banerian, a 22-year-old college student at
the Oakland University in Michigan, told the Post he was getting death threats sent through the mail and over the internet
via email, Facebook and Twitter. 'Somebody threatened to put a bullet in the back of my mouth,' Banerian told the newspaper.
Electoral College Is 'Democracy's Ugliest Anachronism'. A Thursday op-ed on CNN.com outlined a proposal to "not
only... end a Trump administration, but also to eradicate democracy's ugliest anachronism — the Electoral College."
Scott Piro hoped against hope that a group of Trump electors would switch their vote to Hillary Clinton, in order to gain
"the bipartisan support needed to legislate it [the Electoral College] out of existence." Piro contended that "if enough
Trump electors voted for Clinton instead, it would give Republicans their own, distinct reason to loathe the Electoral
College." The editorial staff at CNN's website led into the columnist's piece, "It's time for the Electoral College to
fall on its sword," with a short bio: "Scott Piro is an independent media relations and copywriting professional,
directing PR campaigns and designing messaging for startups, arts organizations, authors, publishers, corporations,
nonprofits, indie films and other entities."
College death threats won't be the last bid to overturn the election. The Electoral College is due to meet
Monday, when the electors chosen on Nov. 8 will establish Donald Trump as the winner. Then Democrats' efforts to steal
the election will finally come to an end — right? Don't bet on it. So bitter are American liberals
that they may go down as the sorest losers since the invention of democracy. They're apt to try anything to overturn
voters' decision. Certainly Election Day didn't stop them, even though the Electoral College outcome was unambiguous, a
landslide indicating that Donald Trump had secured 306 electoral votes to the 232 won by the Democratic nominee. To the
losers, that was a mere sideshow — something to be overturned somehow, anyhow.
Using Celebrities to Urge Electors to Vote Against Trump Has Foreign-Registered Website. A new video of U.S.
celebrities urging electors to vote against President-elect Donald Trump was made by an organization whose website was
registered in a foreign country, despite its accusations that foreign influence was to blame for Trump's victory in the
presidential election. The video, released on Wednesday by a group called Unite for America, is framed as a public
service announcement with celebrities such as Martin Sheen, Debra Messing, and James Cromwell begging Republican members
of the Electoral College to cast their votes against Donald Trump on Dec. 19.
College voters under intense pressure. The 538 delegates to the Electoral College will gather at governors'
offices and statehouses across the country Monday to make President-elect Donald Trump's victory over Democrat Hillary
Clinton official. The results aren't expected to deviate much from Election Day, when Trump won 306 electoral votes to
Clinton's 232. Despite media coverage, social media chatter and announcements from a handful of electors who have made
their protest votes public, it's unlikely that electors will defect in significant numbers.
'Faithless Elector' Lied About Being A 9/11 First Responder. The Texas elector who cited his experience as a
9/11 first responder for his refusal to vote for President-elect Donald Trump appears to have fabricated the entire thing,
according to an investigation by local news outlet WFAA. Chris Suprun said he responded with the Manassas Park, Va., fire
department after the third plane hit the Pentagon during the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. But WFAA's investigation
reveals that the department wasn't among those responding to the attacks. What's more, Suprun didn't even join the fire
department until October 2001 — a month after after the attacks.
The Editor says...
Fool me once, shame on you.
ads urge GOP electors not to vote for Trump. Full-page ads created by a Democratic activist are urging Electoral College members to vote
against President-elect Donald Trump on Monday [12/19/2016]. The ads, which began running in newspapers across the country Wednesday [12/14/2016],
are funded by Daniel Brezenoff, who made a Change.org petition urging electors not to vote for Trump. He told Politico the ad is not aimed at
choosing Clinton or a specific Republican alternative to Trump but intended to inspire electors to use their own judgment before voting.
These godless wretches have never heard of the Golden Rule. 'We
Have a Chance!' The View Crew Desperately Try to Get Trump Unelected. Wednesday [12/14/2016] on The View, the ladies turned
their self-admitted "rage" over the election results into a tentative plan of how to stop Trump from entering office. Host Joy Behar
argued that the Constitution left a "chance" for Trump to get forced out, with help from the electoral college.
Dems plot to rig Electoral College vote. Democrats — who once demanded Donald Trump accept the
election results — are now trying to rig the Electoral College vote in their favor next Monday. If electors
fulfill their obligation and follow the will of the voters for their individual state, Trump should receive a total of 306
Electoral College votes. But Democrats are demanding Republican electors change their votes to thwart a Trump victory.
Judge Says Electors
Must Vote For Statewide Winner. A federal judge dealt a severe setback Monday [12/12/2016] to a longshot plan to deny Donald
Trump the presidency through the Electoral College, refusing to suspend a Colorado law requiring the state's nine electors to
vote for the presidential candidate who won the state in November.
To Use Russia As An Excuse To Steal The Presidency From Trump On Dec. 19th Or Jan. 6th. Donald Trump could have
the election legally stolen from him on either December 19th when the Electoral College casts their votes or on January 6th
when a joint session of Congress gathers to count those votes. The establishment is in full-blown panic mode at this
point, and they seem to have settled on "Russian interference in the election" as the angle that they plan to use to try to
deny Trump the presidency. As you will see below, there is an all-out effort to try to persuade members of the Electoral
College that are supposed to be committed to Donald Trump to cast their votes for someone else instead. And if that
doesn't work, the groundwork is being laid for the Electoral College votes to potentially be invalidated when a joint session
of Congress meets to count those votes on January 6th.
planning to overturn Trump's win as talking heads claim 'National Emergency'. Alex Jones, radio talk show host
and head of the popular alt-news agency Infowars, released a video transmission late Monday night which details how the
C.I.A., along with the democrats, are moving forward to steal the election from President-elect Donald J. Trump. In the
transmission Jones said that the situation is likely the "gravest" threat presented "in the history of our country," in which I
tend to agree.
Todd Excited by Idea of Abolishing the Electoral College on 'MTP Daily'. With the Electoral College gathering
early next week to elect Donald Trump President of the United States, many on the left are desperate to find a way the turn
the institution against him and/or abolish it. Such schemes are popular on MSNBC, and Chuck Todd expressed the same
desire on Tuesday's [12/13/2016] MTP Daily. "If we are never going to use the Electoral College, then we should
abolish it," Todd exclaimed to his panel of journalists. Todd's argument seemed that have been derived from a deep
misunderstanding of the U.S. Constitution. "My point is, the Electoral College was the idea, a college of influencers,
right, deciding whether the American public had made the right decision," he claimed. By Todd's argument the Founding
Fathers set up the Electoral College to be a type of chaperone for the ignorant masses.
House, Clinton Tied To PR Firm Behind Electoral College Push. Texas Republican elector Chris Suprun, who has
said he will not cast his vote for Trump, claimed in an interview with The Daily Caller last week that he decided to switch
his vote after watching Vice President-elect Mike Pence defend one of Trump's tweets on TV. In his interview with TheDC,
Suprun went out of his way to deny any ties to George Soros. "Nobody got to me," he added later.
professor says GOP electors are close to blocking Trump win. Harvard University law professor Larry Lessig said
Tuesday that 20 Republican Electoral College voters are considering flipping to vote against Donald Trump, more than half the
number of anti-Trump votes needed to stall the president-elect from being sworn into office. "Obviously, whether an
elector ultimately votes his or her conscience will depend in part upon whether there are enough doing the same. We now believe
there are more than half the number needed to change the result seriously considering making that vote," Lessig told Politico.
won't be a rebellion inside the Electoral College. Some in Washington and others on social media are
speculating that President-elect Trump is on the cusp of a tidal wave of "faithless electors" defecting from their
pledges. The notion is provocative, titillating — and has no root in reality and is nothing new.
Anti-Trump forces are advancing efforts to invalidate his election in the only venue that matters: the Electoral
College. The electors of the Electoral College — the people who actually choose the next
president — will gather on Dec. 19 to make their choices; choices that are supposed to represent
the will of the voters of the 50 sovereign states.
5 Stages Of Losing An Election To Donald Trump. We are now in the midst of widespread anguish over the
imaginary popular vote. Not only is the system we've used to elect presidents since the founding of the republic
"unfair" and "undemocratic," but like anything else progressives dislike these days, it's a tool of "White Supremacy —
and Sexism." And it's not only illiberal pundits such as Mark Joseph Stern who peddle myths about the Electoral College,
but Democrats such as E.J. Dionne and Michael Tomasky, both of whom misrepresented the reasons for proportional voting and
the make-up of representation in DC. One could argue that Democrats oppose dispersing political power and states' rights,
but that would be giving them far too much credit. They only seem to oppose those things when they're losing elections.
RNC keeps close
tabs on Electoral College vote. The Republican National Committee is overseeing an expansive whip operation
designed to lock down Donald Trump's Electoral College majority and ensure that the 306 Republican electors cast their votes
for the president-elect. Two RNC sources familiar with the effort said the committee — with the assistance
of state Republican parties and the Trump campaign — have been in touch with most of the GOP electors multiple
times, and has concluded that only one is a risk to cast a vote against Trump on Dec. 19, when the Electoral College meets.
rejects Democratic electors' bid to unbind votes as anti-Trump 'political stunt'. Two Colorado Democratic
electors have lost their bid to break with the popular vote after a federal judge threw out their motion, calling it a
"political stunt." U.S. District Court Judge Wiley Daniel rejected late Monday [12/12/2016] the request for a temporary
injunction to suspend a Colorado law requiring members of the Electoral College to cast their ballots for the presidential
candidate receiving the most votes. "Part of me thinks this is really a political stunt to prevent Donald Trump from
becoming president," said Judge Daniel, appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton.
begs electoral college voters to block Trump. A Democratic lawmaker is desperately lobbying the Electoral
College to shun Donald Trump, and vote for Hillary Clinton — even though he conceded Monday [12/12/2016] that the
Republican won the election "fair and square." The plea from Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) comes a week before the Dec. 19
vote, which is expected to affirm the results of the Nov. 8 election, in which Trump beat Clinton with 306 Electoral College votes.
'Hamilton Electors' file appeal in 10th Circuit in continued attempt to not elect Trump. The two Colorado
electors who saw their attempts to get a state law that requires them to vote for the winner of the state's popular vote for
president dashed by a federal judge Monday filed an appeal Tuesday [12/13/2016] in the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals. Monday, U.S. District Court of Colorado Judge Wiley Daniel denied Polly Baca and Robert Nemanich's motion for
a temporary restraining order that would have blocked the state law that now requires they vote for Hillary Clinton, since
she won Colorado's popular vote. Nemanich is an elector from Colorado Springs and Baca is a former state senator and
elector from Denver.
Spineless Hillary Clinton. I'm pretty sure I heard Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton
promise — not once, but several times over the course of many months — that she would accept the
results of the 2016 presidential election. I then seem to recall that after her loss to Donald Trump, she followed
through on that promise. "We must accept this result and then look to the future," she said (or did she?). "Donald
Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead." But I find that hard to
reconcile with what I've seen since then: namely, Clinton and her campaign doing everything in their power to delegitimize
Trump's victory and work towards getting the results of the election overturned.
blaming Russia need to take a good look in the mirror. In the wake of their shocking loss, Democrats and their
fellow travelers in the media have mounted a frantic, and increasingly deracinated, campaign to deny Trump the fruits of his
victory in the Electoral College and thus overturn the election by any means necessary, fair or foul.
all-out bid to smear Trump's victory. Democrats put on a united bid to question the legitimacy of Donald
Trump's election victory on Monday with the Clinton campaign returning from the dead to join in. In a series of
developments the White House, the Clinton campaign and Democrat members of the electoral college all pounced on reports that
the CIA believe Russian wanted Trump to win the election. A group of electoral college members — aided by an anti-Trump
Republican — demanded a security briefing on the CIA's findings — a clear attempt to influence other members of the
college who are not bound to vote for Trump.
Calls for Electoral College Intelligence Briefing, Prior to Final Presidential Vote. Hillary Clinton's top
political adviser John Podesta said the campaign is supporting an effort by members of the Electoral College to request an
intelligence briefing on foreign intervention in the presidential election. Podesta said that President Barack Obama
backs this effort. "The bipartisan electors' letter raises very grave issues involving our national security," Podesta
said in a written statement Monday [12/12/2016]. "Electors have a solemn responsibility under the Constitution and we
support their efforts to have their questions addressed."
want briefing on Russian interference. Ten Electoral College electors have asked U.S. intelligence officials
for more information on ongoing investigations surrounding President-elect Donald Trump's relationship with Russia. The
group of electors, which includes the daughter of House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), wrote an open letter to
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper asking for the information ahead of their Dec. 19 meeting to formally
vote for the next president.
The Editor says...
The Electoral College is not a deliberative body. The Electors are not entitled to intelligence briefings or any other information
other than the popular vote totals in their respective home states. The presidential election is no longer up for debate.
7 days left, Trump resistance pins last hope on Electoral College. Trump won 306 electoral votes. There
are 306 electors, actual people, who are expected to vote for him next Monday in Electoral College meetings in state capitals
across the country. Trump's total is 36 more than the 270 required to become president. With that in mind, a
group of Trump resisters is hoping to convince 37 Trump electors to vote for someone else on Monday, taking Trump just below
the magic 270 mark. If that were to happen, Trump would not become president.
An Electoral Coup is Underway. On December 19, 2016 the electoral college will vote. Based on the vote,
Trump should receive 306 votes and Clinton will have 232. However, it is possible for many electors to change their
vote. They aren't bound by it. There's currently a very well funded attempt to influence electors to flip their
votes on December 19th to change the outcome of the election. Despite expectations that it is far fetched, it has a
high chance of success. As of today, there are enough electoral votes in play to flip the outcome.
"Soft Coup" Now Underway To Influence December 19th Electoral College Vote. What is now underway is an
insidious plan by political and media elites to create havoc in the final days prior to the December 19th Electoral College
vote that would officially make Donald Trump the President-Elect. It is a plan that has governmental agencies pitted
against one another, and politicians and media figures promoting outrageous claims for the sole purpose of providing cover
for an unprecedented move by the Electoral College to deny a Trump presidency.
Pelosi's Daughter, An Elector, Calls For Hijacking Presidential Election. Remember when the Electoral College was evil and
needed to be abolished. Ten electors, including Nancy Pelosi's daughter, have a great new plan. And it doesn't take much
reading between the lines. [...] Why exactly do the Electors require information that has nothing to do with their current function,
which is representative, rather than deliberative? Because Pelosi argues they are a deliberative body.
Pelosi's daughter leads electors demanding intel briefing on Russia's ties to Donald Trump. The accusations of
Russian interference in the November presidential election have provided a last-minute lifeline for the long-shot effort to
head off Donald Trump at the Electoral College. Ten electors, led by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's daughter Christine
Pelosi, demanded Monday [12/12/2016] an intelligence briefing on Russian interference by Monday, when the Electoral College makes
the vote official. Flipping the Electoral College seems to be the only hope left for Trump opponents. Recount efforts
in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania have backfired.
one thing you must understand about the unfolding media-Democrat Electoral College coup attempt. We are
witnessing nothing short of an attempt to steal the election by some Democrats and a very supportive mainstream and leftwing
media, by causing Electors in the Electoral College to go rogue and vote for Hillary, or at least not vote for Trump.
The first excuse for this tactic after the election was made by people like Prof. Lawrence Lessig. At least he was
honest in his call to have the Electors stop Trump because he didn't like the result and thought Trump would be a horrible
president on a host of issues. Honest, but severely misguided.
backs bid to overturn electoral vote. John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's former campaign chairman and the victim of the most
famous hack since Jennifer Lawrence, has joined the call from some members of the Electoral College that they be made privy to the secret
findings of the intelligence community about Russian interference in the 2016 campaign. The hope of the electors, led by Christine
Pelosi, daughter of the House minority leader, is that the information would cause red-state electors to break from the popular vote in
their states. While conservatives may be cheered to see the sudden swell of support for federalism and republicanism on the left,
that's not really what's cooking here.
about Electoral College misplaced. After Donald Trump won the presidency while finishing second in the
nationwide popular vote, some people on the short end of this distinctly American phenomenon have questioned the validity of
the Electoral College. The popular vote winner has failed to become president twice in our last five elections, in 2000
and 2016, after that happened only three other times in history, 1824, 1876 and 1888. That's disconcerting to those
unhappy with how our Constitution established selection of a president, but it's a moot, purely academic discussion.
The Electoral College was created by the Founding Fathers because they didn't really trust the majority will of the people,
and whether it still serves its originally intended role or not, it's here to stay.
Faithless-Elector Fantasy Is Fun, but It's Just a Fantasy. There are six Democratic electors from Washington and Colorado
trying to persuade their Republican counterparts to join them in voting for Mitt Romney or for Ohio Governor John Kasich. (Kasich's
rejected the idea out of hand). There's a Texas Trump elector who says he can't vote for him. There's Harvard Law Professor
Lawrence Lessig, who promises to offer free legal defense to any Trump elector who votes for Hillary Clinton. It's all a shadow
play — entertaining, provocative, but bearing no relation to current political reality.
Deep State vs. Donald Trump. Do the Democrats want Donald Trump to become the 45th president? Of
course not. And how about the Democrats' handmaiden, the Main Stream Media? Do they want Trump in the White
House? Of course not. And how 'bout all the other affluent residents of the Washington "swamp," which Trump has
pledged to drain — do you think any of them want Trump? Of course not. [...] And in fact, one Republican
elector, Christopher Suprun of Texas, has already declared that he won't vote for Trump next week. And guess what:
Suprun has become a hero to The New York Times and the rest of the MSM.
Jones' PR Firm Working With Republican Electors Voting Against Trump. A progressive public relations firm
founded by environmentalist and CNN political contributor Van Jones is representing "a number" of Republican electors who
plan on voting against President-elect Donald Trump. Chris Suprun, a Republican presidential elector from Texas,
garnered media attention on Monday after having an opinion piece published in the New York Times explaining why he
plans to defect from Trump with his Electoral College vote on Dec. 19.
Electors Are Not Brave. On December 19, electors across the country will head to their state capitols to formally cast votes for
president and vice president. In Texas, 38 electors — one from each congressional district and two chosen in a statewide vote — will gather
in Austin, and almost all of them will cast their ballots for President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence. The exception
is likely to be Christopher Suprun, who argues that "electors should unify behind a Republican alternative, an honorable and qualified man or woman
such as Gov. John Kasich of Ohio." Never mind that Kasich has said he doesn't want any electors to vote for him, declaring that "this approach,
as well meaning as it is, will only serve to further divide our nation when unity is what we need." Suprun is not the only faithless elector
nationwide. In Colorado, four of the state's nine Democratic electors are saying that they might not cast votes for Hillary Clinton, who actually
won the state, if there's sufficient support for a non-Trump Republican option.
The Editor says...
Mr. Suprun will have permanently ruined his own reputation if he follows through with his threat to vote for someone other than the clear winner of
the election (in the State of Texas). His word will no longer be of any value. That's a high price to pay for grandstanding and political activism.
I hope his conscience will prevent him from making this costly mistake. (Apparently, his conscience has
a workout lately.) Mr. Trump is far from the ideal presidential candidate, but he's the winner of the popular vote in Texas, and the Electoral
College should vote accordingly.
Left's Retreat into Fantasy. It isn't fair, these pouty runner-ups argue, that a woman should be denied the presidency
because of a system set up by white men over 200 years ago. Not only should the Electoral College be tossed out like
old leftovers that've been sitting in the fridge for centuries, but the College's electors should refuse to vote for Trump later this
month. This is all very rich coming from the same people who demanded Trump accept the election results, no matter the outcome.
[...] Here's the thing about all the Electoral College business: Both Trump and Clinton campaigned to win a majority of its
votes. The presidency was never supposed to be a popularity contest. If that were the case, Hillary could have campaigned
solely in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington D.C. and come out a winner. But she didn't, and she lost.
electors sue state in effort to block Trump. Two Democratic electors from Colorado filed a federal lawsuit
Tuesday, challenging a state law that requires they vote for the winner of the state's popular vote, the Denver Post
reports. Polly Baca and Robert Nemanich had pledged to support Democrat Hillary Clinton, the winner of Colorado's nine
electoral votes. But now they are joining so-called "Moral Electors" in other states and say they'll shift their
Democratic votes to a consensus Republican pick — if one emerges.
asks Electoral College not to change vote for him. Ohio Gov. John Kasich on Tuesday [12/6/2016] advised state electors
not to vote for him in an anti-Donald Trump protest. Kasich, a Republican who ran unsuccessfully for president, told The
Associated Press Tuesday that he is not a candidate for president, the election was held and Trump was the winner. "The
country is divided and there are certainly raw emotions on both sides stemming from the election," Kasich, in his second and
last four-year term, said in a statement.
Conyers now claiming the electoral college is rooted in slavery. When the Democrats lose, they hate anything
that they think contributes to their loss and once again they've taken aim at the electoral college after Trump beat the
pantsuit off of Hillary a month ago. Today John Conyers held a forum on the Future of the Electoral College where he
proceeded to argue for the abolition of the electoral college by claiming it is rooted in slavery. [Video clip]
Clinton could have legal right to challenge electoral college system and be next US president, says law professor. Hillary
Clinton may be able to challenge the election result in the Supreme Court and become the next President of the United States, a law
professor has said. Ms Clinton currently has 2.6 million more votes than Donald Trump in the popular count, but lost
the election in November because of the idiosyncratic workings of the United States' Electoral College system — a result
which academic Lawrence Lessig has said could be ruled unconstitutional. The process by which the United States elects a president
is complicated — rather than US citizens voting for their head of state directly, representatives in the Electoral College
choose the winner on behalf of their state.
for the Electoral College is at a 49-Year High. A recent Gallup poll shows that support for the Electoral
College is growing. A record 47 percent of Americans want to keep the Electoral College, and less than half of
Americans (49 percent) want to abolish it. This is the first time in 49 years — since 1968 —
that less than half of Americans want to get rid of the current electoral system.
I Will Not Cast My Electoral Vote for Donald Trump. I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people
asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election, people have asked me to change my vote based
on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference. I do not think
president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won
the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who
shows daily he is not qualified for the office.
The Editor says...
It's not up to the Electoral College to decide if the winning candidate is qualified, competent, or even sane. That
assessment is made by the voters before the Electoral College convenes; and when it does, it is merely a formality.
The bottom line is this: You shouldn't seek the office of Elector if you don't intend to follow through on your obligations.
FBI Needs to Investigate Violent Democratic Tantrums. It's time for the FBI to conduct a detailed investigation
into the violence and political thuggery that continue to mar the presidential election's aftermath. A thorough probe
of the protests — to include possible ties to organizations demanding vote recounts — will give the
Bureau's integrity-challenged director, James Comey, a chance to sandblast his sullied badge. Director Comey must also
include "elector intimidation" on his post-election investigation list. Reports that members of the Electoral College
are being harassed and threatened by angry, vicious (and likely Democratic Party) malcontents require Comey's quick and
electors brief Clinton camp on anti-Trump plan. Advocates of the long-shot bid to turn the Electoral College
against Donald Trump have been in contact with close allies of Hillary Clinton, according to multiple sources familiar with
the discussions, but the Clinton camp — and Clinton herself — have declined to weigh in on the merits
of the plan. Clinton's team and the Democratic National Committee have steadfastly refused to endorse the efforts
spearheaded by a group of electors in Colorado and Washington state. But, as with the ongoing recounts initiated by
Green Party nominee Jill Stein, the Clinton team has not categorically rejected them, leaving the collection of mainly
Democratic electors to push forward with no explicit public support from the failed Democratic nominee or any other
prominent party leaders.
Support for Electoral College Rises Sharply. Americans' support for keeping the Electoral College system for
electing presidents has increased sharply. Weeks after the 2016 election, 47% of Americans say they want to keep the
Electoral College, while 49% say they want to amend the Constitution to allow for a popular vote for president. In the
past, a clear majority favored amending the U.S. Constitution to replace the Electoral College with a popular vote system.
presidential electors [are] being asked to vote for Clinton. Each party selects its own presidential electors. The Republican
Party in Missouri will send its10 presidential electors to Jefferson City because Donald Trump was the presidential candidate with the most votes
in the state. Hector Maldonado from Sullivan is one of the 10 Electoral College representatives from Missouri and one of 538 in the
country. He showed our Fox 2 News crew a stack of letters he's received in just the past few days. "There's probably a good
close to 100 (letters) here," Maldonado said.
Declines To Comment On Why Agency Won't Investigate Threats To Electors. The Department of Justice did not want
to discuss why the agency refuses to investigate alleged harassment and death threats toward Electoral College voters in
states that went for Donald Trump. "The department will decline to comment," DOJ deputy press secretary David Jacobs
told The Daily Caller in an email Wednesday afternoon [11/30/2016]. The Justice Department seemed concerned about
protecting voters from being intimidated at the polls on Election Day. It deployed 500 monitors to 67 jurisdictions
in 28 states to watch polling stations this past presidential election cycle.
Faith in Constitution, Not 'Democracy'. Start with a thought experiment: What if Donald Trump had won the popular
vote and lost in the Electoral College? How would Democrats respond if prominent scholars and public figures argued that Clinton's
electors should break their pledges and elect Trump? I'll tell you how: Democrats would see it as an attempted coup d'etat.
And they'd be right. The vote in the Electoral College has always been a formality. Its purpose is simply to effectuate the results
of the electoral system we have, with all its imperfections. Faithless electors have never determined the outcome of a presidential election,
and for good reason. To do so would be to change the rules of the game in the game's closing minutes. It would distort
fairness and the rule of law. And it would send the extremely worrisome message that electoral results aren't to be taken seriously as
the outcome of a legally constrained process.
assault Constitution over partisan complaints. Hillary Clinton, with the help of huge vote leads in places such
as California (62-33 percent), New York (59-38 percent) and Massachusetts (61-34 percent), is currently ahead by
more than 2 million votes. In California alone, she surpassed Trump by about 3.5 million votes, meaning that if
the election were decided by popular vote, that extremely liberal state would wield massive power over much smaller states such as
Montana, Wyoming, Oklahoma and Tennessee, where Trump won by similarly large margins. This should remind us why the
country was established with checks and balances against putting too much power into the hands of any one state, and indeed any
one faction. One of those checks and balances is the Electoral College, to which the Founders gave the responsibility for
choosing the winner of the presidency, instead of relying on the popular vote.
Anti-Trump Riots Are a Smoke Screen. Many seem bewildered by the anti-Trump riots and demonstrations. [...] They know
full well that they aren't going to overturn the election. These privately funded forces are being used to create pressure to
destroy the Electoral College so they won't have to deal with it next election. This is how the Left operates. Make a big
deal over here to force the hidden agenda over there. The plan is to make enough trouble that Congress will move to abolish the
EC to get some peace. For clues as to who is behind this effort, one only has to watch to see which member of Congress proposes
such action. The answer of course is California Senator Barbara Boxer.
Harvard Law Prof Tells Electoral College to Abandon Trump. Lawrence Lessig, a well-known professor of law at
Harvard University and a political activist, penned an opinion piece in The Washington Post encouraging electors to
cast their votes for Hillary Clinton despite Donald Trump winning more votes in the Electoral College. His theory is
that, while it has never been tested like this, the Electoral College is a "safety valve" that is intended "to confirm —
or not — the people's choice." According to the latest tally, Hillary Clinton is leading the popular vote by
more than 2 million.
This Silliness about Abolishing the Electoral College. By now, you've heard the disgruntled leftists parroting the sentiment that the
Electoral College is an archaic relic that is either racist (what else?), or has obviously outlived any usefulness it may have once had.
Therefore, in the interest of progress, it must be abolished. Outgoing California Senator Barbara Boxer has recently introduced a doomed-to-fail
bill meant to do just that. This argument is, of course, painfully dim and tiresome. The Electoral College is one of many safeguards
against what de Tocqueville would later describe as the "tyranny of the majority" that our Founders feared, or more specifically, the threat
of a concentrated majority in a state that happened to be more populous than another.
liberal electors have agreed not to give Trump the electoral votes he needs to be President. The electoral
college has many people up in arms right now. It is agonizing for me to listen to people rant about the unfair nature
of the electoral college. I wonder if anyone has picked up a history book lately. It is perhaps the most crucial
part of our voting system. And contrary to what many people seem to think, it plays the most pivotal role in enduring
the most equal representation possible. Even with this being the case, everyday more people sign petitions to end the
electoral college. Which, mind you, would require an amendment to the constitution of the United States of
America. Petitions are just not going to cut it. So sign away.
Rodham Clinton Could Still Become President — It's Not Over. Currently, Donald Trump is on track to
win 306 Electoral College if Michigan is called for him. Without Michigan he is at 290, and he needed as you know only
270. This is what they are doing folks: Clinton clan is circulating a Change.org petition and urging as many
Americans as they can to get electors to mind the national popular vote and mark Clinton's name down come decision day,
EVEN IF she didn't win a majority of ballots in their state. They have the minds of crooks.
The Editor says...
The electors' names and addresses are well known by party officials. Is there no civil or criminal liability in the event
of malfeasance? Would anyone other than Hillary Clinton have the gall to assume the office of US President just because the electors revolted?
presidential elector suing to unbind from state's election result. A presidential elector leading a historic
protest against the Electoral College system is planning to take his fight to court. A lawyer for Michael Baca, a
Colorado elector, told Politico that his client is preparing a lawsuit challenging state laws that force electors to vote for
their party's nominee. There are currently 29 states with laws on the books that bind electors to the election result
in their respective states, but those laws have never been enforced. Further, the penalty for violating the law is
typically a small fine.
Hillary Campaign Behind Push to 'Threaten Electors'. As the revolt against Donald Trump's victory Nov. 8 takes
another turn — with calls to challenge results in three states and more "faithless" electors vowing not to vote
for Trump — Hillary Clinton's lecture to Trump after the third presidential debate on the virtue of accepting
election outcomes comes to mind. When considerable attention was given to Trump's reluctance during the third
presidential debate to pledge that he would accept the results of the election, Clinton went on record stating "one of our
hallmarks has always been that we accept the outcomes of our election."
Majority of Democrats want to ditch Electoral College. A majority of Democrats are in favor of abolishing the
Electoral College, according to an online poll released Thursday [11/17/2016]. The Huffington Post/YouGov poll finds
66 percent of Democrats favor scrapping the Electoral College for a popular vote system to elect the president, while
14 percent want to keep the current system. Most Republicans, 67 percent, are in favor of keeping the Electoral
College, with just 13 percent saying Congress should amend the Constitution so the candidate who receives the most total
votes nationwide wins the election.
the Mob. Long Live the Electoral College. This week, anti-Trump protesters hit the streets in big cities
around the country, chanting "This is what democracy looks like!" Yes. That's the problem. For many Democrats,
the greatest political system is the one that instills their party with the most power. Now that it looks like Hillary
Clinton will "win" the fictional popular vote over Donald Trump, people — not just young people who've spent their
entire lives being told America is a democracy, but people who know better — are getting hysterical about the
Electoral College. Not only is it "unfair" and "undemocratic" but like anything else progressives dislike these days
it's also a tool of "white supremacy" and "sexism."
College voters 'deluged' with death threats. On Dec. 19 the Electoral College will convene to cast their votes
for either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, with each state's electors pledged to vote for the candidate elected on Nov. 8 in
their state. But a handful of states have no laws making it illegal for the electors to change their vote while others have
only a minor penalty such as a fine for doing so. If Clinton's supporters can get enough of the 163 electors from states where
Trump both won and votes can be legally switched on Dec. 19, Hillary Clinton becomes the next president of the United States.
elector wants Electoral College to dump Trump. Michael Baca is a graduate student at Northern Arizona
University. He's a registered Democrat who supported Bernie Sanders. And he's a member of the Electoral College,
who's trying to convince the other electors not to vote for Donald Trump. "There's a chance that by coming together, we
can avoid a Donald Trump presidency," he says. "But it's going to take a unification of Americans, I believe." Baca
calls himself a Hamilton Elector, and he says a half-dozen other electors from across the country are on board with his plan.
presidential electors being harassed, urged not to cast vote for Trump. Arizona's presidential electors are reportedly being hit
by a flood of emails and phone calls demanding they defy the voters in their state and choose Hillary Clinton instead of President-elect Donald
Trump — as part of a last-gasp bid to overturn the election. Since Trump's surprise victory on Nov. 8, those opposed to his election
have engaged in a number of strategies to attempt to nix the election or declare it invalid. Protests, many of them violent, have erupted
in cities such as Portland and New York City. Others, noting that Clinton appears to be on track to win the popular vote but still lose
the election, have called for the scrapping of the Electoral College altogether.
California, Clinton Is A Big-Time Popular Vote Loser. Yes, the Electoral College occasionally produces the odd outcome where the popular
vote winner is the election night loser. But without the Electoral College, abnormally partisan states like California could permanently dominate
the nation's politics. It's unlikely people in "flyover" country would consider that fair, or even democratic.
Clinton Supporters Doxxing, Harassing Electoral College Voters. Supporters of Democratic presidential candidate
Hillary Clinton have already gotten more than 4 million signatures on a petition asking the Electoral College to toss Donald
Trump's victory. But some, apparently, aren't content to simply vent their frustrations online. According to reports
out of Idaho and elsewhere, Clinton supporters have obtained Electoral College voters' personal information and are harassing them
with calls, Facebook messages, emails and even home visits, encouraging them to become "faithless electors," and change their Trump
votes to Clinton votes. And they aren't being kind about it: "A lot of 'em use bad, rough language," said Layne Bangerter,
one of Idaho's electors. "Nothing I feel intimidated over. But we're watching it very closely. They've got our home
phone numbers, our cell numbers, our emails, our Facebook. We're just getting an orchestrated barrage from the left."
Los Angeles County decide our presidential elections for us? The Electoral College is a mechanism, and balancing the power
is a means to an end. The end itself is protecting minorities against majorities. A majority of 50.1% is not necessarily very
much to have to get. 50.1% can often be achieved on a temporary basis. But if democracy operates unfettered, a minority of
49.9% is still a minority. If everything is decided by majority vote, that can be a lot of people left unprotected. A lot
of things voters will later regret can be implemented. And good luck to minorities of 35%, or 25%, or 15%. The Framers wanted
to make it hard for the federal government to alter the status quo very much. Policy ideas that would coerce the people needed to
win widespread and enduring majorities throughout the nation, as opposed to supermajorities in a few population centers. In any case,
the Framers did not envision the federal government doing a good 90% of what it does today. If they even saw the kinds of
government activity we now take for granted as appropriate, they assumed that states, counties, and cities would be the ones involved in them.
the Electoral College if You Hate Minorities. Today, as we wait both for the Electoral College to cast its
votes and for the final tally of the popular vote, we again see the Left declaring that the Electoral College is un-democratic
and must be eliminated to protect the rights of minorities. However, what they fail to understand is that the Electoral
College was designed precisely to protect minorities against the majority.
the British Empire for the Electoral College. There are two truths about the Electoral College: It ought
to be abolished, and it never will be. Calls for changing the constitutional election system abound now that Hillary
Clinton has won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote, as Al Gore did in 2000. But it turns out that the same
Constitution that enshrines the Electoral College effectively protects the small states from an amendment they don't want.
The problem goes back to the nation's founding — and short of abolishing the states as effective sovereigns, it
basically can't be fixed.
The Editor says...
It can't be fixed because it isn't broken.
Trump electors report 'barrage' of harassing messages urging them to change votes. Idaho's four presidential
electors say they have been getting harassing phone calls, emails and Facebook messages urging them to become "faithless
electors" and not cast their votes for Donald Trump in the electoral college. "A lot of 'em use bad, rough language,"
said Layne Bangerter, one of the four electors. "Nothing I feel intimidated over. But we're watching it very
closely. They've got our home phone numbers, our cell numbers, our emails, our Facebook. We're just getting an
orchestrated barrage from the left."
Electors Launch Effort To "Flip the Electoral College" And Block Trump's Win. OK, theoretically, everything
will go according to plan, and Donald Trump will be the next president. But technically, the (s)election hasn't really
taken place yet. Presidential electors of the mystified electoral college must still actually vote for the president,
and there isn't anything to keep them from 'voting their conscience' and choosing someone other than Donald Trump.
introducing bill to abolish Electoral College. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) will introduce legislation on
Tuesday to get rid of the Electoral College, after Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election despite leading in the
popular vote. "In my lifetime, I have seen two elections where the winner of the general election did not win the
popular vote," Boxer said in a statement.
The Editor says...
There are teenagers who have "seen" the same thing in their lifetimes. So what? The same thing may happen again
in four years.
Still Need the Electoral College. While Trump won a clear majority of the votes in the Electoral College, he
did not win the most popular votes. Some liberals are engaging in sore-loser backbiting by falsely focusing on the
meaningless outcome in the popular vote. The Chicago Cubs did not score more runs than the Cleveland Indians in the
World Series, yet the Cubs were declared the winner. Was that unfair, or does anyone challenge that result?
One Big Reason Why the Electoral College Isn't Going Anywhere. [Scroll down] There's just one big
problem: when something only becomes a major issue when it's sour grapes following an election defeat, it becomes very
difficult to actually do anything about it. Or, to put it another way, support for abolishing the electoral college is
almost always directly inverse to the amount of power yielded by the side calling for its abolition. The Republican
wave will not last forever. The pendulum will eventually swing its way back in the other direction. When that day
comes, don't expect to see many Democrats still waving the flag for changing the way we choose our president.
Bitter Socialist From Tiny State Bashes Electoral College After Trump Win. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders
criticized the Electoral College in the wake of Donald Trump's presidential election victory because, he said, Hillary
Clinton won the popular vote and closely contested states receive too much attention. "We may want to take a look at the
whole Electoral College, which is seating a man for president who didn't get the most votes," Sanders told USA Today this week.
Hillary's Participation Trophy.
From the founders onward, the American presidential election system has been based on a state-by-state system of electors,
chosen by the people of that state, who in turn choose the president. The fact that no state, even the smallest, can
have fewer than three electors means that those smaller states still get a voice even though in reality the voters of those
smaller states actually are more "powerful" than the larger ones. The system is unique to the world and born out of the
blood, tears and politics of a different time. However, many still praise it because it serves as a check on the huge
urban population centers "running over" the rest of the country, particularly rural areas, when it comes to national
politics. Those are the rules, and both parties know them backwards and forwards, inside and out.
End of story.
bullies try forcing Electoral College into submission. The Left had a total meltdown over Trump winning the
election. They were massively shocked. Now that they have quit fainting, they are looking to challenge the
Electoral College. Our Founding Fathers were incredibly wise and prescient men. They knew if the country just
went with the popular vote, that many if not most Americans would have no say in who led them. Thus the Electoral
College came into being. Liberals claim that Hillary won the popular vote by about 1%. Not true. Absentee
ballots are only counted if a state is very close, so most were not included in the vote tally. Most absentee votes are
military who tend to vote Republican. That doesn't include expats either or the fact that the Left utilized voter fraud.
They think if they can turn 10 to 37 Republicans in Congress against Donald Trump, that they could keep him from being inaugurated.
Electoral College Is Brilliant. The progressives are determined to get rid of the Electoral College. Of
course they are. Abolishing the Electoral College would complete their project of overthrowing America's unique federal
system, begun about one hundred years ago. The direct election of senators was the first and greatest victory of the
progressives over the Framers of the Constitution. Made possible by the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913, it mortally
wounded the Founders' system. Abolishing the Electoral College will finish the job. And the progressives mean to
do just that.
Half-A-Million Liberals Plot To 'Abolish' The Electoral College. In the wake of Donald Trump's historic
election victory, liberals across the country have taken aim at the institution solely responsible for robbing Hillary
Clinton of the presidency: the Electoral College. A petition on MoveOn.org — founded and funded by
liberal mega-donor George Soros — has garnered nearly 500,000 signatures toward "[amending] the Constitution to
abolish the Electoral College."
Theses on the Electoral College. [Scroll down] The first route to replacing the Electoral College —
through a Constitutional amendment — is hardly worthy of consideration. Even in the extraordinary event that
two-thirds of both houses of Congress voted to repeal it (this has never occurred, despite hundreds of efforts, although the
Congress elected in 1968 came close) there is simply no possibility of getting buy-in from 38 state legislatures.
Concession Speech aka Meet The New Clinton Inc.. [Scroll down] Remember: An electoral college
prevents all the things (such as a King/Queen or Political Elite) from retaining or gaining all the power over its
citizenry. Without it, using today as the example, if one could win all the votes of just 3 states like California,
New York, and Texas. Their population, e.g., their "popular vote," would dictate whatever they decided for the entire
other 47 states and their populace. That's why we have one (electoral college that is) and other "democracies" don't.
It protects the very things these "we won the popular vote!" worry about, yet don't understand.
calls for end to Electoral College. Former Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis, who lost to George
H.W. Bush in 1988, re-upped his call to abolish the Electoral College after Hillary Clinton's loss to Donald Trump on
Tuesday. "Hillary won this election, and when the votes are all counted, by what will likely be more than a million
votes. So how come she isn't going to the White House in January? Because of an anachronistic Electoral College
system which should have been abolished 150 years ago," he wrote Sunday [11/13/2016] in an email to POLITICO.
We Have an Electoral College. The point of the Electoral College is simple: to restrict the power of the
majority. There's a tendency to forget that majority rule is only half of a free country — the other half is
the protection of the rights of the minority, of the dissenters. This is why our federal government has two legislative
houses instead of one. The House of Representatives is filled on the majority-rule principle, with greater power given
to larger states; the Senate, on the minority-protection principle, with equal power given to each state no matter its
size. The same balance underlies the Electoral College.
of Getting Rid of the Electoral College. The results of the 2016 presidential election will give fresh fuel to
those who would like to abolish the Electoral College, with the usual expressed concerns that it is antithetical to
"democracy," that Hillary Clinton could "still win," because there could be some "faithless electors" who could switch to her
from Donald Trump; and then there is the biggest myth of all: Hillary Clinton was the choice of the "majority" of the
voters. It is quite impossible to correct all the myths and misunderstandings about the Electoral College in a single
article, but we can address some.
Marxist Coup Brewing within our Republic. It is now Hillary Clinton and her Marxist supporters who are
threatening our Representative Republic through the petition website Change.org. Immediately following Donald Trump's
election victory, a petition was launched to sway the Electoral College to "Make Hillary Clinton President on December 19."
The Electoral College will meet and vote on December 19, 2016, to certify the Trump victory as defined within our
Constitution. Remember, the United States is a Representative Republic and not a Democracy, no matter how many times
journalists want to change our constitution through language and the repetitiveness of their lies.
The Editor says...
If Mr. Trump truly is "unfit to serve," he can be impeached by our elected representatives. He cannot be
recalled by a tiny minority of disgruntled hippies bearing petitions, some of which may include the
signatures of people like Doodad Pro.
the Electoral College. Filmmaker and progressive activist Michael Moore colorfully summed up Democratic
feelings about Trump's victory: "The only reason he's president is because of an arcane, insane 18th century idea
called the Electoral College." But those clamoring to dump the system cobbled together by the nation's Founders —
which gives each state as many electoral votes as it has members of Congress — should be careful what they wish
for. Adopting a national popular vote would trade one set of problems for another.
Petition Asks Electoral College to Vote Hillary Clinton. A petition on MoveOn.org asked the electoral college
to vote for Hillary Clinton, in spite of the clear outcome of Tuesday's election. While the returns are still coming
in, it seems that Donald Trump has won the presidency but Hillary Clinton has won the popular vote. Democrats and
proponents of absolute democracy are furious that this can happen. More than 3,000 Clinton supporters have signed a petition
urging the electoral college to dismiss the state-by-state results of the election and instead cast their votes for Clinton.
Electoral College Is Hated by Many. So Why Does It Endure? In November 2000, as the Florida recount
gripped the nation, a newly elected Democratic senator from New York took a break from an upstate victory tour to address the
possibility that Al Gore could wind up winning the popular vote but losing the presidential election. She was
unequivocal. "I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people," Hillary Clinton said,
"and to me that means it's time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president."
one scenario that could still get Hillary into the White House. For die-hard Democrats holding out hope that
they won't have to live through a Trump presidency, there is a last, incredibly long shot for them latch on to — a
surprise twist in the Electoral College. Though Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 200,000, Trump has won the
minimum of 270 electoral votes necessary to be elected president. As of late Wednesday, he had 290 to Clinton's 228.
According to the Constitution, chosen electors of the Electoral College are the real people who will vote for president, when
they meet on Dec. 19 in their respective state capitals. However, there is technically nothing stopping any of the
electors from voting their conscience and refusing to support the candidate to whom they were bound, or from abstaining from
The Editor says...
There is nothing to stop the members of the Electoral College from electing the losing candidate, except the very real threat of civil
war. When the Constitution was written, men behaved predictably and honorably, according to their respective consciences.
In the 21st century, it is more difficult to rely on such things. This is why the members of the Electoral College are carefully
selected by active members of their political parties.
Do We Have an "Electoral College"? Is It Fair? It's about the time of year when people start complaining
about the Electoral College, sure that it must be a bad thing. Understanding how it works and why we have it is
important. It's a very American institution, and it really is a good thing. We have a lot to be grateful to the
founders for. Ask yourself just why we have a Senate, with every state assigned two Senators. The House of
Representatives represents the people and the population, The Senate represents the States, so that big populous states like
California and New York have equal representation to the small state with fewer people. The Founders did a very
impressive job of creating our Republic. The Electoral College is based on the same principles.
We Use Electoral College, Not Popular Vote. The Founding Fathers created the Electoral College after much
debate and compromise, but it has provided stability to the process of picking presidents. Though the winner of the
national popular vote typically takes the presidency, that vote failed to determine the winner in four elections: 1824, 1876,
1888, and 2000. Some see the Electoral College as a peculiar and mystifying institution that ensures only a few, select
individuals will ever cast a direct vote for president in the United States. Others complain that the system rewards
smaller states with more proportional power than the large ones. Every four years, around election time, there are
murmurs about revamping the system and moving toward a direct, national popular vote.
Days before the 2016 election: Washington
state elector says he won't vote for Clinton. A Democratic elector in Washington state said Friday he won't
vote for Hillary Clinton even if she wins the popular vote in his state on Election Day, adding a degree of suspense when the
Electoral College affirms the election results next month.
electors" and the outcome of the presidential election. American voters will have cast their votes by Tuesday
night, but it'll still be a couple of months before the outcome is official. Five weeks after the election, the
Electoral College takes place. The 538 electors — one for each congressional district, plus two for the
senate seats — cast their ballots in December and then the votes will be counted in Washington on January 6.
That's when the outcome will be official. It's generally a part of the process that few pay much attention to, but by
late summer, the question of "faithless electors" had attracted some attention to the Electoral College and those electors
who might not vote according to the will of their states.
These are the times for
which the Constitution was written. These are the times for which the Constitution was written; this is why
there is an impeachment clause; this is why there is legislative oversight of the executive branch; this is why there is an
electoral college. Elections are important to the legitimacy of government officials. Where there is no confidence in the
election process, there is the electoral college, but all of these clauses and instruments require a core of integrity.
The electoral college is to keep the public from voting for tyrants and criminals who have a slick campaign strategy. The
electoral college was designed to put cooler, more rational heads to use when deciding an election, at the time it was assumed
that they would exert the power of the electoral college to protect the union. The electors are representatives of the
people and of the union normally bound to vote the way the people of their state voted, but also to recognize where that vote
would be to the detriment of the union.
Breaking the Democrats'
Electoral College Blue Wall. Many savvy political analysts believe the Democrats have
a built in advantage in the Electoral College. [...] There is a strategy, however, which can
significantly improve the GOP's chances in 2016. This strategy only involves taking advantage of
the fact that Republicans control both the Governor's mansion and the state legislature in a few
states that are part of the Democrats' blue wall. The GOP's path to victory would be to adopt
the approach already used by two states, Maine and Nebraska, in which the party that wins the state's
popular vote wins two Electoral College votes (associated with the two Senators), but the candidate
who wins in each congressional district wins one Electoral College vote for his party.
Electoral Votes. Beltway pundits routinely grant Democrats in 2016 an advantage in the
Electoral College. The magic number is 270 electoral votes. Twenty-four states are almost
certain to go Republican: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma,
South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming, with a combined total
of 206 electoral votes. Any Republican candidate who fails to carry any of those states is going
to lose the presidential election anyway.
Dot for Obama Prompts Red Nebraska to Revisit Electoral College Rules. Nebraska is one
of just two states, along with Maine, that do not award all their electoral voters to the statewide
winner. And that meant that in 2008, Barack Obama picked up an electoral vote from the congressional
district around Omaha, even as Senator John McCain trounced him across the rest of the state. One
electoral vote — out of five in Nebraska and 538 nationally — might seem trivial,
but Republicans do not see it that way.
Popular Vote Compact is a Bad Idea. A movement is underway to change the method of
electing presidents. The objective of this movement is to convince states whose cumulative electoral
vote count equals or exceeds 270 (the number needed to elect a president) to join an interstate compact.
This compact requires that all member states cast all of their electoral delegate votes to the presidential
slate obtaining the greatest national popular vote count during that election. To date the compact has
been joined by the legislatures of 10 states and the District of Columbia representing 165 electoral votes.
See if you see any commonality among the member states, RI, VT, HI, DC, MD, MA, WA, NJ, IL, NY, and CA.
They are the bluest of the blue states meaning Democrats seem to think a national popular election might
favor their candidates.
Demonstrates Why Elections Matter. The United States Constitution allows each state to
determine how electoral votes are proportioned — Maine and Nebraska do it by congressional district
won, for example. The Democratic Party has won Michigan by an average of 53% over the last five
elections. Under the proposed change, instead of giving the Dems all 16 Electoral College
votes, the split would be 11 to the Democrats and 5 to the Republicans under the new law.
Much Needed Electoral College Targeted for Elimination by George Soros & the National Popular
Vote. If we were a true democracy, then the president and vice president would be
elected by popular vote. So, what's wrong with that? Well, the Founding Fathers firmly rejected a
purely popular vote to elect the president, because they wanted to balance the power of the larger
and smaller states. They realized that should our leaders be elected by popular vote, the major
centers of population, such as we now have in New York, Miami, Chicago and Los Angeles, would rule,
and the rest of the country would have no say in presidential elections. There have only been four
times out of 57 presidential elections when the president has been elected without a majority of
the popular vote.
states try raiding Electoral College. The fondest dream of the modern Democrat is to neutralize
the votes of the yokels in Peoria and put important decisions in the hands of sophisticates in places like San
Francisco and Manhattan. The modern Democrats took a step closer to realizing their ambition last week
when New York joined nine other liberal states with laws to undermine the Electoral College. Blue states
have been rushing to sign up for the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. So far, the list
includes — in addition to New York — California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts,
New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia. All have agreed to allocate
electoral votes according to the popular vote.
Plan to Ditch Electoral College. Nearly a dozen states have quietly signed onto a plan to effectively
ditch the Electoral College and instead, award the White House to the candidate that wins the popular vote.
The National Popular Vote agreement would take effect if states that represent 270 electoral votes all commit.
New York has most recently joined the efforts, bringing the number of states to 10 plus the District of Columbia.
Altogether, they represent 165 electoral votes.
Closer to Overthrowing Electoral College. George Washington once warned against those who would undermine the Constitution.
"It is requisite," he wrote, "that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon [constitutional] principles however specious the
pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the
system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown." Washington's statement could easily have been aimed at the
anti-Electoral College National Popular Vote effort, which is currently working to win support in several states.
electoral system only is bad when it hurts Democrats. As things stand now, the Electoral College favors Democrats because
they are all but guaranteed to win a small number of large winner take all states, such as California, New York, Illinois, Michigan,
Pennsylvania, New Jersey, plus a coalition of hopelessly blue states. Democrats start off close to victory because of
winner-take-all voting in those states, even if they win those states by a small margin in each state. The system currently is
"rigged" to favor Democrats, if you want to look at it that way.
VA Republicans Consider Changes to Electoral Vote System. Since the 2012 presidential election, Republicans in Virginia and Ohio
have floated the possibility of getting rid of their states' "winner-take-all" systems of awarding electoral votes, proposing instead that they
apportion their electoral votes by congressional district.
Time to eliminate
the Electoral College? With some national polls showing the possibility of Romney winning the popular vote over Obama but failing to
secure 270 electoral votes, an effort is underway to eliminate the Electoral College.
The Electoral College Is Brilliant, And We Would Be Insane To
Abolish It. No matter who is running, each presidential election comes with a de facto bogeyman already
picked — the election process itself. The electoral college is loathed, depending on the election, by Democrats (2000),
Republicans (2012), Third Party candidates (1804-2012) and other activist groups. Still, this is one of the best systems out
there without a doubt.
One step closer to elimination of the electoral college: Dem's
amendment would give 29 more electoral votes to popular-vote winner. The head of the House Democratic campaign arm this
week proposed a constitutional amendment that would give the winner of the popular vote in the presidential race an additional
29 electoral votes. Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) did not offer an explanation in the joint resolution filed in the House
for why he was proposing to change the way elections in the U.S. are decided.
Thanks Al, But Next Time Invent the
Internet. Former Vice President Al Gore recently expressed his newly developed opinion that the United States should dispense with the
Electoral College formula for choosing the President and Vice President. Of course, this complex and enduring practice gets beat up every four years.
It seems a bit convoluted, especially when considering that Americans will someday be able to cast their votes on a mobile device. The Electoral College
is very deliberately not a popular-vote method; that being one vote counted for every person voting. Rather, it comes from a place of time-honored
wisdom that receives a certain validation whenever someone with the intellectual stature of Al Gore kicks it around.
Popular Vote Is a Bad Idea. Moving quietly under the cover of the presidential debates and the enormous
publicity given to the Republican nomination race is a plan to change how U.S. presidents are elected. It
would bypass the procedure spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, which has been used successfully for over two
Tries an End-Run Around the Electoral College. Liberals have concocted yet another method to get
around the founders' Constitution. They plan to elect the President in 2012 on the basis of the national
popular vote, rather than by a majority of the electoral college. Although earlier progressive innovations
have confused the process, the Constitution is quite clear that the President is chosen by electors, appointed
by each state "in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct."
College Reform to Preserve States' Rights. The National Popular Vote Compact is a state law
which would require the presidential electors of each state that pass it to award all of the state's
electoral votes to that candidate who wins the national popular vote. The compact would go into effect
when states with a majority of the Electoral College all pass this compact law. The left wants a
national democracy rather than a republic. It is pushing this "reform" hard.
Qualification Issue. At the outset, we need to dispose of the idea that the Constitution
contemplates political parties nominating candidates to run for president or vice president. It does
not. Both president and vice president are elected by a special constitutional body, the Electoral
College. The members of that college are under no obligation to vote for any person to be president or
vice president. If a Perry-Rubio ticket swept all fifty states, the Electoral College could instead,
quite properly, elect Al Franken and Maxine Waters to be president and vice president.
GOP looks to split electoral votes. "However Philadelphia goes, that's how the
rest of the state goes," Rep. Robert A. Brady, Pennsylvania Democrat, told the roaring
crowd. "We've been doing it for the last 25 years, we're going to do it again.
We're going to be the biggest reason why we're going to reelect Barack Obama as the next president
of the United States." But state Republican leaders are pushing a legislative proposal to
change that equation. And it could cost Mr. Obama, who carried Pennsylvania in 2008, at
least half of the state's electoral votes in 2012.
Defense of the Pennsylvania Electoral College Plan. For those who don't yet know about it (if
the plan gets close to fruition, it will be one of the biggest political stories of the year), Pennsylvania
is considering allocating their Electoral College votes in 2012 the way that Maine and Nebraska already do so
by giving two to the winner of the state and one each to the victor of every congressional district.
Inches Forward. While the massive union effort to overturn the Wisconsin state senate
failed, in California the Left quietly moved its agenda forward this week when Governor Jerry Brown
signed the "National Popular Vote" bill whose purpose is to award the state's 55 electoral votes
to the presidential candidate with the most popular votes nationally. Why is this significant?
California is the eighth state (along with the District of Columbia) to pass this legislation.
It is written to take effect if and when states representing a majority of the 538 electoral votes
have passed similar legislation. This means that if Candidate A wins the vote in your state,
but Candidate B wins it nationally, your state's electors would be required to vote for B.
in GOP rethink Electoral College. A once-sleepy movement that would upend the Electoral College,
reverse two centuries of constitutional practice and elect presidents by direct popular vote has quietly picked
up momentum in recent days, with Republican Party leaders scrambling to stanch a steady stream of defections
by GOP state lawmakers to the plan.
GOP Leaders United in Defense of Electoral College.
One political controversy that came up repeatedly during the meeting of Republican state chairmen here May 15
to 17 was the latest effort by liberals nationwide to scrap the Electoral College in favor of popular election
of the President. Almost to a person, GOP party leaders are adamantly opposed to the proposed change and, in fact,
several of them told Human Events they hope to put the party on record in its opposition at the next meeting of the
Republican National Committee in the spring.
we shouldn't abolish the Electoral College. Basically, the Electoral College provides that
each state shall have a number of electors equal to the number of members in the House of Representatives
and the senators from that state — the most populous states have the most electors, but all
states have at least three because they have two senators and at least one member of Congress. The
method of electing the electors in a presidential election is up to the states. Today, all states
attempt to have the popular vote in their state reflected in the electors chosen. Most states provide
for "winner take all."
under assault. In a strange and dangerous pandering to populism over constitutionalism, the
Massachusetts legislature approved a law on July 27 that overturns the Electoral College in that state.
In other words, nullification is alive and well in the Bay State. According to Democratic state Sen.
James B. Eldridge, "every vote will be of the same weight across the country." This nullification
of Article 2, Section I, Clauses 2 and 3 (Electoral College) of the Constitution is meant
to facilitate a particular political outcome. The nullification phenomenon is all the more important
because of the deafening silence from Washington.
Tinkering With The
Electoral College Vote. What's brewing in the Rockies? Colorado, apparently with
considerably more than the required 67,000 or so signatures, likely will have a referendum proposal on
the November 2, 2004 ballot, to apportion electoral votes a la Maine and
Nebraska — and to do it retroactively!
Electoral College remains our best
option. [A]fter all this time, in the end, the Electoral College chooses the president and vice
president. Sorry to remind you. So, get ready for the howls to abolish the Electoral College.
To do that, in my opinion, would be a colossal mistake. I used to think otherwise until I did some homework.
would abolish Electoral College. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) introduced a constitutional amendment to abolish
the Electoral College on Friday [6/6/2008], less than a week after the Democrats settled on how to handle delegates from
Florida at their national convention. "It's time for Congress to really give Americans the power of one-person,
one-vote, instead of the political machinery selecting candidates and electing our president," Nelson said in a release
announcing the amendment.
Don't Mess With the
Electoral College. With their appeal to independents, Barack Obama and John McCain may scramble the electoral
map in November. Others want to go further and throw out the Electoral College completely, replacing this "complicated"
and "undemocratic" system with a direct, nationwide popular vote for the presidency. Despite its democratic allure,
it's a bad idea.
Senate OKs bypassing Electoral College. The state Senate on Tuesday [8/22/2006] approved an
Assembly bill that seeks to bypass the Electoral College system and institute a national popular vote to
elect the president of the United States. AB2948, which received a 23-14 vote in the Senate, calls for
an interstate compact where states would commit all of their electoral votes to the winner of the national
popular vote regardless of which candidate wins in each state.
[Why do so many bad ideas originate in California?]
Making A Case for the
Electoral College. The framers of the Constitution wanted a form of
government "that would reflect the people but also respect the minority." The
system they set up "allows the majority to rule, but only when it is reasonable. It
also allows the minority to throw up road blocks." The Electoral College
is the perfect system that provides the coexistence of these provisions.
Election v. Electoral College: Our Constitution is dedicated to securing everybody's rights.
This requires that we be concerned not only with size, but with the character of the majorities voting our
president to office. There are many ways in which our Constitution is configured to prevent simple
Run Around the Constitution. Rather than going through the labors of amending the
Constitution to replace the electoral college system with a national tally for president, which
has failed every time it has been attempted, they have come up with a plan for bypassing the
required two-thirds vote in the House and Senate and ratification by three-fourths of the states.
Law Would Bypass Electoral College. Illinois will award its presidential electoral votes to the
winner of the nationwide popular vote — but only if several other states follow suit. A bill
signed into law Monday by Gov. Rod Blagojevich made Illinois the third state, after Maryland and New Jersey,
ready to bypass the Electoral College in November.
Need to Tinker with the Constitution. Let's face it. Some people, especially
liberals, just don't like the U.S. Constitution. Every few years, they come up with wild
or devious plans to make major changes. The would-be rewriters of the Constitution do not
merely propose amendments to remedy a problem, as allowed for in Article V. They seek
structural change after hurling put-downs such as archaic and out-of-date.
An attempt to circumvent the
Electoral College is really an urban power grab. Washington state's 2004 governor's race was
decided by just 129 votes. A judge found 1,678 illegal votes were cast, and it turned out that 1,200
more votes were counted in Seattle's King County than the number of people recorded as voting. This
affected just Washington state, but in a direct national election where everything hangs on a small number
of urban districts, such manipulations could easily decide presidencies.
In California Electoral Votes Not Likely. An initiative may be placed on the ballot in California
to change the way the state allocates its Electoral Votes. Some political pundits have noted excitedly
that the change could add 20 Electoral Votes to the Republican column in Election 2008. However, a
Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey confirms the common sense expectation that this change will
not be approved by voters.
college bill ignites partisan fight. [Colorado] Senate Bill 46 would put Colorado in an interstate agreement to elect the president by popular vote,
instead of the electoral system currently in place. The Senate gave initial approval to the measure; a
formal vote is scheduled for Wednesday [1/24/2007]. Senate Majority Leader Ken Gordon, D-Denver, said
the current system is antiquated and causes presidential candidates to target only a handful of states.
other states, consider end run around Electoral College. Population-wise, Oregon is far
overshadowed by its neighbors to the north and south. But during recent presidential election years,
candidates have tended to bypass staunchly blue California and Washington in favor of campaigning and
advertising in the Beaver State.
National popular vote bill
advances. The [Hawaii] state House has given final approval to a proposal calling for the
abolition of the current Electoral College system of electing the U.S. president in favor of deciding the
election by the national popular vote.
Democrats rally to defend
the electoral college system. A Republican push to change America's historic voting system is
faltering after a fightback by Democrats fearful that it could cost them the 2008 presidential election.
Republican activists in California, the most populous state in the country, have set in motion a proposal to
change the law to end the winner-takes-all electoral college system. The change, if it went through,
would effectively hand the next election to the Republicans.
Dumbing Down The Electoral
College. Since 2004, when John Kerry almost won the presidency while trailing in the popular
vote, and 2000, when George W. Bush did win — and even before — the Electoral
College has been a target of those who consider it a dangerous anachronism. To correct this alleged flaw
in our democratic process, New Jersey recently became the second state to decide to award its electoral
college votes, 15 in all, to the winner of the national popular vote regardless of who carried the state.
Maryland earlier was the first state to do so with its 10 votes. A similar proposal is headed for
the desk of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Yes, he's a Democrat.
States Move to Subvert the Electoral College. A proposal
that would allow the "national popular vote" to elect the president is gaining steam, but so are opponents. As the
governor of Illinois considers the bill and left-wing lobbyists push it in other states, some governors are standing firm.
Why the Electoral College
Decides: The whole purpose of the Constitution is to defuse power so that neither the President, nor the Supreme
Court, nor Congress, could become a tyranny over the people. It deliberately made the process of passing legislation
laborious in order to slow it down for adequate deliberation and for the people's voices to be heard. As Gary L.
Gregg II, the editor of Securing Democracy, points out, "Properly understood, the Electoral College and its
origins point to the ideas and values that undergird the entire American constitutional system as these were embedded in
the foundations of the Electoral College itself."
Should the side with the most votes always
win? You gotta admit, it is a little weird that the United States — every four years — goes
through this drawn-out rigmarole of a presidential campaign, building to a climax on Election Day in November only
then to turn over the real election of the president to the Electoral College, a dusty and obscure outfit. There
have been a lot of criticisms of the college over time. But what seems to bother most modern critics is the notion
that a U.S. president can be elected even without getting the most popular votes nationwide, as in 2000.
Brilliance of the Electoral College: Over the last two centuries, constitutional amendments to
abolish or alter the Electoral College have been proposed in Congress more than 700 times. None
has ever come close to being adopted — an indication, perhaps, of the existing system's enduring
value. The most recent such proposal, introduced by US Senator Bill Nelson of Florida, would
eliminate the Electoral College in favor of direct popular election of the president.
Electoral College. For about as long as some of us can remember, there have been proposals
around to junk the Electoral College and find some other way to elect a president of the United States.
Whether a new system should be devised was a national debate question when I was in high school, and that was
a long, long time ago. Yet for all the dissatisfaction with the Electoral College over the years, no
one has been able to sell the American people on an alternative.
Save the electoral college.
For about as long as some of us can remember, there have been proposals to junk the Electoral College and find some
other way to elect a president of the United States. Whether a new system should be devised was a national
debate question when I was in high school, and that was a long, long time ago. Yet for all the dissatisfaction
with the Electoral College over the years, no one has been able to sell the American people on an alternative.
When picking a president, don't do what's
popular. The anti-Electoral College movement has found its newest champion in a state-by-state effort
to yield electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. ... Basically, this would turn the Electoral
College model inside out and could render the electoral votes of non-participating states ineffective. Hawaii,
Illinois, Maryland and New Jersey already are on board with this plan.
house approves popular vote for president. Colorado would join a national agreement to change the way the
president is elected under a bill the House approved Tuesday [3/17/2009]. "Basically, whoever receives the most
votes for president in all 50 states should become president," said the sponsor, Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood.
against Electoral College. A movement to bypass the Electoral College and elect the president
based on the popular vote is gaining steam, racking up almost one-fifth of the support needed to trigger the
plan. National Popular Vote, a California-based group formed in 2006, has won commitments from four
states to award their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote. Those four states — Maryland,
New Jersey, Illinois and Hawaii — have 50 electoral votes among them.
the Electoral College Gain Momentum. You won't hear about it in the mainstream media, but the
Electoral College is on the verge of being eliminated. One important legislative vote could occur Thursday
[6/24/2010] Two others could occur in the upcoming days and weeks A California-based group,
National Popular Vote, is lobbying hard for a dangerous piece of anti-Electoral College legislation.
College Advocates: Pass Bill Now, Ask Questions Later. When health care reform was being
debated this year, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi infamously declared, "But we have to pass the bill so that
you can find out what is in it." Now a liberal California group is attempting to do the same thing:
Pass a bill first, ask questions later. This time, it's the National Popular Vote (NPV) group, and they
want state legislatures to pass anti-Electoral College legislation that they have proposed, yet they have
not answered questions about the logistical complications of the solution that they have devised.
San Joaquin County
looking into absentee-only voting ballots. By 2012, voters in San Joaquin County may not have a
polling place in which to cast their ballot. Instead, they may be required to vote by absentee ballot
only. County officials are exploring the idea of a vote-by-mail-only system because it could save the
county considerable money, Registrar of Voters Austin Erdman told the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday [8/31/2010].
The Editor says...
Something tells me this idea originated at ACORN.
that elected NY Hispanic could expand. The court-ordered election that allowed residents of one
New York town to flip the lever six times for one candidate — and produced a Hispanic winner —
could expand to other towns where minorities complain their voices aren't being heard.
Is Rigging Elections Fair to Immigrants? A Nebraska town wants renters to prove they are in the
country legally, and Port Chester, N.Y., was forced to swallow a goofy voting scheme that makes sense only if
the aim is to erase the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. Under the plan, imposed by a
federal judge in response to a 2006 Justice Department civil-rights suit, each voter in the board of trustees
election got six votes. A voter could give all six votes to one candidate, or divide them among several.
Trying to Make History,
With 6 Votes Per Person. No one is sure whether the complicated new process, which emerged from
a bitter and expensive legal battle, will have the desired effect — or plunge the community into a
new round of litigation.
The Demise of One Man,
One Vote. In yet another scheme to radically transform our country, progressives have quietly
carried out their plan to incrementally disenfranchise citizens and grant extraordinary voting rights to
non-citizens. This is accomplished by challenging requirements to prove citizenship when registering to
vote and replacing the "one man, one vote" principle with proportional voting, a voting method promoted by
the far-left Congressional Progressive Caucus as one of their progressive promises to America.
The Editor says...
Why stop at six votes? Why not give a dozen votes to everyone who is not (for example) a white
male? How about allowing ten votes per Democrat, and one vote per Republican? All in
the interest of fairness, of course.
Goodbye to One Man, One
Vote. If you thought that "one man, one vote" reflected the full flowering of representative
democracy, think again. In the village of Port Chester, N.Y., just a few towns north of my locality
in Westchester County, there is a new system. It's "one (minority) man, six votes" — brought
to us courtesy of the U.S. Department of Injustice and a lunkhead of a federal judge named Stephen Robinson.
Why Tea Partiers Say Throw the Bums Out:
Demoting all major economic and corruption problems facing our country to the bottom of the agenda, the House
devoted a long afternoon [4/29/2010] and 12 roll-call votes to passing a bill to force U.S. statehood on Puerto
Rico. Of course this ploy had to be Nancy Pelosi's doing, but she made it bipartisan by getting 39
Republicans to vote with her. ... [T]he new vote prescribed in the mischievously named "Democracy" bill will
set an all-time record for dishonest elections. ... The bill would allow persons who were born in Puerto Rico
but now live and vote in the United States to vote in these Puerto Rican referenda. That means giving
the vote to a group based on ethnicity rather than on residency, and should be held unconstitutional under
the 15th Amendment.
UVR = Universal Voter Registration How to Lock Democrats
in Power: A variety of moves being undertaken by Democrats are designed to ensure their permanent
hold on power through engineering a new electorate. ... [John] Fund asserts that UVR will open the nation up to
massive vote fraud. The reasons are straightforward and many. Among them, (1) registering people
using existing government databases will result in many duplicates, (2) many of the lists contain names of
illegal immigrants; and (3) the list could be expanded to include felons currently ineligible to vote.
registration: Letting crooks & illegals vote. The proposal is to register everyone on
every welfare list, everyone getting unemployment insurance, everyone with a driver's license, everyone who
has had run-ins with the legal system, everyone owning any property — basically everyone on every
list the government keeps. People will be registered to vote whether or not they want to be registered.
If individuals are on any public record, they will be automatically registered. Obviously a lot of illegal
aliens have driver's licenses, and many get other government benefits. Quite a few have rap sheets.
New voting law taking effect. A
key change to Iowa's voting system takes effect Jan. 1. This year the Iowa Legislature approved
same-day voter registration. That means Iowans will be able to register to vote on Election Day.
could create a millionaire. With supporters hoping to boost voter participation, an initiative
filed Monday [5/22/2006] for [Arizona's] November election would provide $1 million to one randomly
chosen Arizona voter just for casting a ballot.
[How would that improve the quality of elected officials?]
This sounds like an idea you'd expect to hear in a communist dictatorship. Desperation: Obama
Surrogate Calls to Make Voting Mandatory. Peter Orszag, former head of the Obama Office of Management and Budget, is desperate.
With even Roll Call recognizing that President Obama is fighting an uphill battle for re-election, Orszag is floating a trial balloon:
Texas Wins One for Judicial
Restraint. On January 20, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the decision of a three-judge
federal court in Texas in a case that shows the Voting Rights Act at its most unworkable. The Court's ruling
highlights the importance of a state's legislative policy judgments in redistricting work and, in so doing,
reinforces the importance of judicial restraint.
Air Force Vet Prohibited from Registering to Vote Because of Race. Believe it or not, there is a
place where the American flag flies that citizens of particular races are excluded from voting. Citizens
not of the chosen race are not allowed to vote in an important election. White and Asian citizens of the
United States there are even prohibited from registering to vote for the election. As implausible as it
sounds, such is the law on the island of Guam, a territory where the American flag flies and the Voting Rights
Act applies, along with the 15th Amendment to the Constitution. Unless you are a Chamorro (a "native"),
you are not allowed to register to vote for a certain election involving the future of Guam. If you are
white, or Filipino, you are prohibited from participating.
The Left Owns the
Election Law Industry. Leftist foundations, litigators and organizations have established
permanent structures designed to alter election outcomes through policy advocacy and strategic litigation. ... They
bring lawsuits under federal and state statutes ranging from the Voting Rights Act, Motor Voter law and the Help
America Vote Act. They station teams of election observers in polling places around the nation every
election to fuel their litigation and their media efforts. Almost nobody opposes their efforts.
County voter rolls mistakenly boosted by 3,000. Montgomery County [Pennsylvania] mistakenly inflated
its voter rolls for years, registering more than 3,000 people as independents who never meant to sign up
to vote at all, officials said Friday [5/13/2011]. The revelation — less than a week before
Tuesday's primary election — won't necessarily open the floodgates to a new wave of voters.
Only registered Republicans or Democrats can cast ballots in their respective primaries.
A Reform the Tea Party
Should Embrace. Gerrymandering is a perfect example of bloated corruption in American government
today. Ending gerrymandering is not hard. Congress could pass a very simple statute like this:
"All legislative districts in the United States shall be drawn compact, contiguous, and as nearly as possible
along existing county or parish borders."
All of Harris County's voting machines
destroyed in 3-alarm north Houston fire. Harris County Clerk Beverly Kaufman this morning said
she is confident of timely, clean elections in November, even as a fire that destroyed the county's entire
inventory of 10,000 electronic voting machines still burned. Kaufman urged voters to cast their ballots
early to help the county cope with a possible shortage of equipment on election day.
New York State Opens a
Door to Vote Fraud. In the era before the Australian "secret ballot" came to America, voting
could be a tricky — and often violent — proposition. Goons from such big-city
machines as Boss Tweed's Tammany Hall knew how you voted, and if you knew what was good for you, you voted
the right way. All that changed with the secret ballot. What you did behind the curtain stayed
behind the curtain. American elections got a lot cleaner and fairer. But with an absentee ballot,
party activists can "assist" you in filling out those ballots as they cannot "assist" you at your local
polling place. The possibility for intimidation increases exponentially once those in power —
or those who lust for power — know how you are voting.
Value Added Tax and Illegals.
Many Americans believe voting is the most important thing they do as U.S. citizens. No. It isn't.
The most important thing good American citizens can and should do is to become involved in the candidate selection
process before voting. That means you need to attend local caucuses or whatever pre-ballot candidate
selection process your State offers. You must become informed about candidates so you know to whom
political power is being given before their name appears on a ballot.
Obama and the White
House Chicago Boys. Barack Obama has a problem. His polls numbers are dropping and his
policies are fueling an angry backlash across America. The Democratic party is held in disrepute, and
congressional Democrats are dropping like flies. This imperils Obama's radical agenda and his own 2012
prospects. What to do? Game the system and rig the future elections. That is how things are
done in the streets of Chicago.
Election Fraud: Convicted Felons Illegally Worked for Anti-Smoking Initiative. Among
other violations, 47 felons were hired illegally by the advocacy group SmokeFree America to collect
signatures for issue five, a ballot initiative to ban smoking in Ohio's small businesses. Kidnappers,
thieves and rapists were hired to collect signatures and addresses despite the fact that Ohio election law
prohibits felons from working petition workers.
A Wave of
Likely Voter Fraud and the Linguistic Ripple. The solution [to unauthorized voting] is not
yet — and perhaps never may be — politically acceptable. Two possibilities come
to mind. One would be a Federal or State identification card, driver's license or otherwise, which
displays not less than full name, home address, voting situs (township, ward, precinct, etc.), date current
residence acquired, photograph. Another would be a document created and certified under State law
evidencing that the holder owned the property of his or her residence, fee simple or condominium, or rented
pursuant to a written lease. Simplest of all, State law also could require advance registration of six
months, preferably one year, perhaps with an exception for active-duty military personnel and their spouses.
Pro-Obama, Muslim-led voter
registration in mosques. A leading critic of Islam isn't surprised there has been virtually no
coverage or action taken against a Muslim group that has been running an illegal "get out the vote" campaign
in swing-state mosques.
UK elections vulnerable to
fraud — e-voting no solution. An investigation into the UK's electoral system has
found serious failings with security ahead of London's Mayoral elections on Thursday [4/24/2008]. The
Rowntree Reform Trust's report Purity of Elections in the UK: Causes for Concern highlighted weaknesses with
postal voting and the inaccuracy of the electoral roll as the biggest threats to British democracy.
confusion could nullify mail ballots. More than 35,000 newly registered Colorado voters could
see their mail ballots tossed out because of confusion over the need to include a copy of their ID with their
votes. The state requires county clerks to verify the identification of all new voters. Often, it's
as simple as comparing a driver's license number on a voter registration form to the state's motor vehicle database.
Human Error Not Machine, Found During
Recount. New Hampshire's presidential primary recount has drawn national attention and a great
deal of scrutiny from hundreds of voters across the nation who think there could be a conspiracy, but
officials said the minor problems that have been found so far were the result of human error.
Wisconsin court: Voter
registration official did not commit a crime. The supervisor of a voter registration drive did
not commit a crime during the 2004 election when he failed to stop others from submitting fraudulent voter
registration forms, a state appeals court ruled Wednesday [4/25/2007]. The court reversed the conviction
of Damien Jones on one count of falsifying statements relating to voter registration as party to a crime.
Jones, 27, supervised a voter registration drive for a liberal-leaning group in Racine and Kenosha. The
appeals court said he was guilty of poor supervision but that is not a crime.
Voter Registration Is the
New Battleground. In just about every election, understaffed polling sites, malfunctioning voting
machines and outdated voter data are reported. Such bureaucratic problems often are rolled into the divide
between Democrats and Republicans over who should vote and how — a battle that has become more intense
since the 2000 Florida recount.
Voter deception bill
passes House. Those who knowingly convey false information with the intent to keep others from
voting would face up to five years in prison under voter deception legislation that passed the House on
Monday. The legislation, passed by voice vote, was spearheaded by Democrats who cited alleged incidents
during the 2006 elections of minorities, immigrants and other legal voters being misled about election dates,
guided to the wrong polling sites or told they were ineligible to vote.
Feds sue Philadelphia over
voting rights. The U.S. Department of Justice on Friday [10/13/2006] sued the city of
Philadelphia, claiming it violated the rights of Spanish-speaking voters. The complaint filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania said the city failed to provide language assistance
at the polls to most Spanish-speaking voters in recent elections, the department said.
A Repeat of 2004 Philly Voter
Chaos, Fraud. GOP Election Board members have been tossed out of polling stations in at least
half a dozen polling stations in Philadelphia because of their party status. A Pennsylvania judge
previously ruled that court-appointed poll watchers could [NOT be] removed from their boards by an on-site
election judge, but that is exactly what is happening, according to sources on the ground. It is the
duty of election board workers to monitor and guard the integrity of the voting process.
Study Shows Voting
is Harder in Some States. Some states have enacted laws that make it harder to vote instead of
correcting ballot problems that have plagued various parts of the country since the 2000 election, according
to a study released Thursday. Describing their findings as "troubling," voting reform advocates
sampled 10 states with past election difficulties.
Problems Plague Election Administrators.
Wendy Noren had all the voting machines she needed. What she lacked was the stuff that made them work. So
the elections supervisor of Boone County, Mo., didn't sleep Tuesday night. Instead, she worked
furiously into the next morning, outlining a last-minute election plan for a county of 150,000 people, a
plan that relied on pen and paper and hand-counted votes and that's with the country's midterm election
little more than two weeks away.
are sick of voting. Californians set a record in 2002: Fewer turned out for a primary
election than ever before — just 34.6% of registered voters. Even fewer may turn out for
[There's nothing wrong with low voter turnout. Those who are informed and motivated will vote
every time. Many Democrats show great determination to get to the polls on election day, even
if they're dead!]
Voting Equipment Usage in the
United States: Voting equipment maps and reports provide statistics on the types of voting
equipment and used by election jurisdictions in the United States. Information from voting equipment maps
is summarized on a voting equipment report that also includes names of voting equipment vendors and information
on voting precincts, population, and registered voters.
Half of Lost Voter Records Found
in Denver. More than half of the 150,000 voting records reported missing from city election
offices have been found, raising hopes that they were simply misplaced during a move in February, not lost
or stolen. The lost microfilmed voter registration files records contain Social Security numbers,
addresses and other personal information from 1989 to 1998.
Chesterfield again at odds. The ACLU of Virginia is offering its legal services to Chesterfield
County voters who are denied absentee ballots for refusing to give their Social Security number to election
officials. The issue gained attention this month after Chesterfield election officials blocked a county
voter from submitting an absentee ballot after he refused to provide his Social Security number.
Maryland judge nixes
early voting. Early voting in Maryland is illegal because the state's constitution allows only
one day to cast ballots, an Anne Arundel County Circuit Court judge ruled Friday [8/11/2006].
Ohio's odd numbers: No conspiracy theorist,
and no fan of John Kerry's, the author nevertheless found the Ohio polling results impossible to swallow: Given what happened in
that key state on Election Day 2004, both democracy and common sense cry out for a court-ordered inspection of its new voting machines.
The drunks may save our election system. The burden in a
criminal case is on the state to show that the [breathalyzer] machine was certified. … Failing that, of course, you can have a
"Wizard of Oz" effect, where the man behind the curtain presses a secret button and the machine says "drunk." [But it's very
different in the case of electronic voting machines.]
Elections commission fines Oliphant $10,000.
The Florida Elections Commission on Friday [11/18/2005] fined a former Broward County elections supervisor $10,000 for neglecting her
duties during a botched 2002 primary. The commissioners said Miriam Oliphant willfully neglected her duties, which caused dozens
of polls to open late and close early in the county during that year's gubernatorial primary.
Felony conviction looms over official. Marc
Hoskins won a Galveston City Council seat May 13 even though he acknowledged publicly that he is a convicted felon — a
fact that usually bars a person from holding elected office in Texas.
Why is it so hard to run an
honest election? My advice is to vote carefully. Read the instructions carefully, and ask questions if you are
confused. Follow the instructions carefully, checking every step as you go. Remember that it might be impossible to correct
a problem once you've finished voting. In many states … you can request a paper ballot if you have any worries about the
Fixated on John Kerry. John Kerry conceded defeat weeks ago, and President Bush has already revamped his Cabinet.
But as states certify final election returns, an academic debate over their accuracy is heating up. None of the experts
examining the returns has discovered voting anomalies significant enough to have swung the election.
Remember the Florida 'Chad' Fiasco? Uniquely, the 4.14%
double-punch rate in Palm Beach County was four times larger than it was in any other voting precinct in the United States using a
punch card ballot. The double-punch rate in the presidential race in the rest of Florida was 1%. The double-punch
error rate for the US congressional and senatorial candidates nationwide and in Florida was also 1%. What is even more
strange is that in the precincts which experienced the 4.14% double-punch rate at the top of the ticket, the double-punches for the
congressional and senatorial candidates mirrored the national average of 1%. The only explanation for the 4.14% double punch rate
at the top of the ticket is that precinct workers were pre-punching the ballots before giving them to the voters. In Palm
Beach County, Pat Buchanan did not have any supporters handing out ballots to voters standing in line to vote. All of the double
punched ballots had a vote cast for Gore. There were no double-punched ballots for Buchanan and Bush — only Buchanan
and Gore or Bush and Gore.
Stop and think. While many people are urging
us to vote — regardless of for whom, for what, or for what reason — there are very few urging us to do what is far
more important: Stop and think! Voting is not a matter of personal expression but a serious responsibility for choosing what
course this country will take in the years — and decades — ahead.
Voting chaos looms for American election. The
electronic voting system designed for the forthcoming American election is fundamentally flawed and could undermine the trustworthiness
of the entire US democratic process, a scientist has told the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Asleep at the wheel. In spite of what you hear
from your government school teacher, your leftist college professor, or that smiling talking head on television, we are not a
democracy. Never were. Weren't supposed to be. You won't find the word "democracy" in the Declaration of
Independence, the Constitution of the United States or in any constitution of any of the 50 States. There's a reason for
that. Our founding fathers hated the idea of democracy. They knew that a government of majority rule would dissolve into a
tyranny of plunder and chaos.
Lorain County should resist DOJ claims of bilingual
voting woes. Lorain County Board of Elections officials should resist efforts by the U.S. Department of Justice to impose
what could be costly and unnecessary additional bilingual services to voters who only speak and understand Spanish. For decades,
the county elections board has provided bilingual translators for Spanish-speaking voters. Elections Director Paul Adams said the
board has not received any complaints from Spanish-speaking voters of not being able to cast ballots. Apparently, that's not good
enough for the Obama administration and Attorney General Eric Holder.
The Democrats' Recall Bomb. The
left-liberals have got themselves a new political weapon. Democrat inability to prevail at the ballot box has led to tactics of
desperation. Falling numbers of Democratic voters ... [has resulted in] the introduction of all sorts of novel electoral tactics,
usually backroom stuff that would be familiar to Boss Tweed and Frank Hague: endless recounts spiced up by ballots appearing out
of quantum black holes, opponents being denied places on the ballot by legal action (a Cook County special strongly endorsed by none
other than Barack Obama), voting by felons and illegal immigrants. Frivolous recall elections are simply the latest of these.
Flaws seen in absentee ballot
program. Less than 5 percent of 2 million military personnel in states that are home to 80 percent of
U.S. troops voted last year, the report by the Military Voter Protection Project (MVP) said.
your vote count in the next election? Maybe not! How will we even know? We
advocate the use of voter-verified paper ballots (VVPBs) for all elections in the
United States, so voters can inspect individual permanent records of their ballots before
they are cast and so meaningful recounts may be conducted. We also insist that electronic
voting equipment and software be open to public scrutiny and that random, surprise recounts be
conducted on a regular basis to audit election equipment. Paperless electronic voting
systems are failing us. Worse yet, resistance from the elections official community
Voter Action "... is a not-for-profit organization
that provides legal, research and organizing support to ensure election integrity in the United States.
Our current focus is to protect as many jurisdictions as possible from the acquisition and use of privatized,
electronic voting systems which have been shown to have the most severe security risks and records of
inaccuracy and unreliability."
List of voting machine errors. There
are several ways the mechanical lever machines can be rigged. [But] computerized voting opens the door for
a single individual to manipulate votes in elections across the country.