Here we go… the Democrats are once again claiming that the Electoral College was created because of slavery. Either they don’t know or understand history, or they are just lying their faces off. My bet is on the latter option. A whole bevy of leftists are now screaming over the Electoral College, saying that it needs to be done away with and a few states have already passed legislation on it.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) told CNN at a town hall in Mississippi this week that she wants to abolish the Electoral College. Of course, she does! Then the big cities on both coasts would pretty much rule the country and your average American would have no say in the matter. It’s a dream-come-true for Marxists!!
Warren claims that candidates avoid states that are not “battleground states” because of the Electoral College. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) followed suit on Tuesday, telling CNN the Electoral College was “conceived in sin” to “perpetuat[e] slavery.” What utter bull feces. Neither of those are true… not even close.
“The Electoral College is an institution created by Article II of the Constitution for the election of the president. It provides that each state will appoint a certain number of “electors,” equal to the number of representatives it has in Congress (House plus Senate). The electors are to meet in their respective states and cast their votes for president. The votes from all the states are then counted in Congress, and the person who wins a majority is elected president.
“The primary purpose of the Electoral College was to serve as a brake on populism. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 68: “A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment” necessary to select a person with “the requisite qualifications,” who would not use “low intrigue” or “little arts of popularity” to sway the masses of the people to support him.
“In other words, the Electoral College was designed as an anti-populist measure. Over time, the votes of the electors became more or less automatic — that is, all of a state’s electors generally case their vote for whichever presidential candidate wins the majority of votes in that state. Few were particularly bothered about that, until George W. Bush defeated Al Gore in 2000 despite losing the popular vote. Even after that, Democrats did not change the system.”
When Donald Trump was unexpectedly elected president, the Dems lost their ever-loving minds and have been claiming he’s illegitimate ever since. They just won’t drop the wacko conspiracy theory that somehow he conspired with the Russians to steal the presidency. Hillary Clinton had far more dealings with the Russians such as Skolkovo, so it would have been far more likely to occur the other way around. The Russians didn’t care who won really… they had contingency plans either way.
What won Trump the presidency was that he campaigned in Midwestern states that Hillary Clinton didn’t have time for or interest in. In other words, the common or working man and woman are the people who elected Trump. Because those Americans finally had their voices heard via the Electoral College, the Democrats want to undo a system that our Founding Fathers wisely crafted and put in place.
Should the Electoral College fall, you would see candidates spend all their time in densely populated areas such as the New York tri-state area and Southern California. Elections, therefore, would wind up being less representative. As President Trump tweeted Tuesday: “With the Popular Vote, you go to … just the large States – the Cities would end up running the Country. Smaller States & the entire Midwest would end up losing all power.”
More from Breitbart:
“A national popular vote would also enable cheating. Democrats know the voting rules are loosest in states they control, like California. In the 2018 midterm elections, for example, they used “ballot harvesting,” in which activists delivered thousands of mail-in ballots for other people. The practice is illegal in many states, but Democrats legalized it in California. They want to run up the score there, then use their “National Popular Vote Interstate Compact” to award other states’ electoral votes to the popular vote winner. Republicans cannot accept that.
“Then there is Cohen’s argument about slavery. He claims that the Electoral College was preferred by southern states because it allowed them greater clout than a national popular vote. Northern states could, theoretically, allow all of their adult residents to vote (though few did at the time). Southern states denied slaves the right to vote — but were allowed to count them, due to the infamous three-fifths compromise, in the size of their congressional delegations.
“That is part of the history of the Electoral College — even after the Civil War and the abolition of slavery, when Democrats in the South continued to restrict the right of blacks to vote until the latter half of the twentieth century.
“But that is not the reason the Electoral College was created, and at this stage it has no effect whatsoever on the way we elect presidents. (Arguably, it is Democrats today that want to disenfranchise black voters, and other citizens, by counting illegal aliens in the Census toward the apportionment of congressional representatives to the states.)”
The three-fifths compromise that came out of the Constitutional Convention was more about congressional representation and taxation than it was about the Electoral College system. “Indeed, the discussions about the compromise and the discussions about the presidential election system were largely separate,” Tara Ross, a retired lawyer and author of the book, “The Indispensable Electoral College: How the Founders’ Plan Saves Our Country from Mob Rule,” says. “The main reason the compromise is cited today is because, late in the convention, it was decided that each state’s electoral vote allocation would match its congressional allocation.”
According to Wallbuilders, there are three important benefits produced by the current electoral college system:
(1) Because a candidate must win at least 270 electoral votes from across the nation, a candidate cannot become president without a significant widespread voter base. In fact, as has happened in three previous elections, the distribution of voter support may actually take precedence over the quantity of voter support. Therefore, the electoral college ensures a broad national consensus for a candidate that subsequently will allow him to govern once he takes office.
(2) Since the electoral college operates on a State-by-State basis, this not only enhances the status of minorities by affording them a greater proportional influence within a smaller block of voters at the State level but it also ensures a geographically diverse population which makes regional domination, or domination of urban over suburban or rural areas, virtually impossible. In fact, since no one region of the country has 270 electoral votes, there is an incentive for a candidate to form coalitions of States and regions rather than to accentuate regional differences.
(3) The electoral college system prioritizes the most important factors in selecting a president. If a candidate receives a substantial majority of the popular vote, then that candidate is almost certain to receive enough electoral votes to be president. However, if the popular vote is extremely close, then the candidate with the best distribution of popular votes will be elected. And if the country is so divided that no one candidate obtains an absolute majority of electoral votes, then the U. S. House of Representatives — the body closest to the people and which must face them in every election — will then choose the president.
The Electoral College is a fundamental component forming the basis of our successful system of government. It should not be abolished. To the contrary, every argument currently raised against the Electoral College can be shown not only to be false and flawed but also to be more problematic than the alleged problems that it claims to solve. The Electoral College should be preserved.
DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:
Trending Now on Right Wing News
Sanders To Cut Staffer’s Hours To Pay $15 Min Wage – This Is His Plan For America
It should be glaringly apparent what a flaming, red hypocrite comrade Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is. He has demanded a $15 an hour minimum wage and more unionization for years. He has unionized his workers and is now paying them $15 an hour – he’s also cut his staffers’ hours to compensate for this move. Note to Sanders: that’s not what your supporters wanted.
The union contract that Sanders negotiated resulted in a flat annual salary of $36,000 for field staffers. In a normal 40-hour work week, that would pay about $17 per hour. But some staffers say they work up to 60 hours a week, meaning their pay ends up being about $13 per hour. Thus, Sanders will limit staffers’ hours to ensure they get at least $15 an hour. In the end, this means they will make less, not more working for the elderly socialist. Doing Moscow proud.
“We look forward to continuing those discussions and obviously are disappointed that some individuals decided to damage the integrity of these efforts before they were concluded,” said Sanders campaign manager Faiz Shakir in a statement to Newsweek. “As these discussions continue, we are limiting hours so no employee is receiving less than $15 for any hours worked.”
Do these guys realize just how bad this makes them look? I doubt it… self-awareness is not their strong suit, to say the least. It never is for communists.
Bernie Sanders says his campaign will limit the hours staffers work so they are paid the equivalent of $15 an hour. “I’m very proud to be the first presidential candidate to recognize a union and negotiate a union contract,” he told me. https://t.co/IBJdMiIIIu
— Brianne Pfannenstiel (@brianneDMR) July 19, 2019
From The Daily Wire:
“Shakir also told Newsweek that the campaign had offered to give field organizers a raise — to $42,000 annually, but the offer was rejected because staffers would have had to work six days a week. That salary also would have forced them “to pay more of their own health care costs,” Newsweek reported.
“The Des Moines Register reported that Sanders complained that staffers were going to the press instead of keeping their concerns internal.
“I’m very proud to be the first presidential candidate to recognize a union and negotiate a union contract,” Sanders told the outlet. “And that contract was ratified by the employees of the campaign, and it not only provides pay of at least $15 an hour, it also provides, I think, the best health care benefits that any employer can provide for our field organizers.”
“It does bother me that people are going outside of the process and going to the media,” he added. “That is really not acceptable. It is really not what labor negotiations are about, and it’s improper.”
I can't stop thinking of how stupid this is. Limiting hours so you can raise wages has literally no effect on how much your employees make. Only benefit is you being able to say you pay them $15 an hour. Beyond cynical. https://t.co/UdlxUBIhvA
— neontaster (@neontaster) July 21, 2019
“Sanders had previously expressed his dismay with press leaks ahead of his trip to Iowa this weekend.
“We are disappointed that some individuals have decided to damage the integrity of these efforts. We are involved in negotiations. And some are individuals that have decided to damage the integrity of that process before they were concluded,” he said.
“What Sanders is experiencing is exactly what he wants to foist onto millions of Americans and their employers. His staffers were salaried, but hourly workers will also see their hours cut in order to ensure they’re paid $15 per hour. As for negotiations, those demanding better working conditions routinely go to the press. They also sometimes hold strikes that are guaranteed to get media coverage. For Sanders to complain about how things are going in his campaign shows he hasn’t truly thought through the consequences of his policies.”
This reminds me of that take about how farmers in the USSR had more vacation time than people in the US now.
The point of raising the minimum wage is that so PEOPLE MAKE MORE MONEY, not make the same amount of money and have 3 days off a week, you dolt. https://t.co/QZlu9cNtDD
— neontaster (@neontaster) July 21, 2019
What’s a socialist to do? They want higher pay and free healthcare. In fact, they don’t really even want to work. They want their student loans paid and wages given to them whether they earn them or not. These people are worthless and hopeless. Sanders would set the minimum wage at $15 an hour for all Americans causing unemployment to soar if he got the chance.
Sanders’ minions are not happy and conservatives are savaging him over this:
“For the first time in his life, socialist Bernie Sanders practices economics and, buddy, the results are hilarious,” wrote columnist and humorist Stephen Miller. He added: “Why won’t millionaire Bernie Sanders, who owns 3 homes, instead of cutting hours, pay his staff a living wage? People are starving.”
Texas Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw lambasted the discord in the Sanders’ campaign and says it is beyond parody: “So does this fall under the category of hypocrisy, irony, or poetic justice?” Crenshaw asked. “All three? Can’t make this stuff up.” Lol.
“This situation is an instructive example of the downside of more than doubling the minimum wage,” wrote The Blaze’s Aaron Colen. “Companies don’t just suddenly get more money to pay employees. They have to make tough decisions; usually either cutting hours or worse, cutting staff.” Gee, reality bites… doesn’t it Bernie?
“This is just *chef’s kiss*.” Ben Shapiro wrote, “In which Bernie Sanders learns about economics.” Too true, except he’ll never learn.
Speaking on “America’s Newsroom,” Charles Payne said Sanders “blew a hole in his own $15 an hour minimum wage argument,” adding that he is paying his staff “what the market would bear.”
“There is a maximum amount of time you can work, some people may lose their jobs, I think Bernie may actually blew a hole in his own $15 an hour minimum wage argument,” Payne said.
“Needless to say, I think Bernie learned a valuable lesson, and by the way, his campaign doesn’t generate revenue.”
No, he didn’t. Of course, Sanders sees this as some form of communist morality… not a dollars and cents issue. And that is exactly why he will never be president thank goodness.
DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:
General Hospital Star Asks Ivanka If Her Daughter’s New Puppy Is A Nazi Yet
It seems that the left can’t ever stop their lunatic behavior. Here we have a woman who we’ve never heard of claiming to be a star. She wants her 15 minutes.
It’s amazing how the left connects having a dog to being a Nazi and that America never had a border until President Trump got elected. This is how stupid these people are, folks.
These people are getting worse every day. Their hatred for Trump literally has them foaming at the mouth. This psychotic behavior is only strengthening our side. Just wait until the landslide victory in 2020.
Soap star Nancy Lee Grahn reiterated her disdain for the Trump family in a tweet posted Sunday, smearing White House Senior Advisor Ivanka Trump as a Nazi after she posted a picture of her family’s new dog, Winter.
Trump tweeted a photo of her family’s newest furry addition – or what she called “Arabella’s birthday dream come true” – in a tweet to her 6.7 million Twitter followers Saturday. Grahn pounced and went on the attack.
“How darling. I see you skipped a rescue and went straight to an Aryan breeder. Does it sit and sieg heil yet?” Grahn said, making a clear Nazi reference.
How darling. I see you skipped a rescue and went straight to an Aryan breeder. Does it sit and sieg heil yet?
— Nancy Lee Grahn (@NancyLeeGrahn) July 21, 2019
The General Hospital star has long been an outspoken opponent of the Trump family. Last week, Grahn called Trump an “evidenced lunatic” who has “mortifyingly not been impeached yet” due to Republicans in the Senate.
Shouldn’t have to say this, but the ONLY reason an evidenced lunatic has mortifyingly not been impeached yet is entirely due to every Republican in the Senate sans 1. They are what’s wrong with us.
— Nancy Lee Grahn (@NancyLeeGrahn) July 17, 2019
Last month, the Santa Barbara actress came under fire after posting a picture of kids in migrant shelters wrapped in aluminum blankets and blaming it squarely on the Trump administration. Some social media users, however, quickly noticed that she cropped out the date, hiding the fact that the photo was taken during the Obama administration.
“Trump administration is forcing children 2 sleep on cement floor with an aluminum blanket & lights on all night,” she tweeted. “Sarah Fabian from DOJ argued in court that it was good enough & soap was unnecessary. Companies making 750 a kid a day to torture them.”
Trump administration is forcing children 2 sleep on cement floor with an aluminum blanket & lights on all night. Sarah Fabian from DOJ argued in court that it was good enough & soap was unnecessary. Companies making 750 a kid a day to torture them. pic.twitter.com/XuNIVZwkJW
— Nancy Lee Grahn (@NancyLeeGrahn) June 21, 2019
Your words seem to be a direct misrepresentation of the photos.. pic.twitter.com/BorgxQESRY
— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) June 24, 2019
Oh look, the time stamp. pic.twitter.com/KgN4OlLXpn
— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) June 24, 2019
Grahn eventually admitted that the photos were taken during the Obama administration but refused to back down.
“Had I noticed that, I would’ve clearly realized that it was from the Obama administration because he, unlike Trump, didn’t have a policy of separating children from their parents. Only a monster would do that,” she tweeted in part.
— Nancy Lee Grahn (@NancyLeeGrahn) June 25, 2019
Trump signed an executive order ending family separations last June, telling reporters: “We’re going to have strong, very strong borders, but we’re going to keep the families together.”
“I didn’t like the sight or the feeling of families being separated,” he added.
Despite the cries from Grahn and other left-wing celebrities, the “cages” the left frequently refers to were set up and utilized by the Obama administration.
DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW: