In the weeks since Donald J. Trump handily vanquished his Democratic presidential foe, two-time loser Hillary Clinton, by winning majorities in states that haven’t voted for a Republican in decades, the angry, unhinged Left has been working overtime to intimidate and threaten members of the Electoral College into changing their vote and denying the billionaire businessman his rightful victory.
On Monday, however, they were once again unsuccessful, as the majority of GOP electors did their duty and selected Trump to be the 45th president of the United States.
But even up to the final day – Monday, Jan. 19 – when votes were to be cast, electors were under siege by the so-called “mainstream” media, by Left-wing academics, by legal institutions and by the billionaire financiers who helped fund all of the summer’s violence against Trump supporters.
One way electors were being targeted right up to the end included the planting of fake news stories and phony polls. For instance, a YouGov “poll” allegedly shows that more than half of Americans, or 52 percent, wanted the electoral college vote delayed until electors could be “briefed” on supposed “intelligence” that Russia “hacked” the election in favor of Trump.
As noted by Hot Air, the polling was skewed (intentionally) because the questions were skewed (intentionally). For one, the questioning did not even explain what exactly Moscow has been accused of doing or what exactly Moscow is believed to have done to influence the outcome of the Nov. 8 election. At first, the story was, “fake news” planted in “alternative media” sites by “Russian propagandists” is what destroyed Clinton’s chances of winning and helped Trump. When this lie was exposed as completely made up, the next lie became, “The Russians hacked the election.” Yet no one has ever bothered to explain just how that happened, and what Moscow actually did to alter the election’s end result.
Threats and voter intimidation should be investigated and prosecuted
In addition, these purveyors of hate and discontent went so far, even, as to threaten the lives of some electors, which appears to be blatantly illegal on its face, but also violates federal rules against voter intimidation. If threatening someone over their decision to honor a pledge to cast a ballot for a president-elect isn’t voter intimidation, then it doesn’t exist. Hopefully the incoming law and order administration of Trump will rectify this issue with some arrests and prosecutions.
The Associated Press reported Monday that it wasn’t likely Trump would be denied the Oval Office; only one GOP elector, Chris Suprun from Texas – who is nothing but a massive fraud and not a 9/11 “first responder” to the Pentagon, as he claimed – had said publicly that he would change his ballot. Given his lies about his past, it’s quite obvious that this is someone without much integrity in the first place.
Still, it’s the effort at discrediting both Trump and the election results that is most troubling – not just for the incoming administration, but for the country in general. We don’t want to create the impression that because one side lost the election the other side does not have the legitimacy and moral authority to govern. Yet the Left is attempting to create this very impression using the argument that Trump is not legitimate because he lost the popular vote.
He did lose the popular vote – by about 2.5 million votes. All of which were in California. So what does that mean? In this case, according to James E. Campbell, a distinguished professor of political science at the University of Buffalo-SUNY, it means that the Electoral College system worked exactly as our founders envisioned it.
Hey, whiny Leftists: Our election system worked just like the founders envisioned
The Left is claiming that the EC’s "creator," Alexander Hamilton, believed that electors should not be constitutionally bound by the popular vote to cast their lot in with the election winner if they thought him a fool or otherwise not fit to be president (this is not the case with Trump despite the Left’s claim that he is unfit). But what Hamilton also envisioned as a role for the Electoral College is that it would give equal voice to smaller states. Hamilton explains:
Donald Trump’s election is difficult for many Americans to accept, but there is no good reason to question its democratic legitimacy. For better or worse, Trump won the presidency by constitutional and sensible democratic rules that guided both campaigns and were known to any politically conscious citizen. He also won the national popular vote cast outside of the single state of California. Moreover, Clinton won all of California’s 55 electoral votes despite the fact that 4.3 million of the state’s voters voted for Trump. That big winner-take-all advantage for California’s Democrats and Clinton was certainly felt, but it wasn't enough to override her losses in many other states. Under our electoral-vote system, American voters elected a national president, not California’s choice.
In other words, just because California is a large state does not give it outsized authority to literally choose our presidents. Besides, if we had no Electoral College and presidents were elected by popular vote, both Clinton and Trump would have campaigned differently instead of just concentrating on “battleground states.”
Now that Trump has been duly awarded the presidential prize he won fair and square Nov. 8, the pathetic, shrill and childish Left will not simply “go away” and allow him to govern. They will continue to obstruct, challenge and undermine him at every turn. Expect more shrillness, more insanity and more threats.
Sources:
AVAAZ.org[PDF]
Please contact us for more information.