Posted on 12/04/2016 10:06:35 AM PST by Kaslin
Just like the “recount” is a naked attempt to discredit Trump’s victory, this “smart take” is a deliberate deception designed to keep the unshowered angry.
The Nation magazine put it this way, “The preliminary count had Democratic Senate candidates gathering 46.2 million votes to 39.3 million for Republican candidates.” That and $2.50 will get you a cup of coffee from the aforementioned unshowered, probably with earlobes stretched to the size of Frisbees and an impromptu lecture on the “justice” of fair trade coffee beans.
But it’s a fraud.
Those numbers aren’t a lie, per se, but how the left is using them is, just like how it is using the presidential popular vote.
In California now, all candidates run in the same primary, and the top two vote-getters advance to the runoff unless one receives more than 50 percent of the vote. Thanks to total Democratic Party control, both candidates for the open Senate seat were Democrats. So Democrats got all the votes in California’s Senate race.
Meanwhile, Texas, which has a large population and generally votes Republican, did not have a Senate race this year. So millions of votes that could have gone to Republican Senate candidates didn’t because there was no election for them to vote in.
In fact, several solidly Republican states or states Republicans stand a good chance of winning didn’t have Senate elections in 2016.
When you choose the unit of measure by which you determine success you will always come out ahead. That’s what Democrats are doing here.
In this year’s World Series, the Chicago Cubs won the title 4 games to 3. But both the Cubs and Cleveland Indians scored 27 runs in the seven games. Applying the argument liberals are using, there needs to be an eighth game, or at least more innings added to game 7 with the winner being whichever team scores the next run.
That doesn’t make any sense, and neither does arguing about the popular vote for president or in regards to Congress. The rules were the rules, and campaigns were run under those rules, deliberately.
This won’t stop the unshowered and uneducated. Their ignorance inoculates them from such realities. But it doesn’t excuse the showered and educated who should, and do, know better.
The political class is doing all it can to hurt the incoming Republican government; to discredit it before anyone takes their oaths of office. C-list celebrities have even taken to social media to promote a meaningless online petition to “pressure” Trump electors to switch their votes to Hillary (and avoid keeping their word to leave the country). Many of the great unwashed have even taken to threatening the lives of Trump electors, which is illegal but of no interest to the current Justice Department. Unable to win at the ballot box, these are the tactics they’ve chosen. It’s who they are.
Outside of their enclaves, Democrats have little appeal. They can’t win under the rules, so they do what they always do – ignore them. Be it through a bogus recount trying to deny enough Electoral College electors for Trump to reach 270 votes (he’d still win without them from the three states the Greens and Clinton are challenging, it would just empower Democrats to claim he didn’t have 270, or the widely known “majority”), or the “we won more votes” congressional nonsense. Democrats have never lost well.
You’d think they’d be used to it by now. If they haven’t and they continue down this path, the American people will continue to give them ample opportunity to.
The key is the supreme court! I pray president Trump can rein in the turtle and his ilk.
Trump would have won more popular votes if Red states had Senate races - well IN did have one and institution Bayh was beaten soundly.
Democrats harp the fact their candidates got more votes. Big deal.
At the end of the day, they lost and they’re in the minority.
In other words, Hillary! won the popular vote in CA, and Trump won the overall popular vote in the other 49 (or is it 56) states.
They also have low turnout during the midterm elections, or at least it appears to be that way.
The U.S. Constitution specifically gives state legislatures the authority to determine how their presidential electors are determined. Every state has had a "popular vote" to select these electors for nearly 100 years, but it wasn't always done this way. More importantly, it doesn't always have to be done this way in the future.
I wish one state would change its method of determining its electors to something other than a popular vote -- just to put this stupid conversation about a "national popular vote" to rest.
Great article, with equally great followups here on FR.
The genius of the Founders continues to amaze, even though the things they feared aren’t the same as what we fear today. But in their quest to guard against a king-like ruler (or an ignorant population) they took the concept of a representative republic and applied it to choosing the chief executive.
The 538 ensures the inherent fairness of giving each of the states an equal voice. But democrats and liberals have always struggled with the notion that this is a constitutional republic, not a democracy, and have always been willing to contort the definition of “fairness” to suit their needs (i.e. until they win).
That’s a great synopsis, and totally illustrates why we need an electoral college. Without it, obviously every election would be decided by cities in the Northeast and the West Coast, with a contribution by Chicago.
I’ve also read (although I can’t find the citation) where some votes remain uncounted in CA (absentee?) because even if all went to Trump it wouldn’t change the outcome and Hillary would still win. However those votes would increase Trumps share of the popular vote. No real point in doing so other than this ongoing “contest”.
Have any alleged "news" peeps inquired as to why Mr. Comey hasn't looked into these allegations? Sounds as though it's ultra high priority to any reasonable observer, n'est ce pas?
.
I remember election night. All the networks kept talking about Trump didn’t have a way to 62mm votes. None. Hillary was on her way to 65MM and a sure landslide. They all called the election right.
Oh wait a minute I remember Martha Raddatz crying when Trump got to 270. I wondered why she was crying. He had no way to get to 65mm votes. I am confused.
Heard this from a sports player on TV: “Yeah. You won the popular vote. That’s like getting your ass kicked in football but complaining that you won the most yardage.”
Hm?....Hadn’t thought of it that way. Good point!
They still have to count those ballots because there are a lot of other state and local elections down the ticket that may be much closer than the presidential election.
I thought this was the case, but I went looking for a citation. All I'm finding is the same claim by many people, but no one actually citing the policy/law.
Digging around on CA's Secretary of State website, I would say that it's probably not true. My reason: CA law requires that a method be provided for the voter to confirm that their absentee (vote-by-mail) or provisional ballot was counted. If it isn't, they have the right to contest it.
“Trump would have won more popular votes if Red states had Senate races - well IN did have one and institution Bayh was beaten soundly.”
Get rid of LA county and Trump won the popular vote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.