America Died Peacefully in Her Sleep Last night

Again, I didn’t watch it all.  But what I’m thinking of is the moment  when all the Dem wannabes raised their hands to guarantee healthcare for illegals.  Ten politically prominent members of one of the established parties of our two-party system.  And in the midst of a huge and catastrophic onslaught on the border,  not only by Central Americans but by anybody from the entire third world who can get an airline ticket to Mexico or Guatemala City. ( and oh yeah: their families, too, once they get in here.)

Yeah, go ahead and laugh.  That’s the end of the race! ,tweeted Trump, and the NY Post featured that all-hands-raised photo with the caption, “Who Wants to lose the election?”

But  see, the Dems entire strategy is to WinThe Popular Vote.  They did it last time, by winning California, where they’re practically begging illegals to vote.  And it will happen again—who doubts it?  They’ve got a winner here: “Don’t we want everybody’s vote to count?”

But this time, we have 14 states and counting who have pledged to give all electoral votes to whomever California and New York vote for.

It’s over.  Our president will no longer be elected by citizens, no longer will there be  a “United States”.

Article 2 of the Constitution won’t help us, IMHO.  Have you ever tried to read it?  It doesn’t expressly prohibit what we saw in 2016, a campaign to get electors to vote for someone their state didn’t elect, and I suppose, given the fact that there have been no legal challenges to this compact, that it doesnt expressly  prohibit a state from determining  that its electors will vote for whoever carried California.  I think there are two states  at present who award their electoral votes in proportion to the percentages of the vote which each candidate  garnered.

I hope I’m wrong about this; can’t say they ever covered the electoral college in my Constitutional Law course.  But I have the impression that we’re talking about a long-established custom/policy when we talk about the way electoral votes have traditionally been distributed. The Constitution says we must have the electoral college, but leaves a lot of the details up to the states.

I’m not sure how this would be handled on the ballot.  It’s my understanding that when we pull the lever for Trump, we are actually voting for those electors who have pledged to vote for him.

Would states need to elect electors at all, if all its electoral votes are going to be automatically awarded to the winner of the most populous states?

We are teetering on the brink of tyranny by the majority, and a polyglot, non-citizen majority at that.

Time  of death: approx 10PM, June 27, 2019.

5+

Users who have liked this post:

  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar

36 thoughts on “America Died Peacefully in Her Sleep Last night”

  1. As demonstrated last night, the Democrats are the party of barbarians, perverts, and lunatics. In order to win, the Republicans must be relentless in tagging them as such.

    6+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  2. What can be said that hasn’t already been said? No country can survive this level of stupidity. RIP America: You had the world by the tail, but in the end you [expletive deleted] it all up.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  3. Mike LaRoche:
    As demonstrated last night, the Democrats are the party of barbarians, perverts, and lunatics. In order to win, the Republicans must be relentless in tagging them as such.

    But Mike, as far as I’m concerned the Republicans are just as much a part of the problem as are the Democrats. We need a total system reset.

    5+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  4. Mike LaRoche:
    As demonstrated last night, the Democrats are the party of barbarians, perverts, and lunatics. In order to win, the Republicans must be relentless in tagging them as such.

    Yeah.  And: they  aren’t. (Except for Trump, and the GOPe won’t endorse his tags.)

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  5. Hypatia:

    Mike LaRoche:
    As demonstrated last night, the Democrats are the party of barbarians, perverts, and lunatics. In order to win, the Republicans must be relentless in tagging them as such.

    Yeah.  And: they  aren’t. (Except for Trump, and the GOPe won’t endorse his tags.)

    Republicans and Democrats are just different sides of the same coin—I’m not playing their sick game anymore. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 1000 times, I’m a complete idiot.

    6+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  6. Mike LaRoche:
    As demonstrated last night, the Democrats are the party of barbarians, perverts, and lunatics. In order to win, the Republicans must be relentless in tagging them as such.

    I think of today’s Democrats more as supporters of unlimited government and energizing that through extreme, and frequently, fanatical positions. Facts and truth reveal different processes yield different outcomes and when effective processes yield outcomes in conflict with openness, the fanatics surface to declare the results intolerable. The fact that the Left has co-opted the social media platforms to do this handiwork makes the job of President Trump and his supporters even more challenging. I can’t even contemplate a discussion that will attempt any matching of our President’s agenda and objectives with ideological concepts designed to make America great again, but I like what he has been doing.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  7. Mike LaRoche:
    As demonstrated last night, the Democrats are the party of barbarians, perverts, and lunatics.

    And any other bizarre label that might apply to them or their supporters and anything you might find objectionable there makes you intolerant and you must then be excluded. No facts, please.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  8. Black Prince:
    What can be said that hasn’t already been said? No country can survive this level of stupidity. RIP America: You had the world by the tail, but in the end you [expletive deleted] it all up.

    As all great civilizations in history manage to do.

    4+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  9. Hypatia:
    Would states need to elect electors at all, if all its electoral votes are going to be automatically awarded to the winner of the most populous states?

    I’d read somewhere that there are 14-15 states who ratified the electors’ responsibility to vote according to the populous wishes of their state with more states looking to make this law. As you mentioned, it’s frightening that electors in many states have the legal right to disregard voters’ choice.

    I’m only surprised the Founders didn’t take care of this in the beginning but I know that they (particularly Alexander Hamilton) were concerned about the “non-elites.”

    The thought of CA and NY running this country is so horrifying, I won’t be commenting too much on this post.

    3+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  10. Bob Thompson:

    Mike LaRoche:
    As demonstrated last night, the Democrats are the party of barbarians, perverts, and lunatics. In order to win, the Republicans must be relentless in tagging them as such.

    I think of today’s Democrats more as supporters of unlimited government and energizing that through extreme, and frequently, fanatical positions. Facts and truth reveal different processes yield different outcomes and when effective processes yield outcomes in conflict with openness, the fanatics surface to declare the results intolerable. The fact that the Left has co-opted the social media platforms to do this handiwork makes the job of President Trump and his supporters even more challenging. I can’t even contemplate a discussion that will attempt any matching of our President’s agenda and objectives with ideological concepts designed to make America great again, but I like what he has been doing.

    Cuz, I’m mad as hell too.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  11. EThompson:

    Bob Thompson:

    Mike LaRoche:
    As demonstrated last night, the Democrats are the party of barbarians, perverts, and lunatics. In order to win, the Republicans must be relentless in tagging them as such.

    I think of today’s Democrats more as supporters of unlimited government and energizing that through extreme, and frequently, fanatical positions. Facts and truth reveal different processes yield different outcomes and when effective processes yield outcomes in conflict with openness, the fanatics surface to declare the results intolerable. The fact that the Left has co-opted the social media platforms to do this handiwork makes the job of President Trump and his supporters even more challenging. I can’t even contemplate a discussion that will attempt any matching of our President’s agenda and objectives with ideological concepts designed to make America great again, but I like what he has been doing.

    Cuz, I’m mad as hell too.

    That comes through, huh?

    3+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  12. Hypatia:
    But this time, we have 14 states and counting who have pledged to give all electoral votes to whomever California and New York vote for.

    Which 14 States?  Source?  Thanks.

    (Emphasis mine)

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  13. New Mexico, Colo, Del, Calif, Ill. , Hawaii, Mass, RI, Ct, Wash, NJ, NY, Md, Vt, and D. C.   So 14 states plus D.C.

    3+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  14. Hypatia:
    New Mexico, Colo, Del, Calif, Ill. , Hawaii, Mass, RI, Ct, Wash, NJ, NY, Md, Vt, and D. C.   So 14 states plus D.C.

    Ok, so give me the list of the states who play by the rules.  I know we have at least 14-15 but you’re the barrister!

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  15. Here is a research project for anybody interested in pursuing it.  I did a similar analysis of the cabinets of the Harding, Obama, and Trump administrations, based upon an observation in Herbert Hoover’s book American Individualism, but I have too many other tasks on my agenda at the moment to undertake this one.

    The question is, of the twenty Democrat contenders on the stage in these “debates”, how many actually ever worked for a living?  By that, I mean held a job after the end of their formal education which was not an elected or appointed office whose salary was paid by taxpayers.  One can break things down into categories, so a complete analysis would include how many years the candidate spent:

    • Working in the private (for profit sector)
    • Working for non-profit organisations
    • Holding elected office
    • Holding appointed office
    • Serving in the military
    • Living on inherited wealth

    To parallel Hoover’s analysis, it would be interesting to know how many of these champions of the “working class” ever did manual labour (in which I include military service in enlisted ranks or special operations) and how many attended Ivy League institutions (undergraduate or graduate degree).

    7+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  16. Washington state made a dog’s breakfast of its electoral votes in 2016. The Hilldebeast won the state, but only received 8 of its 12 electoral votes. In a bizarre protest against the Electoral College, three of the Democratic electors cast their votes for former Secretary of State Colin Powell and one cast his vote for an American Indian activist named Faith Spotted Eagle. I was living there at that time; complete pandemonium.

    5+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  17. I tend to think the Roaring 20’s are going to cause changes we cannot even imagine. come the 2032 election, who knows where we will be. Well, if I am here, I’ll be 62.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  18. John Walker:
    Here is a research project for anybody interested in pursuing it.  I did a similar analysis of the cabinets of the Harding, Obama, and Trump administrations, based upon an observation in Herbert Hoover’s book American Individualism, but I have too many other tasks on my agenda at the moment to undertake this one.

    The question is, of the twenty Democrat contenders on the stage in these “debates”, how many actually ever worked for a living?  By that, I mean held a job after the end of their formal education which was not an elected or appointed office whose salary was paid by taxpayers.  One can break things down into categories, so a complete analysis would include how many years the candidate spent:

    • Working in the private (for profit sector)

    I’m on it because this is my sole prerequisite for president.

    Give me 24 hrs.

    3+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  19. Bryan G. Stephens:
    I tend to think the Roaring 20’s are going to cause changes we cannot even imagine. come the 2032 election, who knows where we will be. Well, if I am here, I’ll be 62.

    I’ll have a couple of decades on you then, but if we become ems before then, age won’t count for much.  The Earth may, if any of those who piled out of the clown car in the last two days gain power, turn into a grey, collectivist Hell, but the interesting people will be elsewhere.  “I’m in with the Oort cloud.”

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  20. You guys are completely misreading the purpose of the electoral college as intended. The electors were always supposed to elect our president, not the people. The only direct role the people had in the general government was election representatives. The States direct role was the senate. The people and the States has indirect roles in selecting electors, but those electors could vote however they wanted for president. It wasn’t until roughly the 1840s that the electors began outright following the popular vote of their states.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  21. Robert A. McReynolds:
    It wasn’t until roughly the 1840s that the electors began outright following the popular vote of their states.

    You’re only half correct. I agree with the first part of your argument and even as a fan of Hamilton, I know how he felt about the “masses.”

    The Founders understood that the more heavily populated colonies in the NE would and could dominate elections and the southern colonies would be disenfranchised. This was a concern, because their main goal (and why they tolerated slavery for as long as they did) was to maintain a strong union.

    Their decisions were flawed (by today’s standards in particular) but they accomplished the most important thing- the United States of America in which a candidate running for president has to worry about Michigan and Idaho and Georgia in addition to NY, MA, CA.

    The electoral college protects and defends our republic and without it, we become just another banana republic.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  22. That is simply not an accurate portrayal of history. The Founders were not monolithic. Some were nationalists and others were federalists—I am using this in its correct sense not the sense given in referring to the Federalist Party. The electoral college was a concern of all lesser populated states, North and South.

    I agree that it is a huge reason for the overall freedom in the US, but it is more a reflection of the intent of the document being a compact among independent states than it is a reflection of any national blob of a country.

    As an aside, Ham wanted an elected king in that the president would serve for life and then there would be another election. He also wanted governors appointed by the president.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  23. Robert A. McReynolds:
    That is simply not an accurate portrayal of history.

    It is, Aaron Burr. Ham respected monarchical traditions, but his mentor (GW) nipped that in the bud.

    Read yourself some Ron Chernow and David McCullough and then get back to me.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  24. John Walker:
    Here is a research project for anybody interested in pursuing it.  I did a similar analysis of the cabinets of the Harding, Obama, and Trump administrations, based upon an observation in Herbert Hoover’s book American Individualism, but I have too many other tasks on my agenda at the moment to undertake this one.

    The question is, of the twenty Democrat contenders on the stage in these “debates”, how many actually ever worked for a living?  By that, I mean held a job after the end of their formal education which was not an elected or appointed office whose salary was paid by taxpayers.  One can break things down into categories, so a complete analysis would include how many years the candidate spent:

    • Working in the private (for profit sector)
    • Working for non-profit organisations
    • Holding elected office
    • Holding appointed office
    • Serving in the military
    • Living on inherited wealth

    To parallel Hoover’s analysis, it would be interesting to know how many of these champions of the “working class” ever did manual labour (in which I include military service in enlisted ranks or special operations) and how many attended Ivy League institutions (undergraduate or graduate degree).

    Tulsi Gabbard served and served.

    0

  25. EThompson:

    Robert A. McReynolds:
    That is simply not an accurate portrayal of history.

    It is, Aaron Burr. Ham respected monarchical traditions, but his mentor (GW) nipped those in the bud.

    Read yourself some Ron Chernow and David McCullough and then get back to me.

    Those people are just not serious historians. I know they are popular and have the court approval because they adhere to the 3×5 card of allowable opinion but they are just court scribblers.

    There is no doubt that Ham said he preferred the corruption of the British system, that we should just have elected kings, and that he despised the federal system that was created in Philadelphia.

    Ham’s few good qualities was his distrust of the masses, but that distrust fed his desire of central authority.

    0

Leave a Reply