Interview With A Tea Party Leader About A RINO’S Views on NPV


The National Popular Vote Compact is a state-by-state initiative in which state election officials in all states participating in the plan would award their Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who receives the largest number of popular votes in all 50 states the District of Columbia. It is expected to become law by June of this year, thereby affecting the 2012 presidential election. It is now up for a vote in New York which is critical in the process of enacting this abominable piece of legislation.

This week I spoke with a New York politician (one of many) who supports the National Popular Vote (he is also in favor of abolishing the Electoral College, is disgusted with the Two-Party system, and is against term limits).

NPV will likely end the Electoral College and the Two-Party System. Whether this is Constitutional or not is a matter for the courts and there will be numerous lawsuits on this issue should NPV become law. If you are not familiar with NPV, please click the link at the end of this article.

I wondered why this particular politician feels as he does since he is a Republican and the NPV does not reflect Republican values. In fact, the Republican National Committee has condemned NPV and Mitch McConnell recently came out in strong opposition.

This politician, a Tea Party candidate, bolstered his argument for the NPV, when he said, “…the long-term impact of the Tea Party is threatened by a presidential election process that systematically silences voters throughout the country.” Since I have not found a Tea Party person who supports the NPV, I decided it was time to speak with a Tea Party Leader.

I took the politician’s explanations for why we need the NPV, which are headlined in red below, to a well-respected Tea Party leader. The reaction is interesting.

Everyone’s vote will count 

Response: The popular vote would make sure that every vote will not count!  As soon as a majority of votes, from the most populous urban areas are counted, no one else needs even cast a vote. The numbers are not there. People all over the USA would see no need to vote for president. If you want your vote to count, you must move to one of the eleven most populous cities…not to a swing state.

It 2012-election/ your complaint of being not heard and multiplies it!

The NPVC empowers a faction, via a compact (which is expressly and clearly unconstitutional) to do exactly what our founders knew could happen…and we have seen it happen in other countries where desperate or misguided citizenry voted to give up their freedoms…

In the Federalist, Hamilton explains the need to protect the public good and the rights of the minority from the possible oppression by the majority in a “direct democracy” or “popular” vote:

When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. Alexander Hamilton; Federalist Papers # 68


We would get a presidential candidate to visit New York

Response: Who cares? And what difference would that make??? To him, to NY??? Except that the voter fraud in NYC would be so rampant that they would all visit and look for more votes no matter how they were gotten.


It would make New York relevant for republicans

Response: Anyone looking for the maximum votes would come only to NYC. Long Island and upstate would be more ignored than ever since so many votes would be available from NYC.  They would get all the candidates to visit, all the voter fraud and intimidation, all the lawsuits regarding elections, and all the political favors and entitlements to buy NYC votes.

Tell me again why we would want to greatly empower NYC voters, Chicago, and LA?


We do it for all other elections, why is the presidential any different

Response: It’s the state’s rights. All other elections are within the state.  That is the reason! Need I say more! The only national election is the one that needs such extremely careful planning to prevent a faction from taking over and devastating the minority rights nationwide…you can move from one state to another if you don’t like your state laws or elected cannot move to another United States of America if a faction has completed a compact depriving you of your rights.


We had a plurality with Clinton so why do we care if we have a plurality under NPV

Response: The national popular vote encourages multiple candidates so that someone can win the presidency with only a small %age of all votes…have 5 candidates and someone could win with 21% of popular votes.  It opens the Pandora’s Box WIDE and invites fraud, manipulation, endless lawsuits and disenfranchisement of legitimate voters.

If Americans see their candidate defeated and must be lead by a president with 21% or 25% of all the popular vote, how much support would that president have?  How could we be pulled together as we must be to solve national problems and defend our country under the leadership of someone only one in five Americans wanted as President?

The National Popular Vote Compact is opposed by the RNC, Mitch McConnell and the Heritage Foundation for very sound reasons.

And, if this were something with such a positive consensus, why was this not proposed as a Constitutional amendment so all Americans would know about it…and, according to the left, vote it in overwhelmingly. They want it voted in one state at a time…taking out Republicans one politician at a time because the American people would vote NO.

When this is passed it will be too late to undo it.  But VOTERS WILL ASK THEIR ELECTED LEGISLATORS why they did not stop it. It is a complex issue, a Trojan Horse, and precisely what we elect representatives to protect us from.

The National Popular Vote perfects the destruction of confidence in our electoral system. This is the goal of those Progressives, Cloward and Piven, who didn’t care so much who gets elected as how they are elected. Their goal was to promote distrust in our elections so that people would rise up and overthrow our entire system. They believed that out of anarchy would come to a new order that they saw as being “better”.

“By advocating massive, no-holds-barred voter registration campaigns, they [Cloward & Piven] sought a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C. that would re-distribute the nation’s wealth and lead to a totalitarian socialist state.”

Listen to Francis Fox Piven here as she talks about all the Democrats, Socialists, Communists, Religious Leftists who now work together to fundamentally transform America for the democratic socialist government which is coming. I guess Francis can add RINOS to the list.

One statement repeatedly chanted by this particular politician was, one man, one vote. I’d like to say the following in response –

While the NPVC claims it stands for one man, one vote, the Electoral College does that now.

In Martin Diamond’s brilliant essay, The Electoral College and the American Idea of Democracy, he wrote-

“In fact, presidential elections are already just about as democratic as they can be. We already have one man, one votebut in the states. Elections are as freely and democratically contested as elections can be – but in the states. Victory always goes democratically to the winner of the raw popular vote – but in the states. The label is given to the proposed reform — “direct popular election” — is a misnomer: the elections have already become as directly popular as they can be – but in the states. Despite all their democratic rhetoric, the reformers do not propose to make our presidential elections more directly democratic; they only propose to make them more directly national, by entirely removing the states from the electoral process. Democracy thus is not the question regarding the electoral college; federalism is. Should our presidential elections remain in part federally democratic, or should we make them completely nationally democratic?

For a complete explanation of the National Popular Vote, click the following link: Obama could remain as President as NPV is contested and grinds its way through our legal system.

Please sign the petition against the NPVC – New Yorkers Against National Popular Vote Petition