Look What Happens Without That Old Relic of an Electoral College



The entire left-wing media and the left-wing politicians are either screaming for an end to the electoral college today or they are subtly influencing people with their quiet manipulation. It’s their dream as it is their dream to completely revamp the entire Constitution – that old piece of paper, they say.

Hillary Clinton is poised to win the popular vote. There is a razor-thin margin between them which the left is claiming as “immense”. The New York Times has the two candidates at a little more than 300,000 votes apart with Hillary in the lead with absentee ballots still out there, but Donald Trump won the electoral college handily and that, the media and the left says, is unfair.

Some on the left want the electors to refuse to give Donald Trump the electoral votes and put Hillary into the White House. That would take an act of God but still, they hold out hope for a President Clinton and are still arguing that she is being cheated out of her rightful place.

The left is screaming from the pages of the New York Times as are other left-wing lapdogs to get rid of the electoral college. Some on the right even think that makes sense. They want a democracy, not a Republic which is the downward path we would be on without the electoral college.

The left says that abolishing the old relic will give every individual a vote but it, in fact, does the opposite.

It would magnify the problem we already have on the state level. All but two states toss their minority votes in a presidential election, whether they be red or blue. They don’t divvy the votes up, depriving each area of the state having a say. For example, in New York, only New York City’s and Upstate cities votes count because they have the majority of people so the differing opinions of people on Long Island and the rural areas of Upstate New York. They make the decisions for everyone. New York is a Socialist state or you could say a democracy where the majority rules, often tyrannically.

The Times article starts out by proclaiming the electoral college is “hated by many, so why does it endure?” They’ve made two false assumptions here just in the title.

True, many might say to get rid of it, but the fact is many don’t know why we need it. The populace has been lied to and dumbed down on the electoral college which is easy to do because it’s a boring-as-hell topic. The second false assumption presumes that it’s an old relic. Being old doesn’t mean it’s too old to endure. We could say the same thing about our entire Constitution and Bill of Rights, and for religious people, the Bible, Quran or Torah et al.

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and all the rest of the ever-growing numbers on the hard left, never call the United States a Republic. They want that gone. They want democracy and that’s what they call the United States, but democracy is, as James Madison wrote, “the most vile form of government”.

“… democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as the have been violent in their deaths.”

It leads to mobocracies, tyranny of the majority, and eventually dictatorship.

Hillary has been unequivocal. “I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people,” Hillary Clinton said, “and to me that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president.”

“If we really subscribe to the notion that ‘majority rules,’ then why do we deny the majority their chosen candidate?” asked Jennifer M. Granholm, a former governor of Michigan.

The Washington Post asked today, “Why on earth do we even need an electoral college?”

The “Why” is what Americans are unclear about. If we begin to enshrine ‘majority rules’ and do not have the safeguards in place to control the tyranny of the majority, look what happens.

A Republican form of government protects States’ Rights which prevents tyranny, along with Separation of Powers and judicial recourse.

The electoral college protects the rights of small states.

As Thomas Jefferson explained, “Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine percent.”

The electoral college protects the rights of smaller states and gives them a say in the election of the president of the United States. Without it, they will quickly have none.

Let’s say we don’t have an electoral college. How speedy and efficient that would be. All the people would feel they had a vote and the “real candidate” would win. Now we are talking about, not a Republic, but a democracy. The majority now rules in concept without that important check and balance. Small states will never have any sway because the populated cities have the majority of people and they are overwhelmingly Democrats.

Small states are now unimportant and it’s the beginning of the erosion of their rights.

If majority rules, then we could have immediate national referendums on all important issues. How speedy and efficient that would be. All decisions would be tied, not to the rule of law, but to the mood of the majority of people, all 50.1% of them. It could all change four years later and then again four years after that.

You could dump the Congress. It’s too slow and it’s a relic also. The president could just take it all over and rule from his bureaucracy. We just got a taste of that from Barack Obama. It’s called a monarchy or a democracy.

If people in Kentucky have a different perspective than the people in New York, tough, New York wins. New York, the sanctuary state, has more people.

In a democracy, the populated coasts would become supreme. And if California got passionate and wanted Great Lakes water, we’d have a quick national vote on it. We could see a pipeline to drain the lakes.

We’d have real democracy for a change. And the majority would rule. And that ancient experiment called a Republic, designed to be inefficient and slow, to protect the minority view?

Well, 50.1% of the people say they don’t want it.

To put it another way, without the safeguard of the electoral college, the red on the map below, which reflects  the actual 2016 votes by country would have no sway. The popular vote does indeed affect the electoral college but the electoral college protects the minority votes. If we do away with the electoral college, all the red by state would be gone forever, discarded, only the 50.1% would decide everything with their king.



Leave a Reply