Monday, December 19, 2016

The Genius of the Electoral College

Today is the day that the electors from each state cast their votes for the next president via the Electoral College.  This is the actual process that determines who will be president; not the popular democratic vote.

Donald J. Trump, who "lost the popular vote," as we have been reminded ad nauseum from many of our brothers and sisters on the left will nonetheless be elected as The United States of America's 45th chief executive today.

With all the whining and confusion surrounding the Electoral College vs. the popular vote, I figured it was worthwhile to take a look at the genius of our Founding Fathers and why they set things up the way that they did. First, let’s look at a basic short tutorial about the Electoral College that was excellently done by Prager University:

Also, this well-done short article explains why the Electoral College was so important in this particular election. Essentially, it saves the rest of us from being dictated by the far left goofy state of California:

"Clinton’s 2.3-million-popular-vote plurality over Trump depends on the votes in a single state: California. Clinton has more than a 4-million-vote plurality over Trump there. In the other 49 states plus the District of Columbia, Trump actually has a 1.7-million-popular-vote plurality over Clinton. So California single-handedly turns a Trump plurality into a Clinton plurality....
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."

Without the Electoral College, the presidency could very well be decided by the top half-dozen most populous states, while the rest of the nation would be ignored by presidential campaigns.  That hardly seems like a good way to unite the remaining 44 states with the "decider states".  A "Dis-united States" would soon be the inevitable outcome of that debacle.  Once again, our Founding Fathers' genius is on display in our representative republic.


Jerry Critter said...

If it is such a great method, why not use it for state elections? Treat the counties like the electoral college treats the states. Hey, we could do the same thing for city elections too.

T. Paine said...

I suppose one could do just that for states, Jerry. That would be up for the states to decide in their individual state constitutions though.

Indeed, I actually see where that could be useful in some states such as my original home state of Oregon. Portland and the Willamette Valley have a vast majority of the population in the state and invariably votes very liberally, but the ranchers, loggers, and farmers that populate the remaining 80% of the state really don't have much of a say in who ends up governing them because there are decidedly fewer of them. If state representatives were used as state electoral college electors, they might at least get a voice, even though the larger metropolitan areas would still get more representatives in a more compact area.

As for cities, most every large city these days tends to sway towards progressive tendencies in a very homogeneous way. I don't think a city-wide electoral college would make a difference for most city councils accordingly.

It is an interesting question you suggested though, even though I am fairly sure you were being somewhat sarcastic in asking it, my friend.

Jerry Critter said...

In other words, you do not believe in one person, one vote. You believe that the closer someone agree with your beliefs, their vote should have more weight than someone who disagrees with your beliefs. In other words, we probably disagree on many things. You think that if you live in a rural area or we live in different states, your vote should count more than my vote, but if we both live in the same area, our vote should count the same.

Where is the sense in that?

I think our votes should count the same no matter where we live. What is wrong with that? I'm sorry. Perhaps I am not understanding what you are saying, but it seems like you think that the more space you have around you, the more important your vote should be.

T. Paine said...

I appreciate your thoughts, but no, that is not precisely what I was trying to say, Jerry.

In general, a vast majority of the people that live in larger metropolitan areas tend to vote for more leftist causes and candidates, while the opposite is true for areas that are not a part of a metropolitan area.

This has even show itself played out in my current home state of Utah. The state as a whole tends to be very conservative and has been a reliable Republican state for as long back as I can remember. That said, Salt Lake City is the biggest town in the state and tends to be very liberal in its governance. In a state that is dominated by the conservative family-value-focused and patriarchal Mormon Church, Salt Lake City voted for a openly gay woman as its mayor. That is all fine and good, but I use that as an example of what I am trying to illustrate here.

I absolutely think that each and every vote should be counted, particularly for local races.

Where the Electoral College has its uses is when it comes to far larger geographic areas of diverse-minded populations. Again, why should the presidency of the United States be decided ONLY by the way California, New York, Illinois, and Florida vote? You would alienate over 80% of the rest of the country based on the popular vote wishes of only a few regional homogeneous locations if you relied strictly on a purely democratic popular vote model. The electoral college ensures that EVERY state gets input into the governance of our nation. Doesn't that seem to be far more equitable to you, Jerry? It would seem to be the best way to keep the United States as a united country overall, in my estimation.

Jerry Critter said...

Just a couple of comments, TP. First of all, I completely agree with you that all votes should be counted. I just wish that all voters voted. Perhaps we should make Election Day a national holiday, or at least hold the election of on a weekend. I think either one would boost the election turnout.

Where we seem to disagree is that I believe that all votes should be counted equally. The election of president is the only election where my vote in California is only worth about a fifth of a vote from, say, Wyoming. Or, let's say live in Wyoming, and I decide to retire and move to Southern CA to join my children and get out away from the cold winters. Suddenly my vote for president only goes 1/5 of the way towards electing him/her as it use to. The president represents everyone. Everyone should have an equal voice in electing the president.

A popularly elected president would remove the states from the presidential election. All they would probably do is count the votes, although that could be done on a national level too. "80%" of the country would not be alienated. We are talking about people voting, not land masses. It would not matter where people live. I see no reason why it should matter where they live. What matters is how they vote, and each vote should could equally towards the election of someone who represents us all.

Your concern over "states" is already handled by the way congress is set up. And it is handled with people popularly elect d in each state ignoring, of course, any gerrymandered. State representation is handled by both population and land mass. Congress is where laws are made. The president, as representive of all people, just gives final approval or not. And if not, it can be over ruled.

One final point. (This has turned out to be longer than I planned.) You mention the popular vote causing alienation due the majority of votes coming from a few homogenous regions of the country. I would contend that these homogenous areas (cities, I assume) are much more heterogeneous than rural areas. You have people of all backgrounds in the cities, much more so than rural areas.

OK, I think I'm done. Thanks for your time.

T. Paine said...

Respectfully, under the current circumstances, I am glad that not all eligible voters cast a vote. If each educated themselves based on civics and the constitution, let alone the current issues at stake, then I have no problem with them voting... even if their vote is contrary to mine. What I am annoyed about with some voters now is that they vote based on some celebrity endorsement or what group-think determines is the hip thing to do. I could care less who Kanye West or Katie Perry endorsed. Where did the candidates stand on issues and what is the content of their characters? Un-educated voting does not help our American self-governance, in my opinion.

Further, while I understand your point, I still must disagree. The electors are chosen based on the population of an area, so rural areas may encompass a far larger area of land mass, but it will still be roughly the same average amount of people that one elector represents for a rural area as it is an urban area. I guess my biggest concern if we were to eradicate the Electoral College would be that Trump or Hillary could campaign in the half a dozen most populous states of the nation in the hopes of winning the popular vote there. They would spend all of their money and time in those most crowded areas and West Virginia, Iowa, and Alaska's voice will never be taken into account.

The presidential concerns of the typical New Yorker or Californian are probably not going to be the same as someone from Mississippi or Montana. And yet it will always be the huge swaths of people in New York and California that decide whom the president is just by sheer numbers if we do this by a popular vote. This would only further fracture an already divided nation, I suspect.

Last, while I agree the diversity of people in their culture and backgrounds may be far greater in metropolitan areas, their homogeneity is manifested in the fact that most of these good people all vote the same regardless of their many differences otherwise.

Finally, I wanted to thank you Jerry. You always bring up good and valid points without being hostile in doing so. I greatly appreciate that and wish that others on both the left and right could have similar conversations and see each other as fellow Americans instead of evil political enemies. Cheers to you and I hope you and yours have a wonderful Christmas, sir!

Jerry Critter said...

Eat make a couple of quick comments.

1. You said, ".... it will still be roughly the same average amount of people that one elector represents for a rural area as it is an urban area" I will stipulate that it is probably true within a given state. My problem is that the number of voters represented by each elector varies greatly from state to state. Hence my vote in California counts less towards electing the President than almost anyone else in another state.

2. Rural areas have great homogeneity too. They just vote differently, but the same argument can be used against them.

Bottom line. The president represents everyone. Therefore everyone should elect the president with an equally weighted vote.

Jerry Critter said...

The intelligence of the voter is a whole other can of worms.

Jerry Critter said...

While I often don't agree with your positions, you present them in logical and thoughtful manner. You have always been polite to me even when I get a bit snarky. I respect that and I respect you. You are an honorable person. I wish you and your loved one a very blessed Christmas.

Dave Dubya said...

The “Genius of the Founding Fathers” was the concept of “consent of the governed”. The Electoral College mocks that concept, and was the Slave owners roadblock to democracy and a fair representative republic.

Rural states have every representational advantage in the House and Senate AND the presidency. More mockery of the consent of the government. No wonder our country is failing. Tyranny of the minority has taken us down since Bush. Remember how he left our economy and security? Trump will complete our slide into a divided nation ruled by the neo-aristocracy of the far Right.

The bottom line is the minority will continue to rule when not all votes and voters are equal. China is laughing at us. Russia is laughing at us. The Klan celebrates their final victory. White makes right. Hail Trump, as he gloats in victory with his divisive Nuremburg style rallies.

But Hillary had emails. Maybe some aristocrat/star should have grabbed her pussy to set her straight?

America has fallen.

T. Paine said...

Jerry, I absolutely acknowledge your points, including that rural areas do tend to be homogeneous in their voting patterns too. Rural and urban areas each have their typical interests that are reflected accordingly in how they vote.

The electoral college is a safeguard installed by the Founders. It was meant to ensure that even if a president was popularly-elected but unfit to serve, they could over-ride the popular vote and install a different president. Now I agree a case can be made that Trump is not fit, but I think another equally or better case can be made that Hillary was unfit to be president too. That is the reason why I refused to vote for either of them.

I think it also serves as a way to prevent the tyranny of the majority to be allowed to trample over the minority. Is it a perfect system? No, but I think it does serve a valuable purpose and to eliminate it would only invite greater problems eventually.

T. Paine said...

Dave, with all due respect, my friend, I can almost script out your response each time before you even send it.

As for Bush, I agree that he wrecked our economy... largely by using progressive policies like governmental bailouts. He also further ignored constitutional protections by basically allowing warrantless searches of our papers and property in the ether through the NSA. Both of these things were continued with even more gusto under President Obama.

As for Trump, I have serious concerns about many things he has said and plans to do. Some others sound like well-needed and welcome changes. Whether the good outweighs the bad will remain to be seen. I'll continue to call him out when he violates the constitution and champion when he fulfills his constitutional duty as president.

Next, If you don't like how the Electoral College is set up then I would advise you to gather all of your like-minded friends to petition that a constitutional amendment be drafted to eliminate it. I know our current president routinely ignores the dictates of the constitution and our cowardly congress never holds him accountable when he does so, but I think for something this big, it will indeed take such measures to change things.

As for Hillary, well you know where I stand with that corrupt charlatan. If I had done what she had done with regards to handling classified information, I would have had my security clearance revoked, faced a court martial, and put in federal prison. But then my last name is not Clinton.

Jerry Critter said...

Tyranny of the majority over the minority is a legitimate concern and something that I do not want to happen either. However, I think that the makeup of the House and the Senate adequately address that problem. And it addresses that problem without jeopardizing the value of anyone vote relative to a competing voter for a particular candidate for either the House or Senate. I would not support a constitutional amendment to change how we elect Senators.

Only when electing the president can my vote be worth down to only 1/5 of the vote from someone in another state. As I said before, the president represents all of us. He should be elected with all of us having an equal vote. Therefore I would support a constitutional amendment to elect the president by popular vote.

Regarding you comment to Dave, how we arrived at the electoral college is not particularly important to me. However I believe there is historical evidence to supporting both your sides.

Also, you said that you would champion him when he fulfills his constitutional duties. I hope you actually have a somewhat higher standard for championing him since a president can do significant harm with actions that are constitutional. In fact, I am sure there are constitutional actions that Obama has taken that you would not champion.

Dave Dubya said...

With all due respect, your dismissal of my points without fact or reason is expected.

No matter how you frame it, the electoral college was not a “founding principle”, but a concession to slave states. From slavery to today’s vote suppression, conservatives have always opposed equality of rights and “consent of the governed”, in favor of “consent of the conservatives”. It is ingrained such that those who have the unfair advantage with the electoral college also have the advantage in retaining it over a simple majority vote. And that is exactly how you want it.

In fact it is outright Orwellian. “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others ”.

The word is inequality, no matter how you look at it. Just admit you embrace that inequality for partisan ideological reasons and be done with it.

Conservatives have more leverage to power in the Congress and presidency. The American people (remember them?) are not as conservative as our government. They favor progressive policies on safety nets and minimum wage among other issues.

We the people will once again get conservative dictates rammed down our throats against our will, to borrow a whine about “commie health care” first drafted by the conservative Heritage Foundation.

The Electoral College is as immoral as the slavery that spawned it. Deep down you may sense this, but your belief system rejects it.

Perhaps you recognize these words:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,”

This, good sir, is the founding principle that was betrayed by slavery and conservatism.

No matter you frame it. No matter how you look at it.

That said, I hold no animosity towards you for your beliefs. Politics is a belief system that is almost a religion. The best you can do is hope your beliefs are best for all.

We shall see, again, how minority rule works out for us. The Obama years may be seen as relative peace and prosperity compared to what is coming. (We know liberals will be blamed when Trumpism fails.)

Have a healthy and happy Christmas. Best to you and yours.

T. Paine said...

Jerry, I would support repealing the 17th amendment so that our U.S. senators are elected via our state legislature's like they used to be prior to it. In that way perhaps people would also pay more attention to whom they elect to the state houses.

I do understand your point when it comes to electing the president via the Electoral College though. I still do not think that it would be wise to remove this constitutional safeguard. Perhaps it could be altered to provide more equity in the amount of people each elector represents from state to state though. Albeit, this too would require a constitutional amendment.

I do note that when we remove California from the equation, Donald Trump did indeed win both the electoral and the popular vote of the other combined 49 United States' citizens though. This is one more reason why I think we should apologize to Mexico and return California to their sovereignty with the condition that they must take Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, and Jerry Brown with it. ( I am kidding... I think...:) )

Next, you made an interesting comment regarding my hypothetically not championing Barack Obama when he supported some contentious issue in a constitutional manner. I have tried to recall if such an incident did occur under his tenure when I refused to support him. I try to be consistent with my beliefs, even when I may not like the other person/party. I would hope that I would be fair-minded enough to support him in such a situation, although I am a fallible human. If you can think of a possible situation such as you hypothetically suggested, I'd be glad to tell you whether I was true to my values or was indeed a hypocrite.

Jerry Critter said...

It is immaterial that removing California swings the popular vote to Trump. After all, California is the most populous state with over 38 million people. That said, the people's location should have nothing to do with the election of the president. He should be elected by everyone equally.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on the repeal of the 17th amendment. I see no good reason the remove the direct election of the peoples' repersentives from the people. It may actually have the opposite effect from what you are hoping. Basically it's the same argument as for the getting rid of the EC. Let the people elect their representatives direct.

As to your last point, I am not so concerned with your support or non-support of Obama. He's history soon anyway. It was championing Trump for only acting constitutionally. I think consideration of the impact on people is important too.

T. Paine said...

Mr. Dubya, I have grown weary over the years of giving you facts and well-thought-out reasons for my positions, only to be dismissed, hence the reason I typically don't bother going to the effort as much with you any more, my friend.

Next, while part of the reason for the creation of the Electoral College was indeed to kick the can of the slavery issue down the road in order that they could establish a constitution and hold our nascent nation together, the other one was indeed to prevent a tyranny of the majority and to ensure the more populous states like Virginia and Pennsylvania were not the only ones dictating whom the president would be. (For the record, VA was a slave state and PA was a free state.)

Continuing, when true voter suppression occurs, I absolutely agree with you that it must be pointed out and stopped; however, the cases of voter suppression compared to voter fraud is low. After all, "vote early, vote often" and all of the dead rising to vote for progressives is a long held tradition in many Democrat strongholds. I have provided facts on this in the past too, only to be ignored.

And you are right. The world is inequality. The difference is that conservatives typically want to provide equality in opportunities, while progressives want to provide equality in outcomes. In that way, nobody has to really work hard or strive for anything... the government will simply provide for all folks off of the backs of those that do work.

Further, the American People whom the Democrats and progressives in general have kept on the governmental plantation are no longer as liberal as you seem to believe. There is a reason why a strong majority of congress, the senate, and most state governors, and state legislatures have all become more conservative over the past decade. When people pay attention, they discover that progressivism is a disease and does not work.

Obamacare is a great case in point. It was supposed to provide insurance for the poor and lower the average family's costs by $2500 a year. Instead it is failing horribly and has caused costs to rise by more than $2500 a year, including MINE! And I don't give a damn if the idea came from the Heritage Foundation or It is a failed program that must be repealed and replaced.

And if you define the Obama years as "peace and prosperity" even in relativity, then I need to get you a new Funk & Wagnell's for Christmas, my friend. I have grave concerns with Trump's upcoming presidency, but I hardly think he can make things much worse than Obama did. The world is in chaos. Friends and allies no longer trust us. Enemies do not fear us. The true unemployment rate is execrable and the "economic recovery" is anemic despite all of Obama's attempts otherwise. Race relations are worse than they have been since the 1960's and the rule of law has become a punchline in a bad joke under his administration. Trump scares me in many ways, but he doesn't have a very high bar to get over to improve over Obama.

Regardless of all of our political disagreements, I thank you for your kind wishes, Dave. I too wish you and yours a blessed Christmas. I will raise a glass of Wild Turkey in your honor over the next few days, my friend! Cheers!

T. Paine said...

Jerry, I guess you and I will simply have to walk away in disagreement with this issue on the Electoral College, although I do understand and appreciate your argument.

As for the senate, there was a good reason why the Founders had our U.S. senators determined by state legislatures. Our senators were supposed to be guardians of our states and states' rights, hence their election via the states. The people are directly represented by our congressmen and women in the House of Representatives. By the passage of the 17th amendment, the Senate has become nothing more than a less populated body akin to the House of Representatives. It has become essentially a redundant body.

Last, if Trump will govern constitutionally and follow all of the laws therein, I think all of our American people will be far better off. Again, I cannot think of a case where if he abides by the constitution that I will be opposed to him. That said, I suspect there will be many times he runs afoul of it. God knows George W. Bush did, and Obama acted as if he never heard of it many times. Regardless, if we are governed by the rule of law as stipulated in our U.S. Constitution, then the impact on the people will be overwhelmingly for the good, sir. If you can think of a case that would not be, I would be interested to hear it, as I am having a failure of imagination in trying to come up with an example.

Jerry Critter said...

A quick example comes to mind. What if congress eliminates social security and replaces it with nothing, and Trump signs the bill. All have acted constitutionally and will have harmed a great many people.

Dave Dubya said...

You didn’t disclose your video source:


Facts are welcome, I can’t find anything but your opinion, and that of “Prager U.”. Why not quote Trump University while you’re at it?

the creation of the Electoral College was indeed to kick the can of the slavery issue down the road

Not a fact. It was created to accommodate slave owners who wanted to claim voting power “for” for their 3/5 persons. The EC is immoral as it’s source.

when true voter suppression occurs

Restricting time and place for voter registration, targeted cuts in polling places and voting access, IS voter suppression.

the cases of voter suppression compared to voter fraud is low.

Pure partisan propaganda, This is unsupported by fact and promoted by Dear Leader himself. (Thank you for helping him make American great.)

The difference is that conservatives typically want to provide equality in opportunities, while progressives want to provide equality in outcomes.

Here we go again. Repeat a lie oftern enough... Isn’t voting itself an opportutnity to particiapate in representative democracy? You’ve selected hypocirisy to go with that inequlity of opportutnity you embrace.

the American People whom the Democrats and progressives in general have kept on the governmental plantation are no longer as liberal as you seem to believe.

I’m so sick of the alr-Right’s racist meme of “governmental plantation”. You echo Breitbart and the Klan old buddy. If your friends can’t tell you this, who will?

the American People... are no longer as liberal as you seem to believe

Despite the FACT almost 3 MILLION MORE Americans voted for Hillary, the most systematically demonized woman in history. So much for “consent of the governed”.

This is Bubble talk, buddy.

There is a reason why a strong majority of congress, the senate, and most state governors, and state legislatures have all become more conservative over the past decade.

Yes and the reasons have already been given. It has nothing to do with a majority mandate. Rural states have a built in advantage in representation. Remember? I will say the other reason is lack of voter participation. Democrats are so pathetic they can’t get their lazy and betrayed base out to vote.

I agree, dump Obamacare and establish Medicare for all. It is the compassionate, sane and cheaper alternative to enriching insurance companies that offer ZERO health care. Facts speak, but far Right propaganda has a louder megaphone.

Friends and allies no longer trust us. Enemies do not fear us.

Trump quote number two. Fear? Hell, yes. Half of America is afraid.

I hardly think he can make things much worse than Obama did.

Do you believe we will be trusted more with Trump???

“The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.” - Dear Leader Kim Jong Trump

At least we won’t be worrying about those awful emails.

Please read this again:

The Obama years may be seen as relative peace and prosperity compared to what is coming.

Take comfort in the new Banana Republican dictatorship. Liberals will be blamed for its failure.

America has fallen.

T. Paine said...

Jerry, that is indeed an interesting example. While a case can be made that the creation of social security was unconstitutional for the federal government to create in the first place, that would only lead us on a tangential path. That said, there are millions of people that are now dependent upon social security for their livelihood. If congress and Trump were to repeal it with no alternative in place of it, I would side with you (I assume) and those others that would condemn such an action. I would work accordingly with those people to find a way to help those that were negatively impacted by this. However, I have never even heard of a possibility of congress repealing social security without having a viable alternative to it for those that are dependent upon it. This, therefore, really is pretty much an unfounded fear, sir.

T. Paine said...

Dave, go back and look. I DID disclose the source of my attached video. "First, let’s look at a basic short tutorial about the Electoral College that was excellently done by Prager University", immediately precedes the video. Prager University is a conservative think tank of sorts. It serves to educate the public opinion with facts and logic accordingly. No, it doesn't offer degrees or certifications. What it does offer is sadly missing common sense to an ignorant populace these days.

And it IS A FACT that a compromise was made with the creation of the Electoral College to address representation of less populated states (including some slave states) in order to delay having to solve that abominable institution until a later time.

"Restricting time and place for voter registration, targeted cuts in polling places and voting access, IS voter suppression." Dave, I acknowledge and agree with you that when and if those things occur, that is indeed voter suppression and should be pointed out and eliminated. We have no argument on this. What one polling station does in regards to access, times, and staffing should be done equitably for all polling locations. Again, these instances are far more rare than actual voter fraud though. Here is a good synopsis editorial on the subject: And let's not forget the DNC working with Hillary to subvert Bernie Sanders and disenfranchising all of his voters. And then there is Donna Brazille giving Hillary the debate questions ahead of time too. Nope. No conspiracy here. No help from the liberal media at all.

For the record, in case you missed it the first hundred times, I did NOT vote for Trump. I voted for Darrell Castle with the Constitution Party. Therefore, I have not supported Trump in "making America great again". Thanks for lumping me in with all of those whom you assign evil or misguided motives for doing so though.

As far as the "liberal plantation", I first heard this analogy many many years ago from Star Parker. She was a one-time Black liberal welfare mom who finally saw the progressive welfare system for what it was: a trap to enslave a family in dependency. Her link has been on my blog roll for years, in case you care. Of course such Black Americans that don't vote for Democrats are always "Uncle Tom's" or traitors in the leftist world, it would seem. They are all for diversity, as long as it isn't diversity in thought, right?

T. Paine said...

Funny how when Democrats lose it is always about voter suppression, rural-state advantages, and poor Democrat voter turn-out. How is it that its never about the possibility that most voters simply reject progressive ideologies and candidates?

"Take comfort in the new Banana Republican dictatorship. Liberals will be blamed for its failure."

I am not optimistic either, Dave. I have grave concerns. You will see me blasting Trump a lot in the coming years, I suspect, right along side you. I will also give him kudos when warranted. I tried to give Obama the benefit of the doubt when he first came into office, even though his past remarks and history did not bode well for the nation. Sadly he lived up to the dark side of the force instead of taking the good will given him by the nation and doing positive things with it. I wish the left would do likewise and wait to see what Trump does WHEN HE GETS INTO OFFICE before condemning him from the start. But I guess he is "not your president" though, huh?

As far as liberals being blamed for Trump's failures, well... up until a few years ago when Trump developed presidential aspirations, he was indeed a liberal. I think he still is at his core. He simply repeated more conservative principles when he decided to run for office. One wonders why he didn't run as a Democrat. He seems to be more at home with their big-government, ignore-the-constitution policies. Evidently he would have been a better candidate then the corrupt Hillary. Time will tell how he performs. Cheers!

Dave Dubya said...

I just want to add one more fact. The conservative/Moonie owned Washington Times editorial piece was far more opinion than evidence of voter impersonation fraud.

Do you know how many actual cases were cited? Two. That’s it.


No mass voting by dead people. Yet you echo Trump’s lie, If you repeat his lies you are abetting him.

I would be more than shocked if Dear Leader and his grovelling one-party government doesn't lead to us to catastrophes far worse than Bush's Iraqi civil war and ISIS.

Does Obamacare really bother you more than this?

“The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.”

T. Paine said...

Okay Dave. Let me send out this link for myriads of documented cases AGAIN.

Next, I truly hope you are wrong about Trump and the possibility of greater wars in the future. We will see. God knows Obama only exacerbated problems at best when he wasn't acting as the very catalyst for turmoil and terrorism. I note that he now had our UN delegation abstain from voting and vetoing another pro-palestinian propaganda bill in the UN condemning Israel. He has ignored decades of support for our only true ally and the lone democracy in the Middle East by his lack of support of Israel. Once again he has proven that our friends can no longer trust us while our enemies are further emboldened.

Obamacare bothers me greatly. It was un-constitutional regardless of the Robert's court ludicrous decision.

A nuclear arms race with Russia bothers me very greatly too.

What would bother me even more would be to ignore Putin's declaration that they will continue to build their military including their nuclear arsenal, while we ignore our depleted military and out-dated nuke weapons. I guess we could unilaterally disarm by default and just hope for Russia and China's good will towards us. That seems like a damned fool's way though. Nobody ever started a war because their enemy was too strong and the likely results were too devastating to contemplate. (With the possible exception of Isamofascism) Bullies don't typically pick on the strongest kid on the playground.

Dave Dubya said...

Thanks for the link. I checked it.

There were fewer than 100 cases of impersonation fraud and duplicate voting combined. Not very widespread at all, especially from a Right Wing source with an agenda.

BTW "Depleted military" is another Trump phrase.

T. Paine said...

Not very widespread, huh? If there were 100 cases of voter suppression, I think you would consider that pretty widespread. I sure would.

And "depleted military" is a phrase I have used since Bush's days in office. Perhaps Trump stole that phrase from me, Dave.

I may say things that Trump has said before. He may say things now that I have said long before he ever ran for office, and I may even agree with him on some issues. That doesn't mean that I do or will support him when he strays into unconstitutional territory.

Put away your fear and hate, Dave. It is nearly Christmas after all! :)

Dave Dubya said...

It’s not hate my friend. It is honest pursuit of truth and compassion. It’s fine if we agree with Trump when he tells the truth. But when is that?

Here’s what hate looks like: “Obama founded ISIS”. As much as you may want to agree, ISIS was a product of Bush’s war and they formed in 2006.

My Christmas gifts to you are facts and truth denied by you and Trump. Are these points not worth re-evaluating? I was opposed to corporate written trade agreements. Trump spoke out against them, so I needed to re-evaluate. I determined Trump merely wielded the issue to get votes. He has no real concern for working class Americans. He continues to divide us by his Nuremburg style “Thank You/Victory rallies”. He and his billionaire cabinet will likely pass more trade agreements.

The Washingtom Post reports:

The president-elect met with a group of tech titans whose combined net worth — at least $136 billion — was gilded even for the likes of Trump Tower... “Trump seemed willing to back down from a signature campaign promise to end free-trade deals. Rather than raising barriers to trade, which he said he would do against countries such as China, Trump promised executives he would ease the flow of goods. ‘We’re going to make fair-trade deals,’ he told them. ‘We’re going to make it a lot easier for you to trade across borders.’

“Fear and trust”.

Friends and allies no longer trust us. Enemies do not fear us.

Fear? Hell, yes. Half of America is afraid. Friends and allies are afraid.

I hardly think he can make things much worse than Obama did.

“The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.” - Dear Leader Kim Jong Trump

Do you believe we will be trusted more with Trump? I mean really? At least you have the “common sense” to be botherd by this.

“Our forces are depleted — they're depleted.” Trump

The U.S. spends close to what the entire rest of the world spends in defense. $711 billion. Per year. The next closest is China at $143 billion.
China has less than 500 Type 99 tanks, that have just been developed, and are not even close to being as good as the Abrams. We have 8,700 Abrams.
We have 10 aircraft carriers. The good kind. Everyone else has 10. Combined. And they are mostly small ships that can launch helicopters.
There are 8,400 attack helicopters in the world. The U.S. has 6,400 of them.

Dave Dubya said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dave Dubya said...

Trump's billionaire cabinet and alt-right staff choices make it abundantly clear he is no liberal. It would be beyond gullible and misinformed to believe otherwise.

Trump falsely claims 'millions of people who voted illegally' cost him popular vote
"In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally," Trump tweeted.

Wisconsin Lawmakers Who Cheered Impact Of Voter ID Law Revealed In Court

Appeals court strikes down North Carolina’s voter-ID law

“The evidence in this case casts doubt on the notion that voter ID laws foster integrity and confidence,” U.S. District Judge James D.Peterson wrote. “The Wisconsin experience demonstrates that a preoccupation with mostly phantom election fraud leads to real incidents of disenfranchisement, which undermine rather than enhance confidence in elections, particularly in minority communities. To put it bluntly, Wisconsin’s strict version of voter ID law is a cure worse than the disease.”

In the North Carolina case, the 4th Circuit panel agreed with allegations that North Carolina’s omnibus bill selectively chose voter-ID requirements, reduced the number of early-voting days and changed registration procedures in ways meant to harm blacks, who overwhelmingly vote for the Democratic Party.
“The new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision” and “impose cures for problems that did not exist,” Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote for the panel. “Thus the asserted justifications cannot and do not conceal the State’s true motivation.”

“Plantation” meme: A non-Republican black man’s response

Blacks, Conservatives and Plantations

Why do Republicans keep endorsing the most extreme and hyperbolic African-American voices — those intent on comparing blacks who support the Democratic candidates to slaves? That idea, which only a black person could invoke without being castigated for the flagrant racial overtones, is a trope to which an increasingly homogeneous Republican Party seems to subscribe.

The Democrat Plantation theology goes something like this: Democrats use the government to addict and incapacitate blacks by giving them free things — welfare, food stamps and the like. This renders blacks dependent on and beholden to that government and the Democratic Party.

The implication that most African-Americans can’t be discerning, that they can’t weigh the pros and cons of political parties and make informed decisions, that they are rendered servile in exchange for social services, is the highest level of insult. And black politicians are the ones Republicans are cheering on as they deliver it.

Now who, exactly, is being used here?

T. Paine said...

Dave, we can argue whether it was smart to go into Iraq in the first place under Bush. The fact remains that the precipitous and well-broadcast announcement of our pulling out of Iraq is what caused the power vacuum that was the catalyst for ISIS. I further understand that there were status of forces agreements in place, but a smart foreign policy leadership under Obama and Hillary could have easily have foreseen that it was vastly premature for us to remove all of our troops when there was so much instability and weakness with the nascent Iraqi government. But that was one campaign promise that Obama was bound and determined to keep. That said, I suppose some blame can be laid at Bush's feet, but Trump is right that Obama takes the lion's share of ISIS creation in Iraq.

I am not immediately concerned about the net-worth of Trump's cabinet. I am more concerned about the character of some of them.

As for half of America being afraid, well that has been the case for the last eight or possibly sixteen years. Obama has only furthered the erosion of our constitutional freedoms under his watch. My first amendment right to freedom of religion has been curtailed. If I were certain veterans or on social security with someone watching over my finances, then my right to own firearms would be eliminated FOR LIFE without due process under Obama's new illegal and unconstitutional mandate. And yet you have assured me that "the black man in the White House" wasn't going to take our guns.

I am concerned greatly about Trump's seeming incuriousness about daily intelligence briefings. I am concerned about the tenuous state of the world of which Obama has left us and fear that Trump could greatly over-compensate in the other direction. I am hoping that his advisors and cabinet will convince him to act with calm deliberation and intent accordingly, instead of "fundamentally transforming America" into a third world banana republic which ignores the rule of law and governs by presidential dictates.

As for our military, during the cold war, the USSR vastly outnumbered us in planes, tanks, and other military hardware. It was the quality of ours and our troops that gave us the edge. Now after decades of war, our troops and equipment are dangerously depleted. Instead, Obama has used the military for social engineering experimentation that has greatly decreased troop morale, unit cohesion, and military task effectiveness. His disdain for our colonial empire was manifested in his contempt for our military.

T. Paine said...

The bottom line is that there are areas of voter suppression that must be stopped. AND there are hundreds of situations of voter fraud and manipulation that can easily be prevented by simply proving with ID that each voter is who they say they are. The rest of this is all nonsense and bluster for political points.

As for the plantation "meme", did you happen to look at Star Parker's writing on this, as I suggested? She is brilliant and absolutely correct about the matter. Further, I never said it was only black people that were slaves to the government plantation. Indeed, there are far more poor white people that are ensnared in this trap, but reform of this dignity-stealing system is somehow racist to most leftists. Anything to further a political agenda, I guess.

Dave Dubya said...

One fact you’ve dodged. “Consent of the governed” becomes a lie under the slavemasters’ Electoral College.

Obama takes the lion's share of ISIS creation in Iraq..because he followed Bush’s SOF agreement the Iraqis demanded. Bush started the war. ISIS was formed in 2006. You and Trump blame the black guy. Con-servative ideology says “Liberals are to blame for everything”. You are an ideologue. Why do those who say they value “personal responsibility” never, never, take any? Why should they? Just blame the black guy and liberals.

Only in the Bubble of far Right ideology of hate is the blame NOT on the asshole who started the goddam war!!! More proof we deserve Trump’s one-party dictatorship. See how much your popguns protect our rights then.

Don’t pretend you can’t follow your religion.. That is BS. And you disagree with your church’s leader on every social issue. Someone holds ideology over compassion.

100 cases over 16 years is “widespread voter impersonation fraud”. And the moon is cheese.

So let me get this straight. You think whites can freely insult blacks with the Plantation meme.

One. More. Time.

The implication that most African-Americans can’t be discerning, that they can’t weigh the pros and cons of political parties and make informed decisions, that they are rendered servile in exchange for social services, is the highest level of insult. And black politicians are the ones Republicans are cheering on as they deliver it. - Charles Blow (Just another liberal black guy needing to be put in his place on the “plantation”?)

This falls on deaf ears. Face it. You want to insult blacks. Otherwise you wouldn’t repeat an insulting meme. You think because a black conservative says it, white cons are free to do so? You cons are so conditioned to insulting others you can’t see the basic indecency of it. God knows, liberals have been on the receiving end of this hate talk for decades. Blacks have had it far worse. But not in your bubble.

You are the whitest of the whites, my friend. You have zero sensitivity and only animosity toward non-Republican Blacks. And it shows.

reform of this dignity-stealing system is somehow racist to most leftists.

“Digity-stealing” is yet another of your sick demonizing memes. Putting food on the tables of poor people is Christian and compassionate. This calls your dignity into question more than the that of the poor.

More BS. By reform, you mean eliminating it? You offer no alternative. The need for safety nets arises from the failure of the Right’s one true god capitalism to provide living wages. How about reforming the problem, instead of the safety net?

I don’t know why I bother. Your cult beliefs embrace a range of sick notions from a global conspiracy of evil climate scientists to “widespread voter impersonation” and other unsupported lies of the far Right. This is found only in your ideology, not in reality, my friend.

On every issue you side with polluters, corporate CEOs, banks, and the Republican Party. Always the powerful over the people. This is the essence of conservatism.

T. Paine said...

Consent of the governed absolutely applies directly in the election of our House of Representatives. It does so in our Senate too, even though that was originally done indirectly via our state legislatures. Further, the presidency is also done indirectly. The consent of the governed is therefore not subverted. You are simply apoplectic because far left progressivism lost in favor of quasi-progressivism under Trump. If you and others do not like the electoral college, then petition your congressman/woman to submit a constitutional amendment to change it. I suppose we could just ignore it just like Obama has done with much of the rest of the constitution, but eventually there may be something in that constitution you DO care about being enforced as the rule of law, sir.

And QUIT with the damned race card. It wreaks of your desperation in the debate. I don't oppose Obama because he is black. I oppose him because of his policies and lawlessness.

Regarding ISIS, reread what I said. Bush is responsible because he went into Iraq with the support of a bipartisan congress, including the Democrat presidential nominee. Obama is responsible because instead of renegotiating a new SOF agreement with Iraq to ensure their stability, he rushed to remove our troops for political points so that he could say he ended the war there. He created the power vacuum by hastily removing troops when the Iraqis were unable to defend themselves yet.

Next, please do tell me where I disagree with my Pope on social issues. I am curious to be enlightened by you on this matter.

Continuing, the plantation "meme", as I said previously, applies to even more poor white people than it does blacks. Stop with the damned identity politics. You are the one making this about race. Slavery is not specific to black people any more. Today it is a soft slavery of no expectations and governmental dependency that dooms millions of ALL Americans to a life of subsistence from the tax payers. The government should be working to help those families so that they no longer NEED assistance. Frankly, churches, communities, and families should be providing for the poor instead of abrogating that responsibility into the hands of a corrupt, inefficient, and bloated government.

As a Christian and out of human decency, I have helped personally with much of my time and treasure to assist those less fortunate than I. Your insult that I have animosity towards black people that don't think like me only shows your ignorance of who I truly am. Your mischaracterization and misunderstanding of who I am and what I believe saddens me as we have communicated enough for you to know better over the years. If I didn't know better, I would think you were doing so with willful and malicious intent, buddy.

Dave Dubya said...

As long as you keep up with that "Plantation" crap you sound like a racist. Don't whine when it happens.

Dave Dubya said...

Continuing, the plantation "meme", as I said previously, applies to even more poor white people than it does blacks.

But never directed at whites. Never.

One last appeal to human decency.

Tell me what's wrong with this statement, if your moral compass can fathom it.

"Jews are mostly Democrats. When will they see they need to get out of the Democrat concentration camp?"

Do you get it yet???

T. Paine said...

Dave, I have been called a racist for the last eight years simply because I have the temerity to disagree with the POLICIES of President Obama. It is assumed, even at times by you in the past, that my disagreement can only be because he is black. So who is the racist?

I learned about the plantation meme before I ever even knew who SENATOR Obama was. And it was described by a brilliant lady that had once been a victim of government dependency and broke free to become self-sufficient in order to ensure that the cycle didn't continue for her children. And yes, this lady is black, but she described the plantation scenario as applying to ALL poor people enslaved by the Democrat cycle of providing benefits for votes in order to sustain their power, regardless of color. I guess Star Parker must be a racist too.... If you disagree with progressives, the only reason obviously must be racism, right?

As for your "concentration camp" analogy, I understand the point you are making, Dave. The analogy is hardly the same though for many obvious reasons. The final solution of eradicating Jews in concentration camps is not the same as the Democrats inviting more poor people into the country in exchange for their votes through government dependency.

Dave Dubya said...

As for your "concentration camp" analogy, I understand the point you are making, Dave. The analogy is hardly the same though for many obvious reasons. The final solution of eradicating Jews in concentration camps is not the same as the Democrats inviting more poor people into the country in exchange for their votes through government dependency.

I don’t think you understand at all. You dismiss the essence of the analogy and make a false comparison I didn’t make. Perhaps your conscience needs the distraction.

You refuse to recognize what an insult it is to blacks. Your ideological beliefs are what allow you to see no moral comparison in the analogy. This is sad. Conservatives obviously do not hold a monopoly on values.

The analogy, and fact, is Jews and Blacks were regarded as lesser people, brutalized, and held against their will. You can point out differences, but dismissing the similarities is just your rationalization. It is not ok to inject camps into Jews voting behavior, and it is not ok to compare voting for democrats to slavery. Don’t you see that is exactly what you are doing???

Racists do this for a reason. What is your reason? Ask yourself that question, in light of being informed that it insults blacks. What you want to do is insult blacks and pretend to be shocked when you are compared to a racist.

Slavery killed blacks too you know. We know those Black lives didn’t matter as anything more than property. Rubbing that horror into their faces and comparing slavery to how blacks vote is reprehensible.

I’ve shown you the words of a black man saying the term is insulting.

You know better of course. You are right, and the black man has no idea what he’s talking about because he’s not a Republican. Or whatever your twisted rationalization is. Ideology dictates your morality, or lack thereof.

So no, you do not understand my point. If you do understand and continue the talk racists employ, that is your choice. That is what you deliberately choose to reflect your far Right “values”.

David Duke likes the plantation meme:

“You’ve just seen the perfect example of a HOLLYWOOD plantation slave! Sorry, Mr Williams. But the fact that you were standing on that stage at THOSE awards tells people you really don’t know what you’re talking about. Just spewing hate and anger.”

There’s that far Right projection again, too.

You have chosen to use the language of a Klansman. Say racist crap like David Duke and you will be called a racist. Why is that, do you suppose?

T. Paine said...

So the fact that I first learned the plantation scenario from a black lady that used the analogy to describe ALL POOR PEOPLE "enslaved" by the government doesn't count because you have another black man that says that such a meme is racist.

I get it.

However, you and other leftists have also told me that I am racist and "hate the black man in the White House" because I disagree with his policies. You assign motives to my disagreement that simply aren't so and assume it is because of the color of his skin pigmentation.

That said, God, my friends (especially those of color), and my family know the truth about me so I will ignore your diagnosis because you want to continue to play the race card and identity politics.

You see, Dave, I look at fellow human beings as Americans. You look at them as hyphenated Americans... Black-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, gay-Americans etc. The left is very good at dividing people and playing the race card when no bias exists. It is simply another way of doing so and making it "us" against "them" when "them" is those other stupid, racist, homophobic, conservatives. It makes "them" the sub-humans. It is truly Hitleristic when you find a group of people and demonize and dehumanize them as society's scape goats, sir.

And yet you cast aspersions of racism around whenever a political point can't be made otherwise. This is truly sad that the state of our national political debate has devolved to such a level. I guess this is one more part of the legacy of President Obama: he took so much American good will and chose to divide the nation instead of uniting it.

What side of that equation do your actions suggest you were on, Mr. Dubya?

T. Paine said...

Who is the one truly seeing race in every issue instead of judging people by the content of their character, Mr. Dubya?