[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: Less Electoral College? No, More Electoral College For the past 20 years we have been assaulted by the Marxist left in the U.S. about how terrible the electoral college is. In their quest for a purely egalitarian society — you know one without enforceable rules, culture, sexes and differences of any kind — the electoral college represents the ultimate thwarting of their intentions to rule through mobocracy. It’s been a long and winding road through the institutions for these Marxists, undermining our educational system, media, government bureaucracies and buying off/’electing’ government officials to stepwise push the U.S. to the brink of takeover. That’s where we are today and the only thing that stands between a fraudulent popular vote and a Biden-as-proxy-for-Davos presidency is the electoral college. This is the essence of Trump’s legal challenges to the vote in the states where the rules were gamed to ensure a victory regardless of who actually showed up to the polls on November 3rd. Amolife 7 Pieces Patio... Buy New $459.89 (as of 07:38 EST - Details) That much is clear even to the most compromised of judges and election officials who have thrown out cases with obvious merit on the flimsiest of legal grounds, c.f. the ruling in Michigan against Sidney Powell where the judge all but admitted the fraud but struck down the case with prejudice because of ‘timing’ and ‘disenfranchisement.’ But the last I checked our legal system is predicated on a bad law or rule causing material harm before the suit can be brought forth. Our system doesn’t allow for potential harm, only challenging the law after it has actually harmed someone. Only once the ‘ballots were cast, the vote counted’ and ‘the election certified,’ in the words of U.S. District Judge Linda V. Parker, could there be a legal basis for voters being harmed by the way the election was conducted. Only then could a suit be brought forth. Bring the suit too early and there’s no basis for ‘material harm.” Bring the suit after the vote and the judge rules it’s ‘disenfranchisement.’ You gotta love the rhetorical backflips people do to justify their confirmation bias. I do agree with Judge Parker however that Powell may have brought forth a case she expected to lose with the intention of undermining the validity of our electoral process. Because, in fact, the electoral process is subject to massive fraud with incentives to rig and/or game the outcome for political benefit. Make no mistake, Republicans and Democrats both use this compromised system to their benefit when it suits them. This, of course, begs the question, “Who do they actually work for? Us or someone else?” And it is important with the stakes this high that as many people as possible understand what has happened in past elections, what happened last month and what will happen in the future elections, if they are ever allowed to occur. Maybe that was Powell’s intention in going to Federal Court rather than State court where she would have had more chance of success, per arguments from Robert Barnes. Which brings me back to why the electoral college is so very important. Because, in theory, absent a corruptible system on a mass scale, the electoral college is an unnecessary procedural step towards declaring the winner of a presidential election. But what happens when that system is obviously tainted, the people administering it motivated by the darkest impulses and the disenfranchisement of millions of voters takes place because of the cheating? Then there has to be a check on that power. And the electoral college is that check. Hanover STRATH6PCFP-RE... Buy New $2,199.00 (as of 07:38 EST - Details) There has to be a way for those that uncover fraud but are stonewalled by people with the power to define fraud, in this case a corrupt and byzantine judiciary, to bring that evidence forth and have The People, through the electors and their State Legislatures, retain the power to decide what the real outcome of the election should be. It’s not perfect. No system is. It’s like 2-factor authentication for elections. To turn the argument of the Marxist left about guns on its head, no peaceful society needs private ownership of guns. And a truly peaceful, perfect society doesn’t. Guns become a hobby for hunters, shooters and the collectors. But we don’t live in a perfect society and until we do our guns remain the check on government overreach in the same way the electoral college performs that check, pro-forma as it may in fact be, on election fraud and the tyranny of low-information voters. Back to the lawsuits. Anyone crowing about Powell’s suit being thrown out needs to take a second to ponder what was said in the dismissal. Because ‘making fraud legal’ doesn’t make it right nor inspire confidence. The courts are supposed to enforce the law not interpret it. Judge Parker refused to accept the disenfranchisement of ‘5.5 million’ people in Michigan but ignored the disenfranchisement of the marginal few hundred thousand that tipped the election’s result and the selection of electors without even considering a review. That should stun you in its implication. Tyranny of the majority trumps investigation into material evidence of malfeasance. It is precisely because the courts have been so nakedly partisan (or just plain spineless) in their rulings that Texas made the most consequential move in the entire post-election wrangling. It filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin on specific constitutional grounds for violating “the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they did not go through the legislatures…” when changing their standards for mail-in ballot acceptance. Patio Sense Coconino W... Buy New $136.99 (as of 07:38 EST - Details) What I said in this month’s Gold Goats n’ Guns Newsletter was: States like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin have, for all intents and purposes, forfeited their right to be represented at the Electoral College. They have overseen sham elections not worthy of electing a high school class president no less the ‘leader of the free world.’ And that should have people in places like Florida and Texas incensed. They counted more votes in a matter of hours and certified the results. How far has Florida come in twenty years since Bush v. Gore? Now even corrupt counties like Broward count their ballots in a timely manner and that’s that. If it is perceived by them that a few dozen corrupt party hacks rigged their elections why should Floridians or Texans consent to be governed by their representatives in Washington? Why should they listen to anything any of them say for any reason? Why should they accept President Harris and the crazy court of jackals she’ll appoint to her cabinet? Millions of Americans will be wondering why should America exist in practice if it doesn’t exist in principle? That is the legacy of this election. And this is exactly the response to the mountain of evidence about this election I was hoping to see from states like Texas — refusal to be governed by a bunch of corrupt party apparatchiks who believe in power for power’s sake and rule by theft. Frankly, I want Florida and other states who got their vote counts right to join with Texas here. Many have virtue signaled support for Texas but none have signed on as plaintiffs. And I do believe the more political pressure placed on the SCOTUS is what is needed to get a fair hearing of this case on the merits of the law. c.f. that whole fallen society thing above. This is the essence of what I mean by people becoming ungovernable. And in a period of history where the thin veneer of civility on which our entire political edifice rests is being willingly ripped away to reveal naked power grabs it is even more important everyone on all sides of the political divide understand the stakes here. This isn’t about Trump or Biden winning the election. Fraud of this magnitude is unacceptable. Cheating of this size and scope cannot be countenanced nor can it be excused away as de rigeur and de facto evidence of our inevitable decline as a society. That’s, frankly, loserthink, in Scott Adams’ parlance, and a guarantee that all the terrible things people have done to each other in the past will occur again as checks against power ruthlessly applied wither to bullying. Again, no system like this is without its flaws. At its heart voting is a violent act to determine which tyrant rules not only you but everyone else. It should be used sparingly and with extreme caution. The idea that it should be frictionless is itself an open admission of a tyrannical impulse rather than a paean to egalitarian principles. Only people motivated to vote should vote. If that means a reasonable opportunity cost to execute that privilege then so be it. Moreover, with a second authentication process like the electoral college in place it retards the impulse to cheat to win. And this is why I want to see more electoral college checks on voter fraud rather than fewer. I want the electoral college used for my Governor, my State Rep., my county commissioners and my sheriff elections. I want my counties here in Florida to have the power to check the fraud and, if necessary, disenfranchise the people of another county that refuses to conduct themselves as upstanding members of the community. This would have stopped Broward county’s legendary fraud machine dead in its tracks and there would have been no need for Bush v. Gore in 2000. Cheaters don’t get cookies. Because if we don’t acknowledge our baser angels then we are doomed to a cycle of violence which will make “The Recent Unpleasantness of 1861 to 1865” look like a convocation of Amish dairy farmers. What scares me most is I believe that is the intent of the people who perpetrated this fraud in the first place. This is what Texas is signaling with its suit and it calls directly into question the validity and applicability of the Constitution in 2020 and beyond. If the SCOTUS fails to live up to its role as guarantor of its move basic function — arbiter between the several States — then what was settled law (ironically through naked use of force) when Lee surrendered at Appomattox will be reconsidered. If we’re going to have this consensual hallucination called government then we should admit it flaws and ours in the open and build systems to determine who runs it which are less susceptible to gamesmanship. Otherwise, what’s the point of holding elections. They just become the ultimate opiate of the masses. I’d go on about blockchain-based voting as a potential cure for what ails us here but that’s a different subject for a different day. Today is about specifying what’s wrong with our system not offering implementations other than to argue the merits of what protections the electoral college grant us against forces of naked aggression. The arguments against the electoral college are simply veiled arguments against Federalism. And while I’m happy to entertain arguments against any coercive form of government, in the case of the U.S. our Federal system is a flawed but robust system which has given ground slowly to these political terrorists over the past couple hundred years. It is in a terminal state of collapse today and the odds are long that it will survive these challenges in any practical sense. Good on Texas for reminding us where the limits to power are and bringing up real questions about where we are headed. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ada (#0)
They would have to change the US Constitution
They would have to change the US Constitution To eliminate the Electoral College would require an Amendment to be passed. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
More honesty, less fraud.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||