The progressives learned long ago that any lie, no matter how egregious, can take on a patina of truth if – it is repeated long enough and often enough.
How many times have you heard, since the election, that Hillary “won the popular vote”?
What popular vote? There simply is no such thing. Yet, the progressive media continue to chant about it election after election. Why? Because they want to get rid of the Constitutional rule that the States elect the president and set up some form of national election.
Let me digress for a moment. What did Hillary actually win? Simple. She won the excess vote in several very large liberal states such as New York and California. What do I mean by “excess vote”. Simple again. The excess vote in any state is the number of votes in excess of the number required to win that states electoral vote.
What the crooked pundits fail to report to WTS is that, when the States established the federal government, by virtue of ratifying the Constitution, they delegated several of their inherent powers to said federal government in the name of a common defense and free trade between the States (among other things). One of the powers the States did not delegate to the federal government is the power to conduct elections. Ergo, there is no federal (or national) vote in these United States. That being the case, there can therefore be no national “popular vote”. End of statement. It is simply not possible without amending our Constitution.
Woe is us say the crooked pundits. This means we are not really a true democracy. How about that?? The Founders shunned the idea of a true democracy opting for a constitutional republic instead. Indeed, several of the founders compared true democracy to mob rule.
So, the fact that Hillary lost the election despite of winning the excess vote in a few ultra-liberal states proves only that our Constitution is working as intended by its creators.
Suppose there were really a national election and the winner is the candidate garnering the national “popular vote”… what would this mean for the Republic? It would mean that a very few large states would determine every presidential election and the numerous smaller states could choose either to accept the result or go to the devil.
Is this really what a majority of WTS really want? The United States of California, New York and Illinois plus the 47 dwarfs?
If Trump can accomplish nothing else, please let him restore real education in our schools – primary, secondary and college. With real education, WTS would be far less prone to be taken in by such BS as we are witnessing now.
I will leave the spectacle of a bunch of mislead brats on our university campuses rioting for the downfall of the nation that nurtures them for another rant.
Think about it.
Troy L Robinson
Users who have LIKED this post: