Petition calling for electoral college to choose Clinton over Trump now has more than four million signatures

From: hotair.com,  by Allahpundit,  on Nov 14, 2016

half-million-crooked-hillary-supporters-sign-petition-to-ask-electoral-college

A few angry liberals take to the streets for their tantrums, the rest sign online petitions, I guess.

Did a single person who signed spare a thought for what a Clinton presidency would be like if, in an alternate universe where this had a prayer of actually happening, she won the election this way? If you’re worried about society being ripped apart by a divisive outcome, you have way more to fear from Hillary winning in an electoral-college insurrection than you do from President Trump. And I say that as a card-carrying #NeverTrumper.

On December 19, the Electors of the Electoral College will cast their ballots. If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, they can vote for Hillary Clinton if they choose. Even in states where that is not allowed, their vote would still be counted, they would simply pay a small fine – which we can be sure Clinton supporters will be glad to pay!

We are calling on the Electors to ignore their states’ votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton. Why?

Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault, and utter lack of experience make him a danger to the Republic.

Secretary Clinton WON THE POPULAR VOTE and should be President.

Even on its own insane terms, that’s not strategically sensible. If you’re set on trying to stop Trump in the electoral college, at least make an allowance for the fact that electors would be grossly uncomfortable reallocating EVs that belong to the winning candidate to his opponent instead. The only way to block Trump is to get enough electors to vote for a different Republican to deny Trump the 270 he needs to clinch a majority; that way they could say that they’re honoring the results of the election, sort of, by supporting someone from the winning party. (We’ve been over this before.) If enough electors defected to hold Trump to 269 EVs, the House would resolve the matter and they’d be free to vote for whichever Republican alternative ended up in third place in electoral-college votes. That’s what a pair of Democratic electors are trying to do right now, in fact: They’re looking for 37 electors across the country as part of their “Moral Electors” project who are willing to support a different GOPer besides Trump. We might get President Romney after all.

Or not. The problem with that plan, apart from having to convince electors that Trump is such a threat that it’s worth upending a national election over it, is that … there’s no evidence to think House Republicans wouldn’t elect Trump anyway. Just try to conceive of the political sh*tstorm that would descend on any red-state delegation that voted for, say, Mitt Romney instead of Trump after Trump won their state’s vote fair and square. So total is Trump’s domination of the party now that politicos are wondering whether the Freedom Caucus, which spent the past few years tormenting Boehner and Ryan for not being conservative enough, will curl up in a little ball at the feet of the even less conservative Trump and support any big-government measure he likes, starting with a gigantic infrastructure bill. But whatever — we don’t need to overthink these bizarro-world electoral college scenarios. What you’ve seen the past week from the left is really just a series of “not in my name” mechanisms aimed at coping with a very hard, very unexpected reality. The protests, the petition, the fantasies about abolishing the electoral college, the “safety pin” fad are gestures by a movement that’s been caught so flat-footed by a momentous surprise loss that all it can do for the moment is mumble “no” in various feeble ways.

The only wrinkle in all of this is this tweet after Romney’s loss in 2012. Er…

trumps-tweet-re-electoral-college

He was asked about that last night on “60 Minutes” and, somewhat surprisingly, didn’t change his position for the sake of convenience:

Donald Trump: I hated– well, you know, I’m not going to change my mind just because I won. But I would rather see it where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes and somebody else gets 90 million votes and you win. There’s a reason for doing this because it brings all the states into play. Electoral College and there’s something very good about that. But this is a different system. But I respect it. I do respect the system.

Good for him for not flip-flopping for the sake of pure convenience, but if the left is ever in a position to pass the “National Popular Vote” compact among enough blue states to make the outcome of the presidential election turn on the result of the popular vote, those words will be used in support. In fact, they might try pressuring President Trump on that before 2020. Would a man who became president despite losing the popular vote endorse an interstate agreement to make the popular vote binding in 2020? With 33 state legislatures in Republican hands, I’m going to guess that it won’t matter even if he does. Read this new post from Nate Silver, though, speculating about whether Democrats might have an electoral college problem again four years from now. The Rust Belt should remain competitive but the Sun Belt, which Democrats are expecting to dominate in time thanks to increasing Latino voters, might still not be ready to deliver for them. It’s entirely possible that the next nominee will rack up votes in the Big Blues and lose narrowly in just enough purples to win the popular vote consolation prize again while losing the election.

~~~~~~~~~~

This is so incredibly irresponsible and ludicrous, it wobbles the mind. They are calling on the Electors to ignore their states’ votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton. What’s their justification? 

Because they say that “Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault and utter lack of experience make him a danger to the Republic.”

Here’s the ludicrous part: THEY believe that Hillary is better. Let’s do a brief comparison.

Didn’t she say that “half of Trump’s supporters belong in a “basket of deplorables.” That’s accusing about 30 million people of not being of sound mind simply because they don’t support her. They accuse Trump of lying. They apparently haven’t followed Hillary’s career. She has a long history of lying, criminal activity, and even traitorous activities related to Benghazi, her email scandal and The Clinton Family Foundation. And experience? It’s true that she has put in the time, but was any of her time as a “public servant” successful? None, zip, zero, nada – in fact, when people are asked to name her accomplishments as U.S. Senator or Secretary of State, they’re mostly silent since she has no real accomplishments to her credit. With the exception of dramatically improving the Clinton family fortune and avoiding prison, she’s been a failure at all of her jobs.

Yet they say that she won the popular vote and therefore should be crowned Queen Hillary. According to the New York Times, out of 121,859,470 votes cast, she tallied 776,854 more votes than Trump. That’s a .63% lead out of 121 million votes and they believe that the Electoral College vote, which was established in the Constitution and the Twelfth Amendment, should be ignored and their preferred candidate (Hillary) should be named the president. Forget that Trump has 306 electoral votes (including Michigan) when only 270 was necessary to win. Hillary won only 232. 

We’ve often expressed the conviction that the left/liberal/progressive democrats live in a make-believe world. Has there ever been a more glaring example than this petition?

Garnet92.

 



Categories: Political

Tags: , ,

11 replies

  1. As The Crawfish said, today’s liberals don’t respect the Constitution. Pretty simple. They also hate our country, its laws, its history, its culture and the faith it was based on. Oh well, We’ve all seen that they are a pretty simple minority and when we put our minds to it we win.

    Like

    • These are the kinds of tactics that moveon.org and/or George Soros pay people to participate in – they are hired guns whose “jobs” are being professional protesters. I doubt that many of them can even spell “Constitution” let alone explain why it exists.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Anyone can start a petition based on anything. Creating this one was stupid and it proves that over 4 million people are stupid enough to think this could work. News flash, people – we don’t overturn elections based on petitions.

    How about we stop publishing the count of popular votes since it has no bearing on our process or the outcome?

    A headline today stated that 69 out of the 112 people arrested in Portland did not vote. That’s probably the case in the other cities too.

    Go home, people…just shut-up and go home. You should have voted if you wanted the skank to win.

    Liked by 1 person

    • “You should have voted if you wanted the skank to win.”

      Geez, Kathy. I do wish you would stop sugarcoating things.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I don’t for a minute think that the petition-pushers think that it’ll work, it’s just a way to gain publicity to illustrate the magnitude of their displeasure. FOUR MILLION sounds like a lot, except when compared to the 60 million who voted for Trump.

      Yep, I saw that article where they investigated the 112 people arrested in Portland and found that a majority didn’t bother to vote. They are just part of the group who are paid members of the anarchist militia – paid by the day to protest or do whatever disrupts daily commerce to call attention to their leftist agenda.

      Like

  3. Well, the one thing that Allahpundit leaves out of the column, and that these brain-dead loons don’t seem to know, is that the EC vote has to be accepted and certified by Congress.

    If they want an electoral revolt, then all that has to be done to defuse it is for the President of the Senate to refuse to accept the sealed EC results. Easy peazy.

    Like

    • That’s true Brian, but I think that it would cause a Constitutional crisis more serious than some nameless electors voting in a manner at odds with their state’s tally if Joe Biden refused to accept the results of the EC’s vote. That would concentrate all of the resulting uproar at one specific person (of the losing party). That would be some fireworks show!

      Like

  4. “Petition calling for electoral college to choose Clinton over Trump now has more than four million signatures”

    I wonder how many of that four million actually voted? No matter though. Of the 120+ million people who did vote, at least 116 million have NOT signed the petition. How shall we recognize THEIR will?

    I despise the way some people, particularly those on the Left, use petitions as a way for a small minority of people to impose their will upon a much larger majority when they don’t get their way in the regular course of things. Like anything else the lefties get their grubby mitts on it becomes a tool for no good.

    Having said that, I too would probably be pretty upset to win the popular vote and lose the election. Each state designed its electoral process for a reason, presumably. Some may have intended for the electors to overrule the voters if they perceived that the voters were acting under the influence of a wide-ranging mental disease, which happens to the case, IMO. Luckily the electoral process already saved us from the mental disease that gave Hillary the popular vote by a small fraction. And as you so deftly pointed out, Garnet, the argument they make to justify defying the invoking these rare (if not unheard of) provisions is laughable given that their own candidate is so much worse.

    BTW I can’t help but say something about Trump’s tweet shown above. It’s yet more evidence that he is not in step with the thinking of this nation’s Founders.

    Like

    • I read another article today that explained why the candidates concentrated on the states that were identified as “battleground” states and Trump properly commented with (paraphrased) “if I would have been trying for a popular vote majority, I would have campaigned differently.” And so he would, and so would have Hillary. When the popular vote is the only criteria, spending time in low-population areas is a waste of time – each candidate would concentrate on the biggest population centers. It’s not rocket science, people – you do what you must under the rules of the game.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Nobody ever accused liberals of respecting the Constitution.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: