Now a member of Congress has sided with the history-addled cheating advocates who are pressuring Republican electors to overturn the results of the 2016 election. One might expect electors to be this ignorant and confused, since they are not vetted or qualified and may be, for all voters know, self-righteous paramedics. Smug and partisan social justice warriors using fake names are also not surprising us when they advocate something this unethical. However, we should be able to expect our elected representatives to have more respect for and understanding of our system. Unfortunately, we can’t.
Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) concedes that Donald Trump won the election “fair and square.” (This is a small point in Himes’ favor, at least, since so many of his political brethren won’t even admit that). Nonetheless, he has announced that electors should defy the electorate and make Hillary Clinton President when they gather on December 19to vote,despite the fact that Trump beat Clinton by winning states that gave him, or were supposed to, 306 Electoral College votes.
Himes’s “argument“ mark him as a bona fide idiot. We should not have bona fide idiots in Congress.
“We’re 5 wks from Inauguration & the President Elect is completely unhinged. The electoral college must do what it was designed for,” he tweeted yesterday. No, in fact, that was not what it was designed for. The Electoral College was designed to prevent big states in a federal system from dictating to the other states, which might not share their culture or sensitivities. Imagine a big, wacko state like California dominating our politics. In fact, that’s exactly what would happen without the Electoral College. In the election just completed, Clinton won the Golden Bankrupt Illegal Immigrant-Enabling State by almost 4 million votes, while Trump got more votes than Clinton in the other 49 states and the District of Columbia. That’s why we have the Electoral College, and a more brilliant device the Founders never devised.
But Himes doesn’t understand, or pretends not to. “The Electoral College, if you read the Federalist Papers and understand why it is there, it is a group of people. It is not an algorithm. It is not a set of ballots. It is a group of people that our Founding Fathers, you know, to whom supposedly we all sort of defer to, pledged the idea that if someone gets elected that is manifestly ill equipped to be president … that the Electoral College can step in,” he said.
I know I wrote that if I heard one more quote from Federalist Paper 68 that was so definitive that the writer, who may have been Alexander Hamilton, wouldn’t even attach his own name on it, “I may strip off my clothes and run screaming Norse epithets into the night. “ However, this is a Congressman making this fatuous and dishonest argument, so I have to do something even more extreme.
I’m thinking, I’m thinking…
The Founders were trying to get the Constitution, which was already written and signed, ratified by the states, and that meant selling the anti-big state Electoral College to residents of the big states. This was Hamilton’s, or someone’s, spin to get the thing enacted. Do you know how we know that Himes’ fiction wasn’t what the Founders intended the Electoral College to do? We know it because once the Constitution was passed, the Founder didn’t lift a finger to construct the Electoral College so it was competent to do what Hamilton—or someone’— pretended it would. There was no election of qualified electors. There was no effort to make sure that they met a high standard of character, objectivity, education and wisdom. They were left as just people who agreed, sometimes through pledges, that they would vote as the public instructed them to. Does anyone really beieve that the Founders, among the most brilliant thinkers the nation has ever produced, would set up a system of super-voters who were empowered to overturn the election of a national leader on a whim without making sure those electors were somehow more qualified than the public they would be defying? What qualifies these current 306 anonymous, unvetted electors to veto the will of millions of voters? Nothing. Not superior numbers, not tradition, not fairness, not consent by the voters, not logic.
Ah, but Himes says Trump isn’t qualified to be “mayor of a small town in Connecticut.” THAT’s why the Electoral College should overturn the voters’ will. HE disagrees with them. HE knows better. Well, that issue was settled by the voters, unfortunately.
When did Democrats start adopting the philosophy that democratic processes are only valid when they produce results Democrats want?
And get this: Himes says he wants to abolish the Electoral College, because it’s undemocratic! Except this one time, of course. After all, Alexander Hamilton—or someone—said in 1788 it should be used in 2016.
What an embarrassment Himes is.
And he’s far from alone.