Hot Take: The Electoral College Is A National Security Threat Or Something

Usually, the saying is “never go full Salon.” Today it’s “never go full Politico”, as Matthew Olsen and Benjamin Hass (both Hillary supporters) lose their minds

The Electoral College Is a National Security Threat

In Federalist No. 68, his pseudonymous essay on “The Mode of Electing the President,” Alexander Hamilton wrote that the Electoral College could shield the United States “from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.” Because of the “transient existence” and dispersed makeup of the electors, he argued, hostile countries would find it too expensive and time-consuming to inject “sinister bias” into the process of choosing a president. At the time, the new American leaders feared meddling from Great Britain, their former colonial master, or perhaps from other powers such as France, and they designed a system to minimize the prospect that Europe’s aging monarchies could seize control of their young democracy.

Hamilton and his colleagues never could have envisioned a year like 2016, when an enemy state—Russia—was able to manipulate America’s election process with stunning effectiveness. But it’s clear the national security rationale for the Electoral College is outdated and therefore it should be retired. Simply put, it enables foreign powers to more easily pierce the very shield Hamilton imagined it would be.

Apparently, Putin kept Hillary from travelling to several states, which she needed to win in order to take the election. What this is really all about is Hillary voters not being able to MoveOn from the election loss, because they are a bunch of whiny assed children who really shouldn’t be allowed to vote because they are too mentally immature.

In Hamilton’s day, as he argued, it would have been nearly impossible for a hostile power to co-opt dozens of briefly chosen electors flung across 13 states with primitive roads. But in the social media age, the Electoral College system provides ripe microtargeting grounds for foreign actors who intend to sabotage presidential elections via information and disinformation campaigns, as well as by hacking our voting infrastructure. One reason is that citizens in certain states simply have more voting power than citizens in other states, such as Texas and California. This makes it easier for malign outside forces to direct their efforts.

Texas was going Trump, and California Hillary no matter what. But, by removing the EC, power invested in those two states would grow exponentially, taking all presidential election power out of smaller states…..but, this really doesn’t matter, because the article is just another bit of apoplectic insanity from people who aren’t emotionally mature enough to accept the results of the election.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

15 Responses to “Hot Take: The Electoral College Is A National Security Threat Or Something”

  1. Dana says:

    The Electoral College is not a national security threat, but a national security savior. Twice in recent years it has saved us, from an Al Gore presidency, and now Hillary Clinton in the White House!

    • Jeffery says:

      Well, the nation (and the world) survived W, although he gravely harmed both, and the nation and world has a fighting chance to survive tRump.

  2. Dana says:

    Don’t know if the Framers ever foresaw this, but the make up of Congress — on which the electoral vote is based — is designed to give small states more say, to keep them from being completely overwhelmed by the larger states. Now, the electoral college is saving real Americans from the scourge of the dense urban areas, and giving more weight to God-fearing rural people.

    • They definitely foresaw this in the form of the way Senators were elected originally, by the state general assemblies. They wanted to make sure tiny states, such as Vermont, which had the least population at the time of passage, to have the same power as states such as NY and SC. The Senators would be beholden to their states, not the national party, nor anyone else. They’d be the ambassadors to Washington. The passage of the 17th Amendment ruined this.

      And, yes, the EC gave the tiny states a voice, one which would go away if we go to a direct national vote for pres.

      • Dana says:

        not a state when the Constitution was written and ratified. It considered itself an independent state, while New York claimed the area as part of the Empire State. Vermont was not admitted into the union, as the 14th state, until 1791, because it required the consent of the New York state legislature, due to New York’s claim to the land.

  3. Jl says:

    “Russia was able to manipulate America’s election process…..” They say, with absolutely no proof. Shameless

    • Dana says:

      Proof? They don’t need any stinkin’ proof! Hillary Clinton was supposed to win, it was her due, and she could only have lost if she had been cheated out of it.

      And no, that’s not me putting words in her mouth: when Matt Lauer asked her, in an interview in Today, on September 13, 2007, if she had made enough mistakes of her own to have lost the election without the outside things about which she was complaining, she answered with an emphatic “I’d have to say ‘no,’ Matt.” (Quotation is from memory, possibly slightly wrong in quotation, but absolutely correct in essence.)

  4. Jeffery says:

    We have the president in tRump, and the Congress that the nation and its people deserve. The rest of the world can now plainly see what America really is. No longer will America be mistakenly viewed as the shining city upon the hill.

    • You can thank your Democratic Party masters, including Obama, whose policies were so bad that the GOP won, as did Trump. Thank Hillary for being a terrible, awful, no good candidate.

      But, your entire freakout is because Hillary lost. If you can’t take it, then you should go back to grade school with the other juveniles.

  5. Jeffery says:

    In a talk to African leaders at the UN, tRump embarrassed America again:

    “I have so many friends going to your countries trying to get rich…”

    and later he praised the fictional nation of “Nambia” for their healthcare system.

  6. Jeffery says:

    We are at a cusp in America, but tRump is not the cause, he is a symptom.

    The white working classes realized that the economic elites (both GOP and Dem) have been lining their pockets at the expense of the working classes. They revolted, kicking the GOP establishment to the curb, accepting tRump at his word to improve the economy for workers. He won’t. Once the white working class realizes they are just another minority group serving the elites they may elect politicians who serve them. Or they may elect more demagogues.

    • Rotterdam says:

      I agree with most of what you said other then that Trump is not one of the elites(as you define elite). He does not make law. Congress does.

      He wants taxes at 15 percent but would accept 20-22 percent which is roughly where it sits in the EU in most countries. The right wont touch a tax cut because of the misdirection that they need a tax cut for the rich which is not true at all. With the simplification of the tax code the rich would indeed get tax cuts. This is why they are not touching tax cuts and will not touch them. It is in the tax code that all the special interests have their fingers. Both sides of the aisle by the way. It is these special interests that have bought and paid for your government. Not just in America by the way.

      He wants to rebuild your inner cities. Not with government handouts but numerous times he has called the black community leaders to the White house to ask what they need. Congress wont touch this either. For political reasons. The GOP is labeled racists for even daring suggest that the inner cities are in trouble. The left because keeping them in poverty means keeping them voting for Democrats.

      One thing all Democrats are forgetting is that Trump was a democrat up till a few years ago, only switching to run for president. Most of what he wants to do is more left oriented then right.

      For instance kicking DACA to congress. Even the flooding of immigrants into your nation is now causing the existing pool of illegals as well as legals problems. Because they are starting to take up jobs and focusing a huge spotlight on people just trying to have a better life.(Example of this is how 30 percent of male hispanic voters voted for Trump, because it is the men who are for the most part the main job seekers.)

      In America you people are lucky. You have an influx of Hispanics. Catholics. Non radicalized.

      In the EU we are being flooded by Middle eastern Muslims, most of whom are decent people but there are far too many that are easily swayed into becoming radical because they have been exposed to this all their lives in their foreign countries of origin and as always it is easier to let them all congregate in one area of every town creating massive numbers of what we call NO GO zones in the EU. Nothing screams racism more then forcing these people into their own little communities then being afraid to deal with them.

  7. david7134 says:

    Rotter,
    Let me explain some things as you seem to be European. We do not have a bunch of Mexicans in the US, we have Latinos. These are folks from the islands, South America, Central America and of course Mexico. Now, by any estimate we have about 30 million of these illegals here, although Jeff will say 11 million. They are all criminals as they are falsely getting social benefits, working American jobs, using illegal documentation. In short all the things even the European would put people in jail for. Now, the Democrats look lovingly at these people as they think they can engineer another dependent poor group to expand there voting base. They have had the blacks for about 50 years, but even the blacks are beginning to awaken to the game and that block vote is going. If you said all these people could stay but never have the vote, then the Dems would demand their removal. As soon as the Dems get back into power, they will vote us into socialism and all the horrors it has, witness Venezuela. They don’t understand that socialism does not work, but they want a differentiated society with royalty. Jeff really desires that despite his crap about the poor working man. You are correct in the Latinos actually thinking and voting correctly, but the example to look at is what they did to California, a previous solid Republican state, now nuts. Jeff hates Trump as he is not Hillary and Hillary would have continued the destruction of the US on steroids following the Obama trend. Trump is instituting the Reagan economy and it works, big time. The racist mantra right now is the communist in the NAACP trying to negate the election, yes, the NAACP was founded by a group of white communist in the close of the 1800’s. It has nothing to do with civil rights, which was a program to destroy state control of the US.

  8. Rotterdam says:

    You have to realize that most of what he said was you have a corrupt set of politicians in which I agree with.

    The rest of what you said I get. We have the same problems in the EU that your facing there in America.

  9. david7134 says:

    Rotter,
    We have more corrupt officials than you can count. It is like you can’t run for office without being dirty.

Bad Behavior has blocked 4060 access attempts in the last 7 days.