Democrats Frustrated Over Losing To Offer Amendment To Kill Electoral College

Democrats are Very Upset over losing in 2016 to Donald Trump. It didn’t matter that they won the previous two presidential elections, losing one is The Worst, so, Things Must Change. The subhead of this NBC News story should tell you all you need to know, namely that this is red meat issue for their base

Senate Democrats to introduce constitutional amendment to abolish Electoral College
The proposed amendment to change the way presidents are elected won’t become law anytime soon, but it will keep the issue in the 2020 conversation.

Leading Democratic senators are expected to introduce a constitutional amendment Tuesday to abolish the Electoral College, adding momentum to a long-shot idea that has been gaining steam among 2020 presidential candidates.

Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii plans to introduce the measure along with Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2-ranking Democrat in the Senate, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, according to Schatz’s spokesperson.

Also signed on to the legislation is Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, one of a growing number of presidential candidates who have called for electing presidents by popular vote, even though changing the Constitution is seen as virtually impossible today.

A constitutional amendment may be proposed by a two-thirds supermajority in both the House (about 290 votes) and Senate (67 votes) and requires ratification by 38 states.

This has the same chance at passing as AOC’s Green New Deal. You have better odds at winning Megamillions tonight. This is about the Democrat whine of stolen elections and how those stupid flyovers dare have input on presidential elections. This is about Trump Derangement Syndrome, because how dare he win by playing the rules!!!!

Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kamala Harris of California, Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas, Pete Buttigieg, the Democratic mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro are among the presidential candidates who have expressed openness to abolishing the Electoral College.

“We should abolish the Electoral College,” Castro said at a 2020 Democratic candidate forum in Washington on Monday. “It doesn’t reflect the will of the people of the country.”

See, it doesn’t reflect the will of the liberal elites in coastal cities. Seriously, why should someone’s vote in the tiny population state of Montana count when the artsy people in NYC want a Democrat?

Kill the electoral college? Stack the Supreme Court?

Pete Buttigieg wants to abolish the electoral college. Sen. Elizabeth Warren hopes to ban gerrymandering. Sen. Cory Booker talks about limiting terms for Supreme Court justices. Beto O’Rourke is weighing an expansion of the high court.

The Democratic presidential hopefuls, prodded by a frustrated base, are pushing fundamental changes to the American political system. Aimed at changing how presidents are chosen and laws are passed, the proposals go beyond typical campaign issues such as health care and taxes to challenge the basic rules of American democracy. (big snip)

Republicans say these proposals are radical efforts by Democrats to change the rules because they’re losing the game. After years of benefiting from left-leaning judges, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) says, liberals now want to pack the courts because Trump is appointing conservatives.

Sometimes Democrats win, sometimes they don’t. When they don’t they throw a hissy fit and then want to change the rules. We saw some of the same stuff when George W. Bush won in 2000 then 2004, but, the insanity seems a bit elevated after the Trump win. Can you imagine what happens if he wins in 2020? Most are just sore losers.

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

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

16 Responses to “Democrats Frustrated Over Losing To Offer Amendment To Kill Electoral College”

  1. Dana says:

    The 2000 and 2016 elections have proven the wisdom of the Framers, in keeping two absolutely awful candidates out of the White House.

    The only reasonable way to get rid of the electoral college would be to couple it with the restriction that the franchise is restricted to white male property owners, which was how the Framers envisioned things in the first place.

  2. Professor Hale says:

    The electoral college doesn’t prove the wisdom of anyone. It is an archaic power sharing mechanism for a nation that consisted of 13 states. Parties defend it when their own party “wins” and argue against it when their party losses. The vast majority of the nation doesn’t even know how it works. They either war against it or arbitrarily give it merit based on party lines and outcomes. It is only one means of power sharing among many available means. There is nothing specially virtuous or wise about it. Democrats never cared about the EC when Clinton (Bill) won or when Obama won (twice). Just like with gerrymandering, each side either likes it or hates it depending on how they personally benefit from it. “Fairness” becomes synonymous with “does this benefit my party”. While we are at it, if DC wouldn’t get 2 senators from statehood, no one would care about that either.

    The “right answer” is any solution that would gain a 2/3rd majority needed to pass a constitutional amendment. No imagined system can do that, so we will keep what we have without regard to how “wise” it may be.

    • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

      The “right answer” is any solution that would gain a 2/3rd majority needed to pass a constitutional amendment. No imagined system can do that, …

      Twenty-six of the 27 amendments were approved in this manner.

      • Professor Hale says:

        And none since then. Which is a pretty good feature since things don’t get to change the constitution without a supermajority agreeing to it.

  3. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    So instead of the Presidents the people wanted, we got the Iraq invasion, global warming and Trump.

    Many Americans aren’t convinced it was a fair trade.

  4. Professor Hale says:

    What would be even better would be to dramatically reduce the power of the presidency and executive branch agencies. Then no one would care how they were selected.

  5. Jl says:

    “We got global warming.”. Really? Our emissions are down in spite of what any president did or didn’t do. The mostly free market brought us fracking, giving us a clean, reliable and cheap fossil fuel.

    • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

      Correction: We got faulty computer models that say “we got global warming” or something…

  6. Jl says:

    As I saw it described elsewhere, the electoral college in effect distributes presidential choice among 50 (51) individual elections. This forces nominees to appeal to a wide variety of voters with a wide variety of interests. No wonder libs want to get rid of it.

    • Professor Hale says:

      No matter what the rules were, a smart candidate would adapt to the rules to win. That is why Hillary lost. Despite a 30 year head start on political ambition, she failed to notice that California would not put her over the top. But so far, all the arguments for eliminating the EC are based on making it easier for one side to win next time, and all the arguments for keeping it are based on making it easier for the other side to win next time. Seems rather arbitrary.

      History shows us that when the governing franchise (not the vote) is too closely held, it leads to disaffection with government and in extreme cases, rebellion. There are plenty of systems that accomplish this. some better than others. The key element that we can’t do without is that the general masses trust that the system is fair and responsive. When politicians, for their own personal elevation, undermine that system, or undermine confidence in that system, then it also doesn’t matter which system is used. The result is division to the extremes with neither side able or willing to work for the common good.

      This site’s comment section is a microcosm that demonstrates the current electorate. One side, represented by Jeff, is reading the democratic party talking points and linking to democratic talking points as if his evidence is truthful, important and relevant. no one else cares. Everyone else links to their own talking points. Neither side is listening or interested in what the other is saying. Neither side is capable of compromise or even civility to the other.

      And despite my reasoned arguments above, I will openly claim that I am not immune. I have studied history extensively. I can tell you all that Communism is an enormous source of evil. it should have died in the 20th century along with Fascism. The bottom line that all communists have in common is “if you don’t do as we say, we will kill you”. There is no middle ground for that. Argument time and debate is over.

      • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

         ‘Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.’

        • Professor Hale says:

          The Communist party USA Wiki page is informative, since some people think that the word “communist” is like saying “racist” and has no real value as a description any more. I would make the claim that real live communists, who claim to be communists, actually know what they are. The big reveal is, after you read their wiki page, they are indistinguishable from the Democrat party and their primary objectives are openly declared by every one of the democrats currently running for President of the USA.

          In other words, they are communists.

  7. […] via Democrats Frustrated Over Losing To Offer Amendment To Kill Electoral College — Pirate’s Cov… […]

  8. Professor Hale says:

    Does anyone else remember that Democrats were encouraging the electors in the EC to “use their power” to overturn the lawful election of Trump? It wasn’t that long ago. They argued at the time that the great wisdom of the founders could foresee that the mob could not be trusted not to vote in morons and the nation needed to be protected from that by using the EC as a firewall between Populism and really bad outcomes. There was even a court case arguing that electors could not be bound by state laws requiring them to vote as the voters demanded. Seriously. No one remembers this? The whole media has the attention span of guppies.

    • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

      The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long that nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was. The world around it will forget even faster. 

      –Milan Kundera

Bad Behavior has blocked 10019 access attempts in the last 7 days.