Patriarchal Powers & Political Patronage
The 2016 presidential election personifies the wide divide that exists within the American electorate today. Since the 1988 presidential campaign, Americans have been voting in favor of one party to occupy the Oval Office and then voting out that incumbent party. This is a pattern America may endure as political campaigns and presidential nominees become ever more polarizing.
Another discernible aspect impacting voter returns was identified by Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee, who warned that 47% of the populace does not pay any federal income tax and would be voting for their own financial interest in the form of government hand-out policies enacted by democrats to buy their votes in advance of the next upcoming election.
American polls reflected the fact that the American electorate was thoroughly displeased with the choices of the two major parties seeking the presidency in 2016. But one of them had to win and the one who secured the Electoral College achieved victory. Quite a number of factors resulted in a loss for the candidate the U.S. media had been excessively hyping to win. A media-induced dynamic may have actually contributed to mildly suppressing Clinton’s overall vote total. Relentless propagandizing may have produced an opposite result.
Party Nomination Superdelegate Style
The Democrat National Committee adopted the implementation of Superdelegates in their convention nomination process in 1982 as a means to consolidate behind a more palatable candidate to the American electorate. This is an example of elitism as practiced by the partisan left.
The 1984 Southern Super Tuesday primary was supposed to assist the democrats in consolidating the choices among their potential candidates to select a convention nominee without a prolonged primary campaign. It did not function as forecast and actually induces influence peddling.
Superdelegates represent a sectional faction at the convention that exercises their party-insider preference to influence the choice of party nominee. They are a construct of the political party to retain control in the hands of power brokers. Although Clinton was the establishment candidate, the Sanders’s candidacy invigorated the extreme party base with his wild popularity and activist positions, but he did not emerge as the party’s standard bearer.
Sanders had re-registered as a democrat to seek the nomination. His performance in the primaries began to reveal the weaknesses of the anointed choice. The democratic apparatus abused key party positions of power to thwart Sanders from becoming the nominee and subtly boosted the Clinton campaign. The presence of Superdelegates removes all intrigue from a contested convention when the selection of party nominee is already a foregone conclusion unlike previous conventions during the 1960s & 1970s.
Hillary Clinton: Superior Candidate vs. Inferior Campaign
Clinton the candidate was a capital hypocrite. While campaigning on a theme of fairness for all Americans, she had No intention of conducting a conventional campaign. The Clinton’s have a sordid history of perpetrating political high jinx and getting away with all kinds of unsavory partisan chicanery. Trashing a primary opponent is open season to them.
Hillary emerged on the national scene in 1991 when her husband was seeking the presidency. Desperate to remain politically relevant over a twenty-five-year period appears to appeal to her core constituency of supporters who are more than With Her. The fact of the matter is that Clinton was an uninspiring candidate who ultimately saddled herself with an unenthusiastic campaign.
Hillary came to Bill’s rescue live on the 60 Minutes Sunday evening broadcast immediately before the 1992 New Hampshire primary election. After becoming First Lady, her attempts to shepherd a healthcare bill through congress were thwarted. After Bill was brought before impeachment proceedings in 1998, she had no choice but to seek the open U.S. Senate seat from New York because of a 1964 law that she could abuse as a carpetbagger to re-establish herself independently from all of her husband’s White House scandals.
The Democrat National Committee had not one, but two disgraced DNC chairs dismissed within a short period of time right in the middle of a rancorous political campaign. Schultz abused her position as chair stealthily undermining the 2016 democrat nomination process to support the Clinton candidacy by sandbagging the political prospects of the Sanders presidential campaign.
Brazile was then tapped to replace Schultz as DNC chair. An email detection revealed that Brazile had provided advance notice of questions from a earlier primary campaign debate to the Clinton campaign to impede Sanders’s surging candidacy. The self-proclaimed party of political fairness was caught twice with chairs that exerted unacceptable contradictory conduct.
Eclectic & Electric: the American Electoral College
Twice in this new millennium, the American Electoral College has delivered electoral victory to two Republicans: George W. Bush in 2000 and Donald J, Trump in 2016. Unfortunately, most Americans are ignorant of why the Electoral College exists and how it functions within the American political system. The Electoral College is a political mechanism that was deliberated, ratified, and ensconced within the United States Constitution.
The founding fathers who framed the U.S. Constitution were determined to form a government that would function as a Representative Republic to protect the citizenry from the excesses of centralized power that might one day culminate in dominating the American populace. The Electoral College was an ingenious arrangement to insulate the American presidential election process from a variety of internal forces that might influence the final vote outcome.
Prominent American Revolutionary War patriots were distrustful of the American government functioning under the Articles of Confederation. Consent was undertaken to host a gathering of delegates from the American states to meet in Philadelphia during September 1787. The resulting Constitutional Convention produced an incredible guiding political document and the Bill of Rights. Only 25 of the 55 Constitutional convention delegates in attendance were slave-holders.
The Electoral College was one of several compromises that Constitutional framers agreed upon in ratifying this remarkable document enfranchising rights to an enlightened populace. Yes, Native Americans, American women and slaves in servitude could not vote under this new form of government. It should be noted that slave-holders were among the minority of those state delegates participating in Philadelphia and did not have the votes to implement any of their positions during deliberations.
An agitating op-ed piece had circulated on the internet claiming that the Electoral College was a political instrument concocted to benefit the Southern slave-holding states in the newly reorganized union. The premise that our Electoral College is founded upon a racist construct is both false and purposefully misleading designed to further fan the flames of hatred, mistrust and division among the American citizenry.
To state that preserving slavery and fostering racism were leading factors empowering the Electoral College in retrospect is absurd and inflammatory. Those who were slaves were to be counted and this was the method by which the delegates ultimately chose in order to secure a compromise among the state delegates. Nothing sinister was employed by the any of the delegates meeting in Philadelphia.
Constitutional Representative Republic
The founding fathers ratified three branches of government with a presidency, a judiciary, and a legislature to establish a system of checks and balances. A Census was to be conducted every ten years to reevaluate the Electoral College vote based upon population. The Electoral College was instituted as a means to calculate votes cast for the presidency across a diverse nation of coastal states vs. landlocked states, large population vs. small population, agrarian concerns vs. mercantile interests, and to ensure an election of our president that would balance out these various differences.
The Electoral College has propelled alternative victors to the presidency throughout history: Rutherford B. Hayes in 1877, Benjamin Harrison in 1888, George W. Bush in 2001, and Donald J. Trump in 2016. Congress decided twice in favor of Thomas Jefferson in 1801, and John Quincy Adams in 1825 for the presidency. The Senate has selected our vice president only once in 1837 choosing Richard Johnson. Without question, the founding fathers did not assent to a populate vote nor agree to a democracy to elect our president.
Today, electors participating in the Electoral College are bound by American tradition to cast their ballots to the candidate of the party that won the popular vote of the state they represent. This practice emerged after Massachusetts became the first in the nation to pass such a law in 1820. Only Maine and Nebraska award electoral votes by congressional district to the winning candidate.
The Dark Mirror of Political Dissuasion
The most outrageous comment made during the televised election return coverage was from a CNN talking head who was dismissed from the Obama administration for his radical views. He stated on a live telecast that Trump’s victory in the Electoral College reflected a ‘whitelash’ within the American populace. If a Caucasian commentator had said that Obama’s vote returns in November 2008 represented a ‘blacklash’, that man would have been Fired.
The perpetual playing of the race card to generate political dissonance and the double standard that exists in American political discourse to protect this inverted racism is utterly unacceptable; yet this disgusting behavior continues unabated. CNN should have fired him from his position, but that network is not interested in hiring respectable non-partisan correspondents.
The left ran a flawed candidate who bled votes that failed to materialize at the polls and now they refuse to accept her failure to win the Electoral College. Not My President is a cute catch-phrase as the left struggles to reorganize in the face of defeat. Posting civil unrest via social media, lobbying to upend the Electoral College outcome, and protesting on the streets of American cities reveals two things: the left begrudges the Electoral College and their behavior identifies them as deplorable losers.
Allegations persist that illegal aliens may have voted during the 2016 campaign. This is utterly unacceptable and undermines our Representative Republic. But those on the left have absolutely no problem with illegal voting practices. Early voting invites the opportunity of voter fraud when no individual identification is necessary to cast a ballot within the United States.
A Wide Divide: America’s 21st Century Electorate
To put it succinctly, a popular individual vote to elect the President is a democracy. An Electoral College vote to elect the President validates our Representative Republic. The founding fathers did Not want a democracy for several specific reasons. A democracy is a disorderly form of government wherein the populace can vote themselves the treasury, which is why our once great nation is faltering.
Uneducated and misinformed Americans are irate over a second Electoral College victory for a Republican candidate. Accepting defeat peacefully is an acknowledgment of being an adult citizen. Masking rioting as a viable avenue of political protest is not just uncivil behavior, but the act of outlaws who favor disruption and disturbance. It’s not whether you win or lose; it’s how you conduct yourself afterwards that reveals each person’s true character.
The left has become more radicalized since Bush’s Electoral College victory over Gore in 2000. The 2016 Electoral College victory for Trump over Clinton has prompted elements of the left to demand the dissolution of the Electoral College. They claim her popular vote total less than three million more votes is basis to complain Clinton was cheated out of the presidency. This is simply not true.
The USA comprises 3,797,000 square miles. Our nation has 3,141 individual counties. Trump won 3,084 counties. Clinton only won 57 counties. There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16. In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, Clinton received more than 2 million votes over Trump. Clinton won 4 of these counties while Trump won Richmond.
Therefore, these 4 counties delivered a winning popular vote to Clinton among the total of all ballots cast. As an example, those voting within a compact radius of 319 square miles inside these 5 counties should Not dictate their political will to that of the entire United States electorate.
- An American Inauguration: The Triumph of Donald Trump - January 19, 2021
- The Beatles debut in West Derby 1960 - December 17, 2020
- An Electoral College Education - December 15, 2020
New Right Network depends on your support. Donate now