FEC chair questions legitimacy of Trump's election, Electoral College

The Washington Examiner ^ | September 2, 2019 | Paul Bedard

[Jim Noble]

If that is true, then Trump was not politically qualified to be a Republican President

Well, as others have observed, he's not a Republican.

But more to the point, he's 70+ years old with no experience in politics. He's a few months older than I am, and I can tell you if you don't already know that it's hard to adopt a new paradigm at our age.

I'm sure he thought of what happened in 2016 as he would a hostile takeover in business. You gain a majority of shares, you dismiss the board, you become Chairman or CEO, and on Monday all the middle managers and VPs report to you for new orders.

Of course, as we know, that's not how it works.

[adorno]

The idea that rules, regulations and laws would stop the Democrat fraud machine at all is so ludicrous that it demanded that correction.

That's fine. But, tolerance for fraud would be gone. The people would insist on recounts till forever in close elections, and each vote would likely have to be counted by hand and lawlessness in elections would receive stiffer punishment. Every vote in a popular vote method of counting for elections, would be very deeply scrutinized, and that could take years to resolve any disputes and even entire elections. Like I said, democrats would rue the day they got their wish to remove the EC system/

[thoughtomator]

Your conclusion is bizarre, fantastic, and ahistorical. In reality it never plays out like that.

To whom would the people issue such a demand? To “elected” Democrats who owe their seats to fraud?

How did the demands to stop IRS abuse go? Lois Lerner is serving how many years in jail?

The only way to civilly enforce these demands is by throwing the bums out - which can’t be done with sham elections.

This scenario you are wishing for is the ideal scenario for Democrats... the Democrats know it, Republicans know it - you are the only one who does not seem to see this.

[windsorknot]

…when she explains the U.S. system to foreign observers,…

I would love to hear her “explanation”.

[Georgia Girl 2]

We dont give a chit whether foreign observers understand or not. The FEC chair is the confused party. She needs a refresher course on the reason for the electoral college.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

Only 15 states have passed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. There is no way that 38 states will vote themselves into being less relevant.

[adorno]

Your conclusion is bizarre, fantastic, and ahistorical. In reality it never plays out like that.

Your conclusions FAIL to take into account that we would be in an entire new world, and the way that things are now would not be the same in that new world.

Democrats and their abuses and their fraud, would not exist in the same environment, and they would have to deal with a people that would be a lot more aware and a lot less tolerant of the democrats current ways. New rules, new regulations, new laws, new and completely different methods of voting, and more people held accountable for the fraud and theft in elections. Sorry but I don't see the same things occurring in that popular vote election era.

Besides, both you and I are using our imaginations in our scenarios, since, democrats will not get their way and the EC will stay in place. Democrats talk about it because they want to create the illusion of unfairness, which they do on just about everything.

[M Kehoe]

Hi.

A FReeper, M Kehoe questions the sanity of Ellen Weintrau.

5.56mm

[loveliberty2]

"she said that when she explains the U.S. system to foreign observers, they appear confused...."

Well, of course. . . . When the genius Founders and Framers of America's Constitution introduced that document to their fellow citizens in the States, they didn't ask the "foreign observers"--the British--about whether they agreed. The fact of the matter is that America had just broken from the "foreign observers" in order to establish a new experiment in liberty for individuals, with limited government power and a "We-the-People" approach to self-government.

[boop]

"Hillary Clinton’s husband illegally sought and obtained campaign cash from Chinese Communists in the 1996 election cycle."

Hillary Clinton's husband also only got 43% of the vote in 1992, but won the Electoral College.

In other countries that may not be enough, he might have had to form a governing coalition, be subject to votes of confidence, recalls, etc.

It may "work" in other countries, but not the USA!

[thoughtomator]

By your own admission then, your proposal is a complete flight of fancy.

You should take note that every other political observer believes the opposite, and perhaps take the time to understand why they do.

[mlo]

"It's pathetic that, on a site like this one, it has taken 153 posts to state the glaringly obvious."

It's also pathetic that a lot of the posts have been attacking this woman, but if you read her actual words you'll find she didn't say what the headline said she did.

It's bad reporting that should be attacked. Like every other story, we need to read and be skeptical. If a story says someone said something don't just accept it. Find the quote.

[adorno]

You should take note that every other political observer believes the opposite, and perhaps take the time to understand why they do.

Political observers?

Most political observations, are not worth a second of anybody's time. Most, if they're the thinking types, would have to conclude that the EC system ain't going nowhere. My observations were just about the "if" cases, which is not the same as happening any time soon.

In any case, direct voter counts would necessitate a completely different set of scenarios, including voter IDs for all 'eligible' citizens, which democrats despise. There is not way that direct voter counts could ever happen without first instituting voter ID and some other verification method on top of that.

[thoughtomator]

> Most political observations, are not worth a second of anybody’s time.

... he says, then proceeding to make political observations.

I give up.

[adorno]

... he says, then proceeding to make political observations.

I give up.

Believe it or not, my political observations are not known to the broader world, and neither are yours. So, your point is moot.

Most observations made here on FR, are unheard in most of the U.S.

We (you and me) don't count as much as we might think or want, and in reality, neither do most observations by those in politics, pundits and politicians and government people included.

So, my point is still a correct one, since, most political observations aren't worth a second thought. Ask Beto how that feels.

[Hildy]

No. Like the thousands who voted for Trump.

[BobL]

“Wikipedia is notoriously not a reliable source...”

I have to admit that I was a bit suspicious when their article said that she was married to a guy, considering her attitude towards this country. But I guess I really can’t discredit the article over it, since it does happen once in a while, I think.

[ro_dreaming]

I believe it did. And she should be kicked out of ever being in the FEC is she doesn’t know the basics of how the system works.