Posted on 12/29/2016 8:52:27 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
Democrats still mourning the outcome of last month's election have added a new step to their grieving process: leveling charges of racism against those who support the constitutional method of electing the president.
In keeping with the process stipulated in the 12th Amendment, 538 electors representing all 50 states gathered on Monday to cast their ballots for the 45th president. The result – that Donald Trump will officially enter the Oval Office on Jan. 20 – was affirmed by the Electoral College, an institution the Left is now casting as racist and anti-Democratic.
Mere hours after Trump topped the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency, liberal filmmaker Michael Moore tweeted: "Hello rest of the world! My fellow Americans are asleep right now so I thought we could talk and maybe explain what happened yesterday."
Then came his explanation.
"This racist idea, the Electoral College, 225 years later ended up benefitting the candidate who spewed racism hate," he opined.
The New York Times, in an editorial on Tuesday, described the centuries-old institution as "a living symbol of America's original sin," arguing that it was created at a time when "slavery was the law of the land" and a national popular vote would have "disadvantaged" Southern slave states, where blacks could not vote but were counted as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of a population count.
"The whole point of the Electoral College was an effort by the founders to balance large states versus small states because of the fact that we are a federal republic," Hans von Spakovsky, a conservative scholar of election law at the Heritage Foundation, told the Washington Examiner. "They were afraid that if the president were elected simply by the national popular vote, then candidates would simply go to the big urban areas...
(Excerpt) Read more at thecoachsteam.com ...
Racist??
Both candidates were white.
I guess when you have the IQ of a cucumber, apologies to cucumbers, then “racist” is the first thing to come to mind to cover all situations.
I really like the graphic, Fiddlstix.
To: Oldpuppymax
a national popular vote would have “disadvantaged” Southern slave states, where blacks could not vote but were counted as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of a population count.
First off, no it would have advantaged them. And second blacks could indeed vote. SLAVES of whatever color could not vote.
So having established that you do not know anything about the subject I thing I will not bother to read anything else of M&M’s ignorant screed.
Three-fifths was to their advantage in that it limited their slave masters representation in congress. That never gets brought up....
Something like California and New York today. They have large populations but since a large number of them are not citizens and not allowed to vote they should not be counted in the census.
Hmmm... perhaps we should bring this idea back.
So what. Women and children in non-slave states couldn’t vote either, but they counted as a whole person for purposes of representation in Congress. Unfair! Unfair!
the people that make this country HAPPEN are sick and tired of the word “racism”.
Yeah, let’s have left-wing moonbats and illegal aliens in The People’s Republic of Cali-friggin’-fornia and New Yawk choose our presidents.
That’s the ticket.....to destruction.
My the Fabian society is getting more testy.
That’s why the elected a black man to two terms in 2008 and 2012. Gotta come up with something better than that.
Hell, most of these Democrat dummies think the whole constitution is racist!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.