BALTIMORE, Maryland, Saturday, December 17, 2016 - On a day when most Americans looked past this "last full shopping weekend before Christmas" to this coming Monday, December 19, 2016, because Monday, most Americans sincerely hope, will be the day that will finally bring an end to the disgraceful charade being carried out by those Ultra Leftists who are in charge of the Democratic Party these days. This charade, most citizens know, concerns the official outcome of the Presidential Election, held in these United States on Tuesday, November 8.
Since Election Day, Americans have been subjected to all manner of whining, moaning, distasteful carrying on, temper tantrums, thumb sucking, and other displays of blatantly immature and narcissistic behavior that one would expect from children enrolled in a nursery school or daycare, but not from adults, and certainly not from adults who have allegedly been engaged in running a great nation for the past eight years.
This embarrassing post-election snit-fest started almost before Hillary Clinton picked up a telephone and called Donald Trump in the wee small hours of November 9, 2016 to concede the election. Trump was and is the declared winner of more than enough of the 50 states, with more than enough electoral college votes, to win the Presidential Election. Hillary, briefly (very briefly) agreed with these facts, and thus made the call. During the brief telephone conversationin the pre-dawn of the 'day after' - described by both Hillary and the President-Elect as cordial - Mrs. Clinton congratulated Trump, and Trump, in turn, praised Mrs. Clinton as an able and tough opponent. Nothing about the conversation, which was in keeping with American Election traditions dating back to the founding of this country over 200 years ago, would have predicted the shenanigans that were about to begin.
Within a day or two of election day it was announced by a minor candidate who drew scant attention throughout the autumn campaign, that she was demanding a recount of the votes cast in three states won by Trump. This minor candidate, Jill Stein of the Green Party, finished a distant fourth in virtually every state in the union. This fact, combined with other tidbits that have emerged, leads many to believe that Stein is acting as a sort of surrogate for Hillary Clinton.
Only one of the three states actually undertook full recounts. In that state, Wisconsin, Donald Trump's lead actually expanded once the reount was concluded. In another state, Michigan, a recount started but was cut short by a judge's order. And since the order was final, Michigan's results, now certified by Michigan Authorities, places Donald Trump as the winner of all of that state's electoral votes. In the third state, Pennsylvania, Stein missed the deadline for requesting a recount. She filed suit in a Pennsylvania State Court, asking that the state be compelled to accept her late petition for a recount. The court denied her request. She then filed a suit in a federal court, but that suit, too, was summarily dismissed.
The entire fiasco had little chance of amounting to anything substantial even before it began. Stein would have had to have the final results in all three states be significantly changed for the election outcome to be changed. That was never going to happen since recounts rarely change results by the number of votes Stein needed. But what struck most people as both outrageous and suspicious is the fact that the candidate filing all of the recount petitions, Jill Stein, had absolutely no chance of changing the results to favor her candidacy. Even if Stein was "successful," the success would accrue to Hillary, not Jill Stein. In other words, she could not help herself. Or could she? She raised millions of dollars, most of it, many suspect, coming from infamous Ultra Left Billionaire George Soros. Soros, among others, was so upset by Hillary's loss that he was willing to spend millions of dollars to chase a very small and wispy rainbow.
Even as the sordid brouhaha over the recounts finally wound down, new controversies were contrived and began to play out. Some of these concerned outrageous and despicable charges against Donald Trump and some of his past business ventures and personal affiliations. They are not worth the time of day. Another "idea" - and that word is used here in the loosest possible sense - that has 'ginned' up controversy since the Presidential Election is the concept of impeaching Donald Trump. Right now, Trump cannot be impeached. Why? He hasn't been inaugurated yet. Right now, Donald Trump is just an American Citizen. In fact, he has been an American Citizen since his birth. I bet he has thought about the peaceful connotations of that status more than once in recent weeks. I know that I would have were I in his shoes.
But one somewhat new angle played by the Ultra Left has generated lots of attention from the mainstream; i.e., far left and fully corrupted media. This explosion of low brow goofiness centers on the efforts of Soros and others on the on Ultra Left to corrupt the Electoral College. On Monday, pre-pledged delegates from every state will convene in their respective state capitals and cast their Electoral College votes. While the Electoral College is something of a mystery to most Americans, it has been with us almost since the founding of the country over two centuries ago. Its existence is established in Article 2 of the United States Constitution, and modified by the 23rd Amendment to the Constitution. In short, each state, and the District of Columbia, are allotted electors in direct proportion to the number of Representatives and Senators each state has in Congress. Each State has two senators. The number of representatives each state has in Congress is proportional to its population. Thus, all states are equal in the Senate, but in the House, big states with high populations have lots of representatives. Small states, and even some bigger states that have low populations, have far fewer Electoral Votes. Delaware, for instance, only has one representative in Congress.
To determine how many electors (and, thus, votes) a state has in the Electoral College, find out how many representatives the state has in Congress, add to that number two additional electors, since each state has two senators. The number you arrive at is the number of electors, and votes, that the state will have in the Electoral College. Washington, D.C. is given three electors. Why three? Read the 23rd Amendment. Washington D.C. is assigned the number of electors that is equal to the number it would have were it a state. But - and for Washington, D.C. it is a huge "but" - the number of Electors given to Washington, D.C. cannot be more than the number of electors provided to the least populated state. Delaware is the least populated state and, as mentioned above, it has only one representative in the United States House of Representatives. It also has two senators. When you add its one representative and its two senators, the sum is 3. Delaware has three electors and three votes in the Elrctoral College. But it isn't the only state with just three electors and three votes. Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming also have this low number of electoral votes. The really big numbers of electoral votes are owned by just six states. For the purposes of this post in Credible and Incisive, "big numbers of electoral votes" is defined as 20 or more electoral votes. The Big Six are California with 55 Electoral Votes, Florida with 29 votes, Illinois with 20 votes, New York with 29 Electoral Votes, Pennsylvania with 20 votes, and Texas with 38 Electoral Votes. These numbers make it clear why Donald Trump has such a narrow and harrowing road to travel to winning the 2016 Presidential Election. Of the Big Six, three of them - California, New York and Illinois - are conceded to be Democratic or Blue States even before the first vote is cast. In other words, Democrats always win those states. Before the first vote is cast, Hillary Clinton has these three huge blocks of votes, 113 votes in all, without making any real effort to get them. When you add in the other "always blue" smaller states (Connecticut with 7 Electoral Votes, Delaware with 3 votes, Hawaii with 4 votes, Maryland with 10 votes, Massachusetts with 11 votes, New Jersey with 14 votes, Rhode Island with 4 votes, and Vermont with 3 votes), and you include Washington, D.C. and its 3 votes, Hillary has another 59 votes without any kind of effort. Add these two huge blocks together (113 plus 59) and you get 172 Electoral Votes. Hillary Clinton actually started Election Day with 172 of the 270 Electoral Votes she needed to win the 2016 Election. It puts all of this whining and carrying on in a new perspective. She had all of those locked in votes and she still lost.
On Monday, December 19 the electors will actually cast their votes. These votes will technically be counted by the United States Congress. Actually, the public will know the results on Monday. To be the winner, the candidate must accumulate 270 Electoral Votes. And you ask, why 270?
The answer to this perplexing question is actually very simple. Using the formula established by the Constitution, this year there are exactly 538 Electors. This total number of electors divided by 2 is 269. Thus, to get a majority of the electors' votes, a candidate needs 270 Electoral Votes.
Soros and Friends, or Hillary and Friends, or, really, all of the Ultra Leftists sitting atop the Democratic Party, along with their functionaries, have placed these electors in their actual cross-hairs. The electors have been bombarded with communications of all sorts. They have been threatened. They have been offered all manner of compensation. In other words, the Ultra Left is leaving no stone unturned to sway the electors away from Donald Trump and toward anybody but Trump, but really toward Hillary.
The actual law in many states binds electors to vote for the candidate which won the state that they represent. In states where the electors are legally bound, the penalty is usually a token fine, and Soros and friends have been up front in offering the electors in question the amount of their fines if they will switch away from Trump.
Even in states which do not legally bind their electors, they are bound by the tradition of how American Elections are conducted and decided. It is an American Tradition that has behind it over 200 years of doing things the way they are always done. It just happens to be the right way. All of the candidates knew the rules of the Election well before the campaign started. They knew they needed 270 Electoral Votes to win the election. They knew how many Electoral Votes each state had. Each candidate strategized with their staffs on the most effective way to accumulate the necessary electoral votes. In the autumn, none of the candidates spent real time in the states they had no chance of winning. That's why Hillary and Trump didn't campaign in New York or Delaware or Maryland. Those states would vote Democratic even if the moon disappeared. Similarly, the candidates didn't campaign in Alabama or North Dakota, because they were going to vote Republican no matter what happened.
The point is, everybody knew the rules and conducted their campaigns accordingly. If the winner of the election was the candidate who won the popular vote, the candidates would have campaigned in a different way. In fact, if the election was going to be decided by popular vote nationwide, there is no way of knowing if the parties would have nominated the same candidates.
The Ultra Left managed to dig up one clown who is a Texas elector who is supposed to vote for Trump, who won Texas. But this elector says he just cannot vote for Trump. This "patriot's" name is Christopher Suprun. He tells us he is a fireman who, on the first and real 9/11, was one of the first responders to the fire at the Pentagon, where a jumbo jet crashed after being hijacked by Islamic Extremists. In interviews, he said he was with a paid, full-time fire company in Manassas, Virginia and responded to the Pentagon as part of his duties with that fire company. Turns out he wasn't hired by that company until a month after the 9/11 attacks. Confronted with that fact, Suprun said he was actually a volunteer fire fighter with a different Virginia fire company. But other parts of his claimed accomplishments haven't panned out either. But he's gotten lots of publicity with his claims. And, the New York Times asked him to write an op-ed piece, which ran last week. The Times did not vet his claims, which, you know, is just shocking.
In past years, one or two electors have changed their votes away from the majority voted for by the voters in their states. The change has never come close to changing the result of an election. But big Ultra Left money is at work and it is desperate to hold onto power, knowing it may never get it back. Soros is not young by any stretch and he isn't ready to ride off into the sunset.
I'm literally holding my breath. It isn't that I adore Trump. But he won the election under the rules in effect at the time. Much attention has been paid to the fact that Hillary won the popular vote. But think about it. Trump, who is a native New Yorker, didn't campaign in New York after the primaries ended. He followed the rules and campaigned where there were electoral votes he believed he could win. He spent tons of time, a majority of his time, in states where he believed he could win. You know what? Hillary did the exact same thing. The exact same thing. Hillary didn't campaign in states where she knew she had no chance or couldn't change the outcome. She campaigned in almost every state that Trump campaigned in. I'm sure you've heard about these states. Everybody calls them "battleground" states because the outcome of the vote in these states was close enough that it was hard to predict who would win. The outcome was in doubt. The battleground states were Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Colorado, part of Maine (which is one of the few states that divides its electoral votes into districts. it sounds complicated, and in a way, it is, but I'm not going to explain it here because it doesn't matter to this post.), Pennsylvania and Utah. Other states were believed to "be in play" at different times during the campaign. Usually, that belief was fleeting and soon enough the candidates would stop going there because new polling showed it was leaning heavily one way or the other.
But one state that was very blue and with a long history of being blue that came "into play," and then stayed in play, was Michigan. Donald Trump took the few states that were believed to be his and added them to the total votes in the battleground states and realized that he would still be short of the number of votes necessary to win. He and his advisers knew that they had to turn at least one big blue state in order to win the election. Polls indicated to the Trump campaign that Michigan was closer then the national polls were saying. Trump hit the state hard, especially in the campaign's closing days. In fact, Trump's very last campaign stop, in the early hours of Election Day morning, was in Michigan. Trump won Michigan. Jill Stein demanded a recount but the state stayed with Trump.
Then, in the last days before the Electoral College meets the Ultra Left has dredged up another humdinger. The Ultra Left, led by the number one Ultra Leftist, President Obama, now says that the Russians hacked the election. Actually, they are not saying that the Russians hacked the vote. They concede that the vote was very clean. Even Obama's top functionary, USA Attorney General Loretta Lynch, says her people kept a close eye on the various states and there were no irregularities. Wow!
But Obama now says that the Russians did hack the Democratic National Committee, the one that was run throughout the campaign by Hillary's personal functionary, Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz. The same Blabbermouth who was drummed out of her job after it was revealed that she was working directly with Hillary against Bernie Sanders during the primary campaign. Anyway, Obama says this hacking led at least to the Wikileaks revelations of the DNC emails. Julian Assange, the leader of Wikileaks, says he did not get the emails from the Russians. The FBI says the Russians did not hack the Democrats. People with common sense know that if the Russians favored any candidate it would be Hillary, since she would be as likely to use the American military against the Russians or other USA enemies as was Obama, which means that she wouldn't even think of it. The candidate who would at least keep all his cards on the table, and has vowed to rebuild the military after eight years of neglect under Obama, is Donald Trump.
But Obama says he is angry about what the Russians did and he told Putin so. Suddenly acting tough, Obama says the USA will take revenge for the interference. Wow, after eight years he gets tough. After the Russians annexed the Crimea and marched into Eastern Ukraine and established their military in a big way in the Middle East after having no presence at all for decades, Obama is now Mr. Toughguy.
For his part, Trump says he isn't buying any of it. A Congressional Committee summonsed a CIA official to come before it on Monday. The CIA blew the committee off. The Obama director of intelligence, James Clapper, says the Russians didn't interfere. At least that is what he said before Obama said they did. Anything for Hillary. Anything to keep power with the left.
No comments:
Post a Comment