Tag: Popular Vote

MLLG

Democracy Sucks

George Noga

Democracy Sucks

Defending the Electoral College

George Noga
June 16, 2024

Since this is a presidential election year, it’s time to revisit questions that arise every four years about the Electoral College, popular vote and democracy. To begin, answer the following question and then ask it of family and friends. It is simple, yet 90% get it wrong. Question: What is the form of government of the United States (a) constitutional republic; (b) representative democracy; (c) democratic republic; (d) direct democracy; (e) constitutional democracy; or (f) democracy? The answer is later in this post.

red and blue building illustration

Electoral College Gets No Respect

The word democracy is not mentioned in either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. That is because America is a republic with a republican form of government – not a democracy. A republic is a representative form of government pursuant to a charter or constitution and often consisting of subordinate political entities. Remember: we pledge allegiance to the flag and to the republic for which it stands; we sing the Battle Hymn of the Republic. Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution guarantees to every state a republican form of government.

The Electoral College is consistent with, and a democracy is inconsistent with, a republican form of government. A popular vote would destroy the carefully crafted constitutional architecture based on federalism, separation of powers and checks and balances. A popular vote for president severs it from the rest of the constitutional forms, creates a myriad of new troubles and unleashes tyranny of the majority.

Critics assert that a national popular vote would have changed the outcome of some elections. The truth is there never has been a true popular vote, only a meaningless total of votes cast within the electoral college system. No Democrat squanders precious time and resources in deep red states and no Republican in deep blue states. Further, Democrats in deep red states and Republicans in deep blue states are not motivated to vote knowing their votes are meaningless. Consequently, the popular vote total within the present system has no validity whatsoever.

Moreover, it is unlikely the popular vote would have changed recent elections when requiring 50% to win as there would have been runoff elections with third party candidates eliminated. Hillary Clinton still would have lost the popular vote in 2016; in a runoff, the Green Party vote would have gone to Clinton but the much larger Libertarian Party vote would have gone to Trump. Since 1824, when popular votes first were recorded, 20 presidents failed to receive over 50%.

The electoral college system limits fraud to smaller jurisdictions, reduces federal power over elections and fosters the building of broad coalitions, while discouraging regionalism. Importantly, it safeguards us against tyranny of the majority.

Very few countries use popular vote; most advanced democratic nations use indirect systems. Recently in Canada, Trudeau won with 33% of the vote; Canada’s senate is based on regions, not population. Parliamentary systems, ubiquitous in Europe, routinely elect minority leaders. The senate in Australia has 12 members for each state – South Australia (1.7 million people) has the same number as New South Wales (7.3 million people). In Switzerland, each canton regardless of size has two members.

The US is a constitutional republic to answer the question posed earlier in this post.

National Popular Vote – One Person One Vote

We must go back to first principles. What is the purpose of government? Is it to instantly actualize the will of a bare majority at every moment? Or instead, is the measure of good government whether it is effective at creating long-term justice, stability, freedom and security – like in the US since 1787? If instant actualization is what you want, then the popular vote is for you – but beware the consequences.

Progressives consternate over inequalities inherent in a republic such as in the senate where Wyoming has the same number of senators as California. They consternate about the Electoral College and the filibuster. Under our republican government, senators and the Electoral College represent states – not people.

There is a Soros-funded organization, National Popular Vote or NPV, that aims to replace the Electoral College by a pact among states to pledge their electors to whoever wins the NPV. Thus far 16 blue states with 195 electoral votes have passed enabling legislation. It takes effect when states with 270 electoral votes ratify. Even if NPV reaches its goal, it is unconstitutional. Article I, Section 10 prohibits any compact between or among states without the consent of Congress.

Democracy and Tyranny of the Majority

America’s founders, extraordinarily well versed in history, had contempt for democracy, which they regarded as tyranny. Thomas Paine said, “Democracy is the vilest form of government.” Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on dinner.

While doing my research, I was unable to find one democracy past or present where the majority did not tyrannize minorities. Majoritarian tyranny is occurring throughout the world today including in Iraq, Syria, Turkey, China, Russia, Mexico, Myanmar, Sudan, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Bolivia, Kyrgyzstan, Indonesia, Botswana, Congo, Central African Republic and much of Latin America and the Arab world. During just the past century, over 100 million Europeans were slaughtered in genocides, pogroms, holocausts and ethnic cleansings. Every one involved tyranny of the majority.

America’s founding fathers, well aware of the excesses of democracy, filled the Constitution with firewalls to protect against the depredations of the mob. Human nature has not changed since 1787 and tyranny of the majority remains an unfortunate part of the human condition.

Returning, as always, to first principles and the purpose of government, do we really want instant actualization by a bare majority? The US Constitution has served us well for 237 years including the Electoral College, Senate and filibuster. Those who argue for democracy are woefully ignorant of history and human nature.

© 2024 George Noga
More Liberty – Less Government, Post Office Box 916381
Longwood, FL 32791-6381, Email: mllg@cfl.rr.com

Amazon – Baltimore – Caracas – AOC – More

George Noga

Last year’s Caracas blackout provided a real life glimpse of an EMP attack.

 

Amazon – Baltimore – Caracas – AOC – More

By: George Noga – March 22, 2020

       It has been over a year since we did a microtopics posting wherein we combine several topics that are blogworthy, but too short for an entire posting.

Amazon pays no income tax: I have heard this trope so often it has become a cliche. Progressive savants castigate Amazon for not paying income tax. Consider this syllogism: An income tax taxes income; Amazon has no (cumulative) income; therefore, Amazon pays no income tax. Amazon had such humongous losses in prior years that it still has federal carryforwards of $625 million of operating losses, $1.7 billion of tax credits and $260 million of capital losses. However, Amazon pays billions each year in payroll, state, local and foreign taxes. Progressives know all this, but choose to demagogue and to pander to Americans’ ignorance and fears.

My night in Baltimore: The murder rate in Baltimore is double Mexico’s and closing in on that of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. I once had a business meeting in downtown Baltimore that ran late and I found myself unexpectedly on the streets at night. I have been to third world countries but never experienced anything scarier than that night in Baltimore. I would have preferred Mogadishu. Most murders aren’t even prosecuted; only 15% result in prison and many convicted killers receive probation.

Milton Friedman: “The state exists to protect us from coercion by other individuals and groups and to widen the range within which we can exercise our freedom. It is purely instrumental and has no significance in and of itself. Society is a collection of individuals and the whole is no greater than the sum of its parts. The ultimate values are the values of individuals who form the society; there are no other values or ends.”

 

Venezuela and EMP attack: I blogged about an EMP (electromagnetic pulse) attack on the USA on 7/23/17; it is on our website: www.mllg.us. Thanks to Chavez, Maduro and socialism, we got a foretaste of an EMP attack. Last year’s power outage in Caracas produced chaos and despair. Hospitals could not function and dialysis patients died. Gas and water could not be pumped and food ran out prompting, widespread looting. And this tragedy was from just a five-day blackout and with aid available in nearby areas. If the power outage had lasted for months and been more widespread, like in a real EMP attack, the ultimate death toll could have approached 90%.

Robespierre, Madame Defarge and AOC: I have compared a popular vote election to the French Revolution because it instantly actualizes the will of the majority. There are no guardrails, restraints or checks and balances. It is only a slight leap to compare wannabe Jacobin AOC to Robespierre and Madame Defarge. It is easy to envision AOC presiding over the Committee of Public Safety to enforce progressive dogma and political correctness. Her enemies would be lucky to escape with their heads.

National Popular Vote (“NPV”): Our post of 2/2/20 (on our website) mentioned the NPV movement, whereby states pledge to cast their electoral votes for whoever wins the national popular vote. I neglected to point out that the NPV movement faces another big hurdle in the Constitution; Article I, Section 10 states in part: “No state shall, without the consent on Congress, enter into any agreement or compact with another state”. It’s amazing what you can learn by reading the Constitution!

Next, we begin our month-long observance of the 50th Anniversary of Earth Day.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

There is No Such Thing as the Popular Vote

George Noga

The United States is not a democracy and there is no such thing as the popular vote.

There is No Such Thing as the Popular Vote
By: George Noga – February 2, 2020

 

The Electoral College (“EC”) gets no respect! Hillary’s 2016 loss whipped progressives into a frenzy, prompting much talk about abolishing the EC; there also has been action. A leftist, Soros-funded organization, National Popular Vote (“NPV”), aims to overthrow the EC. Thus far 16 (blue) states with 195 electoral votes have passed legislation to cast their votes for whoever wins the national popular vote. The NPV compact takes effect if and when states with 270 electoral votes ratify the pact.

       It is past due for MLLG to provide a full-throated defense of the EC. Following are compelling reasons why the Electoral College is preferable to a popular vote.

The United States of America is Not a Democracy

       The US is a constitutional republic; the word democracy is nowhere to be found (not even once) in either the Declaration or the Constitution. The EC is consistent with, and a popular vote is inconsistent with, a republican form of government. A national popular vote would destroy the carefully crafted constitutional architecture which is based on federalism, separation of powers and checks and balances. A direct popular vote would sever the election of the president from the rest of the constitutional forms and would create a myriad of new troubles including tyranny of the majority.

There is No Such Thing as a National Popular Vote

      There are many things crucial to winning a presidential election: fund-raising, advertising, grass-roots organization and personal campaign appearances. Republican candidates would not waste precious and limited resources on New York or California. No democratic candidate would squander such resources on Texas or Wyoming.  Moreover, if you were a democrat voter in Utah or a republican voter in Illinois, just how motivated would you be to vote, knowing your vote for president is meaningless?

       The simple truth is that there never has been and there is not now a true popular vote in America. There is only a meaningless total of votes cast within the electoral college system. No one knows who would have won a popular vote since none existed. Therefore Hillary did not win the popular vote and, as shown infra, could have lost.

Hillary Probably Loses a True Popular Vote Election

       Since 1824, when popular votes first were recorded, 19 presidents, or 40% out of the 48 elections since then, failed to receive over 50% of the vote. In a true popular vote election there would be a runoff if no candidate received 50%. In 2016 Hillary got 65,853,516 votes to Trump’s 62,984,825. In a runoff Hillary probably gets Jill Stein’s 1,457,216 Green Party votes and Trump gets Gary Johnson’s 4,489,221 Libertarian Party votes. Trump then wins with 67,474,046 votes to Hillary’s 67,310,732.

      Not only would Hillary likely have lost the 2016 popular vote election, Bill also would have lost in 1992. Bill got 44,909,806 votes, Bush 39,104,550 and Perot 19,743,821. If Bush picks up 65% of the Perot vote, he wins and Bill loses and most observers believed Bush would have gotten a strong majority of the Perot vote.

Other Nations Don’t Conduct Popular Vote Elections

       Few countries use popular vote; most advanced democracies use indirect systems. In the recent Canadian election, Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party won with 33.0% of the vote to the Conservative Party’s 34.4%. Parliamentary systems, ubiquitous throughout Europe, routinely elect minority leaders. In virtually no democratic system is the popular vote decisive. The measure of our system is how effective it is at bringing about just, free and stable government. A popular vote, like in the French Revolution, does a good job of actualizing the will of the people. How did that work out?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

        Our Constitution is the best and most enduring document ever created to define the relationship of man to the state. The Electoral College contains fraud within small jurisdictions, reduces federal power over elections and fosters the building of broad coalitions while discouraging regionalism. It has served us well for over 232 years. It is a foundational safeguard against the tyranny of the majority. We need to preserve it and importantly, we must help our fellow Americans understand why it is worth keeping and not to be discarded whenever there is a tough electoral loss.

Next on February 9th, we shine our light on the 2020 presidential election.
More Liberty Less Government  –  mllg@mllg.us  –  www.mllg.us

Hillary Loses 2016 Popular Vote Election

George Noga
AOC’s mother fled New York for Florida to escape sky-high taxation.
Hillary Loses 2016 Popular Vote Election
By: George Noga – April 14, 2019

       We are reminded ad nauseum by HRC and her media acolytes that she won the 2016 popular vote. The subtext is that Trump stole the election and it delegitimizes him, the electoral college and our republic. I heard this fusty canard once too often and sliced and diced the numbers – and came to a startling conclusion: Trump wins and Hillary Clinton loses a 2016 popular vote election. Here are the numbers.

       There were 136,669,276 total votes cast, of which HRC received 65,853,516 (48.18%) and Trump 62,984,825 (46.09%). In a true popular vote election however, there would have been a runoff because no candidate got an outright majority. In a runoff, HRC putatively gains Jill Stein’s (Green Party) 1,457,216 votes and Trump picks up Gary Johnson’s (Libertarian Party) 4,489,221 votes. The totals then would be Trump 67,474,046 and Clinton 67,310,732. I did not count the votes of the 26 other candidates, which were inconsequential and would have been split nearly equally.

          In the scenario above, Trump wins the popular vote by 163,314. Of course, in a popular vote election Trump and Hillary both would have campaigned differently with the outcome likely close. However, when you hear some latte left liberal regurgitate the HRC popular vote fairy tale, you now have the ammo to set them straight.

        Moreover, by one reckoning, Trump is the most legitimate president of our time. In office, he has done exactly what as a candidate he said he would do. He is totally transparent (maybe even too transparent) about telling Americans what he is thinking at any given time. The voters got precisely what they voted for, unlike say Barack Hussein Obama, who ran as a centrist but governed from day one as a progressive.

Blanca Ocasio-Cortez (BOC) Flees New York for Florida

         Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s mother (BOC) lived in New York most of her life; she worked two jobs as secretary and cleaning lady. Despite her hard work, BOC could not afford to live in New York. In an interview following her recent move to Eustis, Florida, she said, “I figured it was time to move to Florida.” She called her move a “no-brainer” and went on to say, “I was paying $10,000 per year in real estate taxes in New York but now I am paying $600 in Florida. It’s stress-free down here.”

        While AOC was running for Congress, BOC said, “She is fighting for the working class; she is fighting for immigrants.” AOC’s first act was to help kill 25,000 well paying Amazon jobs that would have been a godsend for workers. Based on her tax and spending positions, AOC will turn New York into even more of a hell hole for working class families. By her own account, BOC is working class and is overjoyed to bolt New York; her actions speak volumes as do the actions of millions of other New Yorkers who, like BOC, have escaped New York to stress-free states.

Progressive Paroxysms 

    Progressives have been having paroxysms over politically incorrect statues, monuments and murals. It is difficult not to conflate their actions with the Taliban’s barbaric erasure of history. It brings to mind a passage from Orwell’s 1984: “Every book has been rewritten, every picture repainted, every statue, street and building renamed and every date altered.” . . . . . . Once upon a time, Leftists used to say, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Now they say, “I disapprove of what you say and I will stop you from saying it.“

Next, on April 21st, is our special Earth Day 2019 posting; don’t miss it!