Tantrums From Clinton Supporters (Updated)

[UPDATE: Donald Trump won in Michigan, too. Thus, my post has been edited to reflect this additional information. Hat tip to Scalia.]

Donald Trump was elected the next POTUS by 30 out of 50 states – a 60% majority.

Trump was elected by the system established by the U.S. Constitution, and the system worked like it is supposed to.

After all, the President of the United States is just that – President of the United States.

Thus, the President is elected by the States.

The Electoral College was created in such a way so as to prevent a minority of states from running roughshod over the majority of states.

The 11/08/16 decision by the majority of states isn’t being accepted by certain people who are now throwing temper tantrums.

To her credit, Hillary Clinton is asking her supporters to be gracious toward Donald Trump.

Hillary Clinton: “We must accept this result, and then look to the future. Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead.”

Democrat political analyst Juan Williams is also setting a positive example.

Juan Williams: “I am a Christian, a dad and grand-dad and a proud American first and foremost. I am an American before I am a Democrat, and before I am an author and a political analyst. I will pray for President-Elect Trump and root for his success on behalf of the American people even as – at least for today – I shake my head over the fact that Trump lost the popular vote but won the presidency because he won the Electoral College.”

Those who wanted Hillary Clinton to win aren’t helping anyone by acting like Chicken Little.

It is one thing to be disappointed about the result of a presidential election.
It is another thing to be such a snowflake that one needs a whaaambulance.

Whaaambulance

Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™
Pollsters Ignored Their “Check Assumptions” Lights
  • pennywit

    If college students and others want to protest peacefully, it doesn’t particularly matter to me, honestly. Their right and all that …

    • Walter_Cronanty

      First of all, their protests are not “peaceful.”
      Second, while it’s their “right,” of what use is it? Does their narcissism so blind them that they believe their public tantrums will change the results of the election?

      • pennywit

        First, my “peacefully” adverb was to make it clear my indifference was conditional.

        Second, it doesn’t matter to me if it’s useful or not. They’re exercising their rights.

        • Jwb10001

          Yes we all have the right to act stupidly, most of us take an opportunity or 2 do just that. Hopefully not in such a public way as these folks.

        • Retired military

          They have a right to destroy property and beat people up?

          • Walter_Cronanty

            Of course – they’re “Progressives.”

    • Retired military

      To bad they are out destroying property and causing havoc. Strange that. It seemed that the OWS and BLM crowds did the same. What do these 3 have in common? Hmmm Oh yeah. THey are liberal.

      • pennywit

        Hey, I did my part to stop OWS. I taught basic capitalism to a kid at my local OWS protest using the old “fish for a day” parable with a twist.

        • Jwb10001

          I’ve seen teachers use the we’re all getting c’s approach as well that always seems effective. The one I’ve used successfully is with wait staff when they complain about tip sharing.

          • pennywit

            Hm. What’s the tip sharing example? I’ve heard of some restaurants where the owners will take a portion of the tips for the business… something which (IIRC) is illegal.

            With the OWS kid, I suggested that rather than give the man a fish, or teach the man to fish, he should see if the man has his own talent (perhaps cobbling), and then exchange fish for shoes or shoe-repair service.

            He thought that was “kind of cool.”

            Unfortunately, I later lost hope for him. We talked about science-fiction stories that use aliens as a metaphor for real-life immigration issues. Then he asked me when I thought the government would reveal the extraterrestrials.

            *Sigh*

          • Jwb10001

            I’ve had wait staff complain that they share tips equally with lazy waiters and busboys, that’s when I like to point out that they are just experiencing socialism on a small scale.

        • Retired military

          I never said that you had anything to do with stopping or being a part of the OWS crowd. Simply pointing out that the one thing OWS, these protestors and the BLM crowd have in common is that they are liberals.

      • Scalia

        I wonder where Buster went. One would think he’d at least offer a comment. Maybe he’s protesting…

        • I suspect he’s wet to the knees as he gazes upon the Pyramids of Giza.

        • Retired military

          He is too busy trying to pull his foot out of his mouth after scoffing at my prediction before the election.

    • LiberalNightmare

      OK, peaceful protest is a right, but what are they protesting?

      People voted for a new president, legally and peacefully, and now people are protesting that other people exercised their right to vote.

      This is a ridiculous response, and it shouldn’t be tolerated.

      • Retired military

        You have to remember that these are special snowflakes with their trigger words and safe spaces. This is the first time that the outside world has dared to slap them in the face and say “You dont get want you want and we dont care about your opinion” and they are shocked by it.
        The question is what is going to happen to the left 3 or 4 years from now when these same special snowflakes look after the last 4 years and realize (hopefully) that hey things arent nearly as doomed as they thought, the world didnt end, the rivers arent turning black, the air isnt full of smog, they can still get their abortions, etc etc etc. Then they just may come to the realization that it was all nothing but hype that they fell for.

        • pennywit

          Y’know, there’s nothing wrong with going off with you like-minded folks to blow off steam if you lose the election. I once talked to a reporter who was covering his local Republican Party HQ on election night 1992. He said the whole room was sad, a few people were crying, and a lot of them were hitting the booze early.

          And there’s nothing wrong with a little bit of escapism. Some people like sports. I sometimes like a video game where I can kill dragons and orcs with a sword for a while when the world is too much.

          And there’s nothing wrong with universities or employers answering questions from international students or immigrant workers who are suddenly concerned about their legal status, or offering counseling to somebody who’s, y’know, dealt with an actual incident of assault or something.

          But the ritualized thing with “safe spaces” thing is infantilizing and offputting, aint’ it?

      • pennywit

        “Shouldn’t be tolerated” in what sense?

  • Retired military

    Tinfoil hat alert

    Just remember Trump isnt President elect until the electoral college says so.

  • PBunyan

    Anyone who thinks these “protests” are spontaneous is not paying attention. They are organized and funded by the same uber-wealthy globalist oligarchs (like Soros) who are behind the Occupy movement and BLM. They are a shot across the bow to Trump, basically saying let our puppets (Clinton and Obama) take their money and get out of dodge without any investigations or prosecutions or we will burn the place down.

    Had any of the other Republican candidates won, this would not be happening, but Trump, as the only outsider (well maybe Sanders was, too) in the group is a serious threat to the oligarchy as his is not one of them, he is not indebted to them, and they have nothing to hold over him to control him.

  • Scalia

    Check your map. Both Detroit newspapers called Michigan for Trump.

    • Thanks, Scalia. I was looking for the Michigan results, but I didn’t find them. I’ll post an update.

      • Scalia
          • Paul Hooson

            The problem for both candidates is that many voters didn’t vote compared to 2008 or 2012, while Trump did win a majority in the electoral college, it appears that he received less votes than either John McCain or Mitt Romney. But, for Clinton, although receiving nearly 300,000 more votes than Trump so far counted, it is still nearly 10 million less votes than Obama received in 2008. With many voters so disliking both candidates, the pool of voting voters was much smaller than the larger 2016 pool of registered voters. The American population or the population of registered voters didn’t decline, but the number of people who actually voted did. Clinton failed to be positive and actually paint a vision for the country in all but her election eve ads. These negative ads, Trump’s attacks, and FBI Direct Comey’s controversial comments and acts just before the election all only serving to deter voters, convincing millions not to vote.

          • Retired military

            Clinton received 6 million fewer votes less than Obama in 2012. Yet you have yet to hear any leftist talking head say that on TV or in their newspaper opeds.

          • Paul Hooson

            I’m not sure what the final vote numbers will be, but my best guess is Trump will garner a few more votes than McCain, but millions less than Romney. But, Clinton is nearly 10 million votes behind the 2012 Obama numbers so far. Nonvoters decided this election, and it cost Clinton more than Trump.

          • jim_m

            No. Non voters do not decide anything.

            Since they did not vote we can only speculate as to how they might have cast their ballots. Statistically speaking, they probably would be close to the ratio of ballots that were actually cast. Therefore the speculation that they would have changed the outcome is not only pointless, but more likely than not completely bogus.

    • PBunyan

      Interesting note about that. Bill the rapist was the first democrat to flip our state after it had been Republican for 5 elections (and most of the elections from Lincoln to Bush Sr.) it took the rapist’s wife to flip us back. Thank God. I hope we stay red.

      A lot of people think we should do away with the electoral college. I think we need to expand it to the state level, county by county. We’d never have a far leftist President again.

  • Paul Hooson

    No, I think it’s very wrong to assume that these are the mainstream voters that supported Hillary Clinton. Much of these are far leftists who would also demonstrate against Clinton if she was the elected president. Probably many of these people in these demonstrations didn’t even vote in the general election or supported Jill Stein or other neoCommunist parties. Portland Police easily identified some of these people as members of the leftist “Occupy” movement and as anarchists.

    But. mainstream Democrats have a legitimate complaint that this is fifth election in American history in which a Democratic candidate, including President Grover Cleveland, won the popular vote, but lost the election in the electoral college because it biases towards electing Republicans. It takes far less voters in many small Republican-leaning states such as Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, etc. to elect one elector than it does to elect one elector in many larger Democratic-leaning states such as New York or California. In 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000 and now 2016, Democrats won the popular vote, but were denied the presidency by the electoral college. And. when Republicans have won these controversial victories, which some believe violates the “one man, one vote” standard, the Republican presidencies have not been easy for a number of reasons because the country was left divided. Grover Cleveland came back from his re-election loss in 1888, to reclaim his presidency in 1892. John Kerry could won 2004 election if he would have won Ohio.

    • Retired military

      Paul.

      You are really really out there in left field. THese thugs are acting the same way the OWS and BLM crowd acted. I agree they are hardcore leftists but I most assuredly dont think they would be out protesting if Hillary had been elected. Nor would you hear anything from the lefties about the electoral college if Hillary had won the electoral college and lost the popular vote. They were screaming about the rust belt firewall in the electoral college all day long poll after poll for weeks. Yet now they dont want to hear about the electoral college. Hell Hillary was practically coronated with her supposed electoral college advantage in the leftist media and we were told that we shouldnt even bother going out to vote because Hillary was going to win the electoral college in a landslide.
      Really Paul, Your arguments supporting Hillary and these criminals are a joke.

    • Paul Hooson: “Mainstream Democrats have a legitimate complaint that this is fifth election in American history in which a Democratic candidate, including President Grover Cleveland, won the popular vote, but lost the election in the electoral college because it biases towards electing Republicans.”

      The Electoral College was created more than 60 years before the Republican Party came into existence. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution causes the Electoral College to be allegedly “biased towards electing Republicans”.

      The Democratic Party doesn’t have a legitimate complaint because the POTUS is the President of the states. That is why the POTUS is elected by the states.

      Also, the U.S. Constitution doesn’t even require state-wide votes for POTUS. The U.S. Constitution says that the legislature of each state determines how the electors of that state are chosen. The legislature of a state can decide on its own who the electors of that state will be.

      • Scalia

        You stole my thunder.

      • Retired military

        “but lost the election in the electoral college because it biases towards electing Republicans.”

        See my post above about the dems talking for months about Hillary’s electoral college advantage over Trump. Now that it turned out to be not true the dems want to cry about it. They knew the rules going in and now they want to change them. “Stop whining” – Barrack Obama.

        Also why dont all the liberal states (if they are so concerned about one man one vote) make their electoral votes proportional to the winners. Seems like then the republicans in states like New York and California could get some representation. Oh wait they wont do that (even t hough at least one state does so this) because they dont want to break up their lock on the electoral college votes for those states.

      • Paul Hooson

        The modern version of the electoral college gives an unfair disproportionate weight or bias towards conservative leaning or Republican states. Even the delegate selection numbers by both political parties more fairly represent the actual numbers of voters. The problem appears to be when states, especially the smallest states have two senators added to their respective number of representatives, which is based on population. Electoral reform where only the number of representatives in Congress should determine the number of electors would be a realistic solution.

        It’s certainly true that nothing even guarantees the rights of voters to even determine the president. In a number of older South Carolina presidential elections, voters were not allowed to vote for the president, and some state politicians made their own decisions who to cast their electoral votes for.

        But, my big concern is the breakdown of American democracy here. Millions were disgusted at the candidates and did not vote, dooming Hillary Clinton, but allowing Trump to apparently win the election with less votes than John McCain and 300,000 less votes than Clinton due to the fluke nature of the electoral college. And because he represents some serious racist instincts, now mob street violence threatens to tear our country apart, especially if respectable persons would start to endorse this mob rule, rather than denounce it. Tonight Trump writes an unhelpful Twitter message claiming the media supports these mobs, which will only anger the media. This is a time for level heads now, to restore order to the country. We don’t want to walk down a path of street revolts, or God forbid, a revolution, or the military having to take control like even nations like Turkey have faced.

        • Walter_Cronanty

          “I believe in a civil and orderly society.”
          Then tell your fellow leftists to act in a civil and orderly manner. Sweet Jebus, you guys are nothing but a bunch of crybullies.
          WAAAAH. I don’t like the way the Constitution provides for the election of President. Let’s riot.
          WAAAAH. People didn’t like my candidate so they didn’t vote for her. Let’s call everyone who voted for Trump a Nazi, Islamophobic, deplorable, racist, xenophobic, stupid, uneducated, blah, blah, blah. Let’s riot and threaten to kill people.
          WAAAAH. Our policies are so piss-poor typical working-class people who used to vote D voted R. Let’s riot some more, then blame Trump because we’re rioting.
          Piss off.

          • Brucehenry

            I have a feeling that if the situation were reversed — if Trump had won the popular vote but lost the election in the Electoral College — there would be civil disorders also, only perpetrated by the “deplorables.”

            I saw Jim here on Wizbang talking about how the election was rigged and voter fraud and yada yada and how “those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.” I’ve seen the reptilian Rodney gasbagging about how he possesses “defensible terrain” and is friends with other armed veterans. Not that those two lardasses would actually DO anything, but other hotheads probably would have.

            And away from Wizbang you can find memes all over social media about how the Real Murricans won’t take an election stolen by Hillary lying down.

            I don’t support these “protests” and I’m confident they’ll die down over the next few days. They’re silly and won’t lead to anything, but the peaceful ones should continue as long as they stay peaceful and the participants wish to keep up the silliness.

          • jim_m

            Name a single instance of rioting and looting form the Right.

          • Brucehenry

            Well maybe I’m wrong but I sure heard a lot of threats and bluster here, and anywhere on the internet that “voter fraud” and the possibility of a “rigged election” were discussed.

            Read your linked article. The WaPo published it but this guy is of the weird mindset you and your ilk are. He uses Jim-logic when he claims that DOJ has “refused to rule out” tax-exempt status for those refusing to recognize same-sex marriage — actually, the answer is contained in the article he links to, but he claims it is a “refusal.” Typical dishonesty of the type you like to push, putting his (and your) ideological spin on an article to claim it says something it doesn’t say. He does the same thing with his link about the Mozilla guy — Twitter firestorms know both ideologies, witness the dude who berated the Chick-fil-A worker, he lost his job, etc.

            And looking at his bio blurb I see why — he’s a George Mason University professor, and part of the Obama- and-Hillary-bashing cottage industry that has made so many wealthy. He’s trying to sell his book now, with this article.

            If you look at the link from CBS I’ve posted twice, you’ll see that Donald Trump was using Twitter to call for “marching on Washington” to “stop this travesty” back in 2012 after Obama won reelection, exclaiming that “we can’t let this happen.” He said that “We should have a revolution in this country” the day after the 2012 election, and that “we should fight like hell!” What do you think he meant by that? Hell, in 2012 Obama won BOTH the EC and the popular vote but this idiot was calling for a putsch. Only the fact that back then he was still considered a joke, as by all rights he still should have been, averted violence.

            Here’s the link one more time.

            http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-calls-electoral-college-a-disaster-during-2012-tweetstorm/

          • jim_m

            Yes, GMU is a hotbed of conservatism.

            LOL. You are such an uninformed fool. I pity you in your profound ignorance. You have already proven that you are in the same group as the WaPo article so correctly describes.

          • Brucehenry

            Your inability or unwillingness to address Trump’s silly-ass Twitterstorm of 2012 is noted.

          • jim_m

            Sorry Bruce. You can go back to crying in your safe space and planning your relocation to Nova Scotia.

          • Brucehenry
          • jim_m

            Oh yes. I especially like the part about how it is 2 years and not 4. In 2 years the dems will have 25 Senate seats a stake, several in red states. Take a long view of things Bruce. A very long view.

            The GOP owns the State and Local politics like no other time before. The dems have no idea who they will run in 2020. Why else are they pushing Michelle 0bama’s name?

            8 years ago, you were on the band wagon claiming that the dems had a lock on the federal government for the next 40 years. I’m not fool enough to make that claim, but I will simply point out that your side has alienated people across this country focusing solely on the major cities and discounting everything else. You wanted to be the party of a small segment of the nation and now you are. Until you can learn to bridge the gap between the urban and rural areas of this country you will remain there.

            Meanwhile, your party seems to have concluded that the answer is violent overthrow of election results. This we have seen from the left multiple times before and in multiple countries. In the few where it has been successful we have seen the results: Venezuela.

          • jim_m

            Oh, and the notion that the dems are going to filibuster anything is laughable. After Harry Reid nuked it, the GOP will finish it for good. No filibuster for nominees or judges. Deal with it, it’s the bed you made now lie in it.

            The claim that the dem bench is deep is a joke. Lizzy Warren? Bernie? Ossified white people from the party that looks at minorities like slaves still. Got anyone who will be under 70 in 2020?

            The GOP has both chambers of the legislature in 25 states. The dems on have that in 4. The GOP has 33 Governorships, 29 AGs, 31 Lt Governors and 31 Secy of State. All these numbers are growing. Where are your future national candidates coming from? The House and Senate? Caucuses run by more Septuagenarian white people?

            The GOP even gained in Illinois reducing the Dem majority there. Even where you still hold sway that is eroding.

            And how are you going to do in 2020 when you no longer have an IRS suppressing conservative groups? How are you going to do in 2020 without a weaponized federal bureaucracy attacking GOP candidates? With a shrinking number of State Atty Generals to file fake indictments against GOP candidates?

            The dems will be back when they learn to represent the people again. When they drop the Clinton belief that they should have a public and a private policy position, that the purpose of politics is to lie to the public.

            The dems will be back when the public is able to trust the media, which means that when the media is no longer perceived as an arm of the DNC people will believe what is reported. The media runs a lower trust rating than either candidate this year.

            The dems will be back when they start believing in democracy again. Rioting in the streets is pushing the nation away.

          • jim_m

            Oh, and don’t forget that 1/3 of your House Caucus comes from just 3 states: CA, MA and NY. So while those states are valuable, you have marginalized yourselves to those states. Virtually all your leadership comes from there. It speaks of the myopic and parochial views that the dems have and how little they appeal to the rest of the nation.

            Until the dems stop threatening middle America with the destruction of their industry and way of life they will continue to wander in the wilderness.

          • Brucehenry

            There is much in what you say in your three (Count ’em!) responses, although what you say is presented in your usual over-the-top and hysterical style, sprinkled with paranoia and twisted “facts.”

            The Democratic party is right now in the position the Republicans were in in 1964, only without a Reagan slowly and steadily building support and without a Nixon waiting in the wings. Still the Republicans won in ’68, helped by Johnson’s monumental fuckup in Vietnam. I don’t doubt that Trump will fuck up just as spectacularly, which should help.

            But it will take a lot of work. I may be just too old, cranky, sick and cynical to help much, but I’ll do what I can. Hopefully my daughters’ generation, who are by and large appalled at this result, will pick up the slack of we boomer liberals.

          • Walter_Cronanty

            Well, I can put up, somewhat, with you’re being cranky and cynical [I sometimes suffer from those maladies myself – I think I’m on the verge of curmudgeonhood], but not being sick. Nothing serious I hope.

          • Brucehenry

            Oh no, but thanks for the concern. More like “sick of this crap” rather than actually sick, lol.

          • Pity, that. Perhaps you should self treat my removing yourself from the irritant.

          • That was a given as soon as you laid finger to keyboard.

          • Rdm42

            Bruce, when is big liberal cities you get a higher than 100% voter participation rate how can you deny there is fraud going on?

          • Walter_Cronanty

            I have to agree with Jim M on this. When did the right riot and loot because of an election? Some Ds still won’t say W’s election was legitimate.

          • Brucehenry

            And some Republicans, including Trump and several members of Congress, spent 5 years claiming that Obama couldn’t be President because he was born in Kenya. Some of them are still saying so.

            But maybe I’m wrong when I say the deplorables may have pulled the same thing. But I sure heard, as I said, a lot of bluster about it here and elsewhere. A few of them DID occupy a Federal wildlife refuge in an armed act of insurrection but for some reason were acquitted — seems like jury nullification to me.

          • Jwb10001

            Yes lots of conservatives said that Obama was illegitimate but they didn’t take to the streets to burn things, block traffic and otherwise disrupt people just trying to live their lives. Most of the organized rebellion in fact focused on removing republican representatives from office via elections.This reaction is out of proportion.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes I agree. My comment was in reply to Walter’s reminder that “some Ds still won’t say W’s election was legitimate.”

          • Walter_Cronanty

            There is no one who despises Obama and believes that he has done irreparable damage to the US more than I. Yet, I didn’t protest, nor do I know of anyone who protested his election.

          • Brucehenry

            No they just circulated a lot of birther nonsense and shut down the government once or twice.

          • Jwb10001

            Circulating birther non sense doesn’t disrupt people trying to live their lives, it doesn’t set fires and pull people out of cars to beat the shit out of them, it’s just protect albeit perhaps ignorant speech hardly worth even mentioning since it has absolutely zero effect on anything.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes and no. It DOES have the effect of creating an atmosphere of illegitimacy about a legally elected president among those susceptible to racist dogwhistles. But it DOESN’T have any effect, apparently, as to delegitimizing a racist fuckwit who is the main spokesman for such racist bullshit, or anyway so little effect that said fuckwit can’t be elected president of the United States.

          • jim_m

            When you are referring to the “Racist Fuckwit who is the main spokesman for such racist bullshit” I assume you mean Hillary, who came up with it in the first place?

            Or do you mean 0bama , who used the claim that he was not born in the US to promote his first book?

            With all your dishonest bullshit it is hard to keep track. Please be specific as to which of the two you were referring to.

          • Brucehenry

            RWNJ propaganda.

            The idea for birtherism was indeed floated by a low level Hillary 08 worker, who was fired. The Clinton campaign never ran with it, unlike the man you just elected to be president, who spent years, as a Republican, embraced by the last nominee as well, as the most prominent spokesperson for it.

            EDIT: Which indeed makes him a racist fuckwad.

          • jim_m

            Actually, it has been pointed out that Trump has for many years been a democrat.

          • Brucehenry

            Not while being the spokesman for birtherism he wasn’t.

          • Jwb10001

            Creating an atmosphere of illegitimacy is not just for the right you know, the left turned Bush in to a chimpanzee and rejected his election as selected not elected etc. It’s 2 sides of the same coin. Both sides are guilty as sin of working hard to delegitimize the other. Limbaugh says he hopes Obama fails, liberals go nuts. Bill Press says he hopes Trump fails, are you going to go nuts? In politics I find that there is ample hypocrisy on all sides. Every time power shifts in DC so do positions on things like the filibuster and what’s considered acceptable discourse. Remember decent is the highest form of patriotism, until it’s not.

          • Scalia

            Exactly. Notice how quickly each party changes hats when it comes to Advice and Consent.

          • Jwb10001

            Yes and how quickly executive orders go from “”doing the right thing when congress won’t to “Imperial Presidency”. I saw a tweet (I absolutely despise twitter but) that showed a picture of the depressed WH staff and it said “You weaponized the federal government then turned it over to Trump”

          • Walter_Cronanty

            What protestors shut down the government at any time, let alone before Obama was even inaugurated? And circulating “birther nonsense,” first circulated by Ms. Corrupt Pantsuits’ campaign, is not the same as rioting. Come on Bruce, you’re better than that balderdash.

          • Brucehenry

            I didn’t say protestors shut down the government. I agreed that Obama’s opponents DIDN’T protest, instead becoming birthers and shutting down the government and yada yada.

          • Walter_Cronanty

            Your reply makes no sense. We were talking about the ridiculous protestors/rioters. It’s like me replying to your post above by saying Obama’s opponents didn’t lie to get Obamacare passed.

          • jim_m

            So what you are complaining about is that the GOP used parlimentary procedure to resisted 0bama’s dictatorial rule and dem calls for a dictatorship.

            What you are really complaining about is that we are a Republic and you don’t like the way that representative democracy works because sometimes your side loses and that should never be allowed and people trying to promote ideas you disagree with should be illegal.

          • Brucehenry

            Your usual craziness appears. Stop strawmanning or I’m outa here.

          • jim_m

            Not a strawman. You just said that the GOP unfairly shut down the government. Since they used legal parliamentary procedure to do so the only conclusion is that you believe such things should be illegal.

            Feel free to leave at any time. You won’t be missed.

          • Brucehenry

            I said they did it. I don’t think they should have done it but I never suggested that what they did should be illegal.

            Unlike you, I’m never so sure of my beliefs that I want to enshrine all of them into law.

          • jim_m

            I don’t believe in enshrining my beliefs into law. I believe that people should have freedom of conscience. I also believe that you cannot legislate morality or ideology. The first is what social conservatives get wrong. The second is what the dems get wrong.

          • Brucehenry

            I guess that’s as close as you’ll get to admitting you used a strawman — pretending it never happened.

          • Indeed. Wizbang is a better place without our resident hemorrhoid.

          • Don’t let the doorknob hit you in the ass on your way out…

        • Retired military

          “The modern version of the electoral college gives an unfair disproportionate weight or bias towards conservative leaning or Republican states”

          So you are saying something set up 200+ years ago unfairly advantages something which didnt even exist when it was created.

          The electoral college is set up by population. That way liberal states like Rhode island at least have a say in the country they are a part of along with Texas.
          in short Paul. STOP WHINING.

        • jim_m

          The modern version of the electoral college…

          Please enlighten us as to precisely which amendment to the constitution altered the electoral college into this so very unfair “modern version”.

          Once again you prove that you are an uninformed dumbass.

          The electoral college only favors small states regardless of their political affiliation. Of the states getting 4 or fewer votes there are 12 plus the District of Columbia. Of those 13 states 7 voted for Hillary.

          So stick your lies about who this favors up your ass.

          • Walter_Cronanty

            Well, the 23rd Amendment, ratified on 3/29/1961, gave the District of Columbia 3 electoral votes.

            Of course, Paul’s whine about this modernization of the Electoral College is proven correct as DC votes reliably R….oh, wait: “Since the passage of this amendment, the District’s electoral votes have been cast for the Democratic Party’s presidential and vice presidential candidates in every election.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-third_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

            Never mind.

          • Scalia

            Yeah, that biased Electoral College kept Bill Clinton and Barack Obama from getting elected twice.

          • Each…

          • jim_m

            Despite Bill never getting a majority of the popular vote. (He got 43% and 49%)

          • Brucehenry

            It wasn’t an amendment to the Constitution that created what Paul is calling “the modern version” of the EC.

            http://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1901-1950/The-Permanent-Apportionment-Act-of-1929/

            This act had the effect of increasing the power of rural (which in this country usually means conservative) areas in Congress and, coincidentally, in the EC. Of course, back then “conservative” didn’t automatically mean “Republican” — far from it.

          • jim_m

            Um no, it did not. That merely fixed the size of Congress.

            As I pointed out there are precisely 8 States (including DC) that get only 3 votes. Therefore, there are only 8 regions where this actually gives them a greater electoral college vote than their population would dictate. Those states are AK, MT, ND, SD, WY, VT, DE, DC.

            It is exceptionally difficult to characterize Delaware and DC as rural areas, although you are so fucking dishonest that you will refuse to admit that fact.

            You are also so fucking dishonest that you will refuse to recognize that 3 of those 8 regions consistently vote Democrat. So the claimed “Systematic benefit” to the GOP is no more than 2 electoral votes. Surely you cannot be claiming that any of the elections where the popular vote winner lost the election that it was due to just 2 electoral votes?

            In fact only twice would 2 votes have made a difference (1800 and 1876)

            If you look at the number of states that get 4 electoral votes (again you can argue that they get disproportionately more votes because the 2 votes per state part of the calculation is weighted higher because the number of House seats is fixed making those more significant) There are only 5 such states(ID, HI, NH, ME, RI) and 4 of them went to Clinton.

            So this is really nothing more than ignorant and dishonest whining from a bunch of fools.

          • Brucehenry

            What about the states that have 5 or 6 or 8 electoral votes, Jim? How many of those are usually liberal states like VT?

            Arkansas 6
            Iowa 6
            Kansas 6
            Louisiana 6
            Mississippi 6
            Nebraska 5
            Nevada 5
            New Mexico 5
            Oklahoma 7
            Oregon 7
            Utah 6
            West Virginia 5

            http://state.1keydata.com/state-electoral-votes.php

            Only 3 blue states on that list, out of 12.

          • jim_m

            Great so your counter argument is that we should disenfranchise those 12 plus my previous 12? Fantastic idea. Let’s cut half the nation out of the the electoral process because they might be skewed toward the party we don’t like.

            Fuck you Bruce. We finally arrive at the reality, which is you only want to count the states that vote your way. And you still wonder why we call you a fascist despite the daily evidence that comes from your keyboard.

          • Brucehenry

            I’m just pointing out that the system is flawed if you want the “will of the people” done. If you are more concerned with protecting the rights, privileges, and immunities of the several states, fine.

            Here is a chart that shows how much weight each electoral vote gets. You can see that the EC votes (per citizen) in the rural states carry more weight than in the urban states, generally speaking. And, also generally speaking, rural states are more conservative politically than urban states are.

            https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/fairvote/pages/199/attachments/original/1450119297/2008votersperelector.pdf?1450119297

          • jim_m

            And your way would give the people of Wyoming less influence in the government than the metro area of Jackson, MS. They would be 95th compared to US metro areas.

            You want your vote to count more? Move your ass. You don’t like our system? Get the fuck out of my country!

            Funny that you find that protecting people’s rights to be something to scoff at.

          • Brucehenry

            Dude you are getting carried away again. I’m just killing time in a blog comment section, and my intent as this tangent began was to point out to you that your snark directed at Paul about “which constitutional amendment?” was misplaced, since it wasn’t an amendment that created what Paul is calling “the modern version” of the EC.

            I’m not calling, here, for EC reform, although, like most of the people who lose a close electoral contest, it sticks out like a sore thumb to me right now. But I grant that I was OK with it when I mistakenly thought my side had a “blue wall” in the Upper Midwest, and so I’m not starting as campaign to abolish it now.

            No, I’m just pointing out certain inequities in it, and also it occurs to me that amending this 1929 law would be easier than amending the Constitution. If someone proposes such a thing I’ll consider it, and suggest that you should too, depending on the details of such a proposal.

            For that matter the same argument could be made about the Senate itself. Why should Wyoming get two Senate votes, some may ask, when NY only gets two? The answer, of course, is that we are a federal system of “sovereign” states, and each state wishes to protect its own rights and privileges, but many see inequality in a system where the most powerful legislative body in the world has some Senators casting votes for 300,000 folks and some for 20,000,000 folks and both votes get equal weight.

          • jim_m

            Really? Why should every state get two senators?

            Clearly you do not believe in the sovereignty of the states or the value in any government body other than the federal. You clearly believe that everything should be decided by central planning because that has worked out so well for the communist states you so idolize.

          • Brucehenry

            Again, since you have misunderstood me, deliberately or not, I am not advocating that view but pointing out that some people may feel that way.

            I really don’t think I write that unclearly. You are just in such a rush to contradict me that you read what you THINK I’m saying rather than what I’m actually writing.

            At least, that’s my charitable view of what you do. It could be you’re just a loathsome liar, or bovinely stupid, or both, but today I’m going with “in a rush,” because I feel a little less crabby than usual today.

          • jim_m

            The average state gets 10.55 electoral votes. The std deviation is 9.7 electoral votes.

            That means that all small states fall within one SD of the mean. They are not statistically out of line with the rest of the nation

            In reality it is States like CA, FL, NY and TX that are out of line and have undue influence on the vote as they are 2 SD above the mean in their electoral votes. We should pass a law to cap the total number and redistribute those votes to states that are population challenged.

          • Brucehenry

            I would look at any proposal to get closer to the ideal of one man one vote.

          • jim_m

            We have that already.

            The electoral college is in place to prevent the tyranny of the majority.

            Please watch this and learn what you would have learned had you made it through the 6th grade.

          • jim_m

            The reality is found for you at the 4:00 mark, where they say how it prevents elections from being stolen. That is most obviously why you want to get rid of the Electoral College.

          • Scalia

            Excellent synopsis.

        • Jwb10001

          Bitching about the electoral college is like kicking over the table cause you lost a game of monopoly, what’s the point? Please name the states that would support an amendment to change this? If you can name 10 I’d be shocked, hell I bet you’d be hard pressed to find 10 blue states that would support it. it’s a complete waste of time. No one wants each presidential race to be between California and New York vs everyone else.

        • Rdm42

          The structure is 100% intentional and made to ensure you can’t have a ‘regional faction’ candidate easily. You have to be able to appeal to broad interests in a number of regions, not just really strong interest in a few select high population regions.

        • Jwb10001

          Paul the electoral college does not give republicans anything. It’s the democrats that fashion their message and campaigns around identity politics that appeals more to urban voters while at the same time ignoring or being openly hostile to voters in “fly over” country. Your overwhelming desire to place blame anywhere but on the democrats is silly.

        • Ken in Camarillo

          Actually, the “modern version” of the electoral college has diluted the effect of counting Senators in determining the number of electoral votes for each state. The Constitution specified the number of Representatives which would then be readjusted after each census. Originally there were 65 Representatives and 26 Senators (13 states), giving a ratio of 2.5. Now there are 435 and 100 respectively, giving a ratio of 4.35. To maintain the original ratio we would have 3 Senators per state and 375 Representatives.

          • Ken in Camarillo

            Further: Originally the minimum of 3 electors gave the smallest state 3/91=0.033 of the total electors. Now the smallest state has 3/535=0.0056 (disregarding DC). Normalizing this current value by 50 states vs 13 originally (0.0056*50/13) would make it 0.022. Thus today the small state has only 2/3 the influence that a small state had originally.

          • Ken in Camarillo

            Checking my analysis: under a 3 Senators per state and 375 Representatives system, a small state would have a normalized ratio of 4/525*50/13=0.029 which is reasonably close to the original ratio of 0.033.

      • jim_m

        Clearly the Electoral College so biased the elections toward Republicans that it forced creation of the party itself.

  • LiberalNightmare

    democracy … its a real bitch aint it?

  • Retired military

    On weds on the Five Juan Williams sounded like a butt hurt bitch. Every other word was racism.
    It is laughable that he talks about the electoral college when that is all anyone talks about leading up to EVERY presidential election. Why is it that the libs always want to whine about the rules after they lose the game.

  • Retired military

    This is too good to be true. It is laughable.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/305501-clinton-aides-blame-fbi-director-media-for-devastating-loss

    Clinton aides blame FBI director, media for devastating loss

    Aides also blamed the media for the loss.

    “The media always covered her as the person who would be president and therefore tried to eviscerate her before the election, but covered Trump who was someone who was entertaining and sort of gave him a pass,” Podesta said. “We need to reflect and analyze that and put our voices forward.”

    The media coronated Hillary and now it is their fault for her losing.
    Please show me a NY TIMES, CBS, NBC, ABC MSNbC article that tried to eviscerate Hillary . Just one.

    • I read that article, too. Clinton’s associates refuse to believe that they bet on a horse that was lame before the race started.

  • Mary Gehman

    Their karma ran over their dogma….poor babies.

  • arcman46

    I like the idea of Calexit. Only one caveat. If they seceed from the United States, they cannot go to any other state unless they complete immigration forms and are approved. We’ll see how long their little utopia can survive.

    • LiberalNightmare

      We’ll have to move the wall a but further north.

  • LiberalNightmare

    Its funny, but calexit would probably turn California into a conservative paradise. All the crazy shit would disappear as soon as Ca tax payers had to pay for it themselves.

    Of course, first they would have to go thru a Venezuela phase.

    • California is a net contributor to the Federal coffers, and the world’s 12th largest economy.

  • Olsoljer

    Snowflakes refusing to take exams should get a zero grade for them, the instructors allowing it to happen should be fired.

    • Walter_Cronanty

      Here’s a partial listing of those special snowflakes who simply cannot abide American democracy:

      “…A professor at University of Michigan postponed an exam after too many students complained about their “very serious” stress. Columbia University postponed midterms, a Yale University professor made an exam optional, a University of Iowa professor canceled classes and a University of Connecticut professor excused class absences — all because their students just absolutely could not function knowing that they’d have to live in a country where their president would not be the president that they wanted. And it’s not even just the students — a University of Rochester professor canceled all of his meetings with students the day after the election because he decided he just could not bear to talk about it with them.” http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442083/

      Then there’s the “cry in” at Cornell: “Over 50 Cornellians gathered on Ho Plaza this afternoon for a cry in to ‘mourn’ in the aftermath of Donald Trump’s shocking presidential victory.” http://cornellsun.com/2016/11/09/devastated-cornellians-mourn-election-of-donald-trump-at-cry-in/

      Our wonderful “educators” are not limited to colleges or universities: “Half of the 3,000 students at Berkeley High School walked out, holding up signs showing a Mexican flag and slogans like “F— Trump….

      Similar walkout protests occurred at Oakland Technical School, the Oakland-based private Catholic school Bishop O’Dowd, and at San Jose’s Lincoln High School.” https://pjmedia.com/parenting/2016/11/10/students-and-teachers-walk-out-of-school-in-protest-of-trump-victory/

  • Walter_Cronanty

    And the Ds begin the post-election healing process with their typical civility: “Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid broke his silence Friday on Donald Trump’s victory, denouncing Trump as a “sexual predator” who “lost the popular vote” and “emboldened the forces of hate and bigotry in America”—and who is now solely responsible for healing the country’s gaping political wounds.”

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/harry-reid-dismisses-donald-trump-%e2%80%98a-sexual-predator-who-lost-the-popular-vote%e2%80%99/ar-AAkbwv5?li=BBnb7Kz

    • Jwb10001

      Remind me again what did Reid say about Bill Clinton and his work place sexual conduct, lying under oath?

      • Walter_Cronanty

        The only time in his political life he didn’t lie.

        • Jwb10001

          My point is he was most like pretty quiet about until it became so blatant it could no longer be ignored.

          • Walter_Cronanty

            As far as I know, he didn’t say a word about Bill’s sexual escapades while in office, nor did he mention his lying under oath. Thus, he didn’t lie.

          • jim_m

            I guarantee you, based on the exploits of Ted Kennedy and Chris Dodd, Bill’s activities were the subject of great envy and amusement amongst the dems in the Senate cloakroom.

    • Pity it wasn’t his face getting broken (again).

  • Mary Gehman

    These kinds of tantrums are the direct result of an educational system where everyone gets a trophy even when they’ve lost. That doesn’t prepare anyone for the real world and the disappointments that happen everyday in life. My failures (and they are many!) have taught me more about life than my successes (and they are few!). The real world tells you ‘no’ a lot more often than it tells you ‘yes’ …at least that’s been my experience as well as my observation. God answers every prayer, and often His answer is “No”, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. If you’ve never experienced defeat, you can’t know how good success feels when you attain it because you have nothing to compare it to. When an oyster is irritated, it makes a pearl; when spoiled brats are irritated, they make a scene. Suck it up already.

    (PS – But I was raised by wolves so what do I know?)

    • Jwb10001

      This is not just the education system, for 20 years I was involved with youth sports competitions and these snowflake’s parents are absolutely out of their freaking minds. If we had 5 or fewer teams in a division we only gave 3 trophies, well that was just devastating to the little darlings. Hell most of the time if there were 5 teams 3 of them would go ballistic if they didn’t win. It wasn’t all of them but it was sadly a very large minority. I can not tell you how many times I was accused of being racist because some team lead by a black person didn’t win.

      • Mary Gehman

        Sad, but true. When we coddle wimps, why are we so surprised when they grow up to be wimps who expect to be coddled? But, since I’ve never been a parent, my opinion means very little here. This is just my observation of people who are parents who never say “No” to their children then wonder why their kids grow up to never take “No” for an answer.

        • Jwb10001

          When an adult tells me that losing some little kid contest is devastating I just want to ask them how they will ever deal with grandma dying. Too many of them are ill prepared to deal with life’s inevitable disappointments.

          • Mary Gehman

            Amen!