Democrats have been very critical of the relevance of the Electoral College since Hillary won the popular vote but came up short in the Electoral College and Donald Trump was elected. This reaction of course is to be expected because they are sore losers as their continual attacks on President Trump have demonstrated. The founding fathers had their reasons for coming up with this concept, and second-guessing them now is presumptuous; nonetheless Democrats have relentlessly advocated the College be removed.
I’m no expert on poly-sci, but, as I recall, ridding our country of the Electoral College would require an Amendment to our Constitution which would require ratification of two thirds of our 50 states. In other words, calling for the removal of the College is a gesture in futility; and a discussion of its relevance in this day and age would be a moot point. Regardless, maybe the next time around, it could be the Democrats who gain the White House through the Electoral College, and the shoe would be on the other foot.
Democrats advocate the majority vote should be the only consideration in the outcome of a presidential election. This opinion is not surprising, since, according to Pew Research, Democrats and those leaning toward the Democratic Party outnumber Republicans 48% to 44%. Two thirds of registered Democrats are living in our largest cities and the trend is increasing. If we didn’t have the Electoral College, it is quite possible then that the voters living in LA. San Francisco Chicago, Seattle, Philadelphia, Washington D.C. and New York City would always determine who was going to be president of our entire country, and that would be trampling on the right all Americans have of participating in how they are being governed. Of course, we can understand why the losing party would want to eliminate the one obstacle that stands in their way to attain unopposed power to govern this country, but I would ask all Democrats to consider that a government dominated by only one party, year after year after year is not healthy in a democratic republic, regardless of which party is in power. Compromise is the name of the game in politics, and we need a strong two-party system for it to work effectively.
In making his argument in support of majority rules, a friend of mine said that it is our law, not our leadership, that protects the minority from the majority, but I would point out that the executive branch is also involved in the making of our law through executive orders and the veto power; so law can be influenced by the president which means it is not as significant a factor in protecting the rights of the minority as one might assume.
Statistics indicate now that the majority (55%) of Democrats claim to be liberal or of liberal persuasion. The opposite is true for those who claim to be Republicans. Since the liberal world view is so different from the conservative world view, and our world views determine our politics, (as I discussed in my first book of The Cabana Chronicles series), it’s not just a struggle between political parties to gain power to govern, it’s about one world view dominating another world view. Based on the stats now and the fact that the numbers will increase as minorities continue to vote exclusively for Democrats (talk about blind tradition), conservatives are concerned they will have no voice in how we are governed in the near future. The Electoral College gives us our only voice.
We conservatives are very concerned about losing our voice because we differ from liberals in social and economic policy such as support for gay rights, the importance of the wealth gap, abortion on demand, the de-emphasis on hard work as a means of attaining success, and support for globalism, to name but a few. This division between the two parties has been increasing over the past 30 years. Perhaps this is why virtually no bi-partisan legislation has been passed over the past several administrations. Congress has gained a low approval rating because Americans don’t think the party that has the votes to pass a bill has appropriately considered the opposing point of view in enacting important legislation.
I think I can speak for most conservatives when I say that we are concerned about the majority being able to continually force their agenda down our collective throats by assuming ownership of the White House, destined to remain there for the foreseeable future. Standing in their way is the Electoral College, which gives rural voters the chance to express their opinion on who should govern us. Liberals have an opinion on what objectives they would like to see for America, and they are very different from the conservative objectives. I’ve already discussed both objectives in detail in previous posts on this website: Worldview and Politics, Have Christians Lost the Culture War?, The Evolution of Unbelief, How Can We Fix Healthcare?, Can We Speak the Truth?, The Trouble with Illegal Immigration, The Wealth Gap, Why the Democratic Party has lost the Middle Class, Why it’s easier to be a Liberal, The Future of the Republican Party, Liberal Internationalism, Separation of Church and State, and last, but not least, Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, which outlines the liberal game plan.
I’m also concerned the liberals are getting more aggressive. We need look no further for support of my concern than Governor Brown’s executive order to make California a sanctuary state in opposition to cooperation with an agency of the Federal government. In fact, Aaron Renn, a senior fellow and urban policy specialist at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, believes that leftist mayors and urban residents are pressing hard and warns that “for their part, they need to rethink their unrelenting hostility to those who don’t share their agenda.” Without the Electoral College, we would have no voice in opposing what we see as a hostile takeover of America.