WTF?

The Democrats have been losing elections, even though they win the popular vote, for decades because of the Electoral College.  Whatever is he on about?

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Let's talk about the electoral college

It would take a constitutional amendment to get rid of the Electoral College. Amendments must be ratified by three-fourths of the states, and so an amendment abolishing the Electoral College is unlikely to happen as long as voters in small states falsely believe the system gives them more political power than they would have otherwise.

That’s why it’s so important to push back on the false narratives that are being spread about how the Electoral College functions. It does not give voters from small states more of a voice. Instead, it only gives voters from relatively large states an inflated voice if their state happens to have just enough voters from both parties at any particular political moment. In this election cycle, the Electoral College favors Pennsylvania and Georgia. Just a few cycles ago, those battlegrounds were Florida and Ohio. In the future, the battlegrounds might be Texas or California.

[...]

The idea that the Electoral College protects small states and rural voters is the biggest modern lie about what the system does. The EC doesn’t force politicians to give a damn about whether or not a state is “rural”; it forces them to care about whether the margin of victory is close enough in the state to make it worthwhile to campaign there.

[...]

[T]he idea of a “rural” state is largely a myth. According to the 2020 Census, 80 percent of Americans live in “urban” areas. In only four states—Maine, Mississippi, Vermont, and West Virginia—does a majority of the population live outside of urban areas, and nobody with a straight face would argue that the Electoral College encourages presidential candidates to spend a lot of time and resources in those places.

Of the states that are Electoral College “battlegrounds,” Wisconsin and North Carolina are the only ones where as much as a third of their populations live in rural areas. In all the other battleground states, more than 70 percent of the population lives in urban areas.

We are an urbanized nation. That’s why, even when politicians go to slightly more rural states like Georgia or Michigan, they go to the major cities in those states. They go to where people actually live.

[...]

Why do so many people believe the Electoral College protects “rural” interests when it demonstrably does not? I believe what’s happening is that these people are using “rural” as a euphemism for “white,” and “urban” as a euphemism for “Black.” The Electoral College protects white interests and sensibilities from being overrun by the emerging non-white majority in this country, and the people who defend the EC are desperate to keep it that way.

[...]

The most insidious way the Electoral College warps our political process is that, in almost all cases, it awards the full slate of electors to whichever candidate wins a state, even if the margin of victory is only one vote. That functionally disenfranchises entire coalitions of voters, rendering their votes meaningless if they happen to live in a state that is likely to go the other way. Republicans in California have almost no presidential political power, even though there are more Republicans in California than anywhere else, while Democrats in Texas or (latterly) Florida may as well not exist for the purposes of the presidential election.

[...]

The Electoral College is agnostic as to which states have the power; it just requires that the people themselves are treated unfairly and unequally.

[...]

Unfortunately, it will be with us as long as Republicans rightly perceive that it is the only way for them to win power for their demonstrably unpopular agenda.

[...]

But there will be a moment, someday in the future, when the political calculation will flip. A Democrat will tap into the still-unrealized political power of Black folks living in former Confederate states and win narrow victories in not just Georgia but places like Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina. White folks in Wisconsin and Minnesota will strenuously object, but it won’t matter because of the Electoral College. As soon as a Democrat loses the popular vote but wins an Electoral College victory thanks to the support of Black and brown people in currently red states, Republican white folks will suddenly become very interested in getting rid of the Electoral College.

  The Nation

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Yes!

But that's gonna take a Constitutional amendment, and no red state is gonna ratify it.  Because they'd never win another election.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Good on Nebraska

Not a democracy

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

FOX poll!

The plan that could have worked

And we have the nameless Senate aide to thank for this plot being foiled. 

A thousand words about electoral college voting and Senate representation ... and democracy

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Sad!

Pence told the president Tuesday during their weekly lunch that he does not have the power to block a congressional certification of the Electoral College results.

[...]

Trump tore into the report in a statement on Tuesday night, saying it was "fake news" and maintaining that Pence never made the remarks.

"The Vice President and I are in total agreement that the Vice President has the power to act," Trump said.

  The Hill

We'll see in a few hours, won't we?

Trump applied new pressure on Vice President Mike Pence to interfere with the Congressional certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory on Wednesday.

[...]

“States want to correct their votes, which they now know were based on irregularities and fraud, plus corrupt process never received legislative approval,” Trump tweeted on Wednesday morning. “All Mike Pence has to do is send them back to the States, AND WE WIN. Do it Mike, this is a time for extreme courage!”

[...]

“THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND, MORE IMPORTANTLY, OUR COUNTRY, NEEDS THE PRESIDENCY MORE THAN EVER BEFORE - THE POWER OF THE VETO,” Trump tweeted. “STAY STRONG!”

  Politico

[D]uring his podcast "Jay Sekulow Live" on Tuesday, the attorney stated that he didn't think "that was what the Constitution has in mind."

"Some have speculated that the vice president could simply say, 'I'm not going to accept these electors,' that he has the authority to do that under the Constitution," Sekulow said. "I actually don't think that's what the Constitution has in mind."

He added, "If that were the case, any vice president could refuse any election."

Sekulow pointed out that the vice president's role to preside over the process is largely ceremonial.

  The Hill

And Al Gore would have been president.

Sekulow won't be a Trump attorney long saying things like that. I'm surprised he said anything at all. He obviously doesn't want to completely trash his future.

A federal appeals court on Saturday dismissed a lawsuit brought by Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) and other Republicans that sought to expand Pence's legal authority to effectively overturn Biden's presidential win.

The suit sought to sidestep federal election law when Pence presides over the joint session in Congress on Wednesday. Rather than certify Biden's win, he would be free to effectively change the results.

Pence's role in Wednesday's joint session is largely ceremonial. The role is governed by an 1887 Electoral Count Act, a law that the Republican lawsuit sought to invalidate.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Jesus wept

What does he think they're going to do about it?  He is on very, very thin ice here.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

WTF, Grassley?

GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley on Tuesday generated a whirlwind of confusion among reporters and on social media after suggesting that Vice President Mike Pence would not preside over the Electoral College certification on Wednesday.

"We don't expect him to be there," Grassley, 87, initially said of Pence, per Roll Call. As president pro tempore of the Senate, or the second-highest ranking official of the chamber, Grassley suggested he would stand in for Pence.

But within minutes, Grassley backtracked. "Every indication we have is that the vice president will be there," Grassley's office said.

  Yahoo

Okay, that's not Grassley backtracking. That's his office correcting something he said. Why'd he say it? Was Grassley confused in his old age, or was it actually the case that Pence wasn't expected to be there? And if so, who's "we" who didn't expect it?

After the confusion, Grassley's office said that the Iowa senator was simply trying to explain what would happen if Pence had to step away.

Bullshit. If that's what he was trying to do, he would have done it.

"I hope Mike Pence comes through for us, I have to tell you," Trump said at a rally in Georgia on Monday. "Of course, if he doesn't come through, I won't like him quite as much," Trump added.

That's probably why they didn't expect him to show. Some group of people were likely discussing how Pence could get out of the bind Trump put him in at the rally.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:

I'm not feeling a bit of sympathy.

Democracy is failing among Republicans

They would obviously prefer something closer to dictatorship.  Rule by GOP edict.

Nearly a quarter of Senate Republicans are officially preparing to challenge President-elect Joe Biden’s Electoral College win on Jan. 6, a stunning development that demonstrates just how far some in the GOP will go to align themselves with President Donald Trump’s flailing claims that the election was stolen from him.

Eleven more Republican senators announced Saturday they will challenge Biden’s election victory next week when Congress gathers to certify the Electoral College vote. The movement is led by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who circulated the idea among Senate Republicans of voting against certification of the election unless there’s an election audit.

  Politico

Challenging Josh Hawley for the role of coup leader.

The 11 senators' efforts are separate from Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who was the first senator to announce he would join with House Republicans to object to the certification of the election results. Hawley responded to the new objectors on Saturday, saying he hopes "many more will listen to their constituents and act."

The building support for efforts to vote against Biden's win in Congress has created a major rift in the GOP. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) was among the Republicans who punched back Saturday at the movement within his party, which in part centers around attacks on how the election was conducted in his own state. Toomey said the effort by Hawley and Cruz "directly undermines" the ability of people to elect their own leaders.

[...]

The effort to vote against Biden's electoral win is opposed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), though the GOP leadership is not whipping against the effort to prevent the certification of Biden as president.

And Mitch is under attack by the MAGAts.

In the House, as many as 140 Republicans have indicated they may vote against certifying Biden's Electoral College win.

Jesus wept. This is what comes of the GOP taking the Tea Party into their tent. And they did that because they were already unable to win elections on their own.

In a statement released Saturday, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said she would "vote to affirm the 2020 presidential election." Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) called the move "an egregious ploy" that "dangerously threatens our Democratic Republic."

And Toomey, who is retiring, said that "allegations of fraud by a losing campaign cannot justify overturning an election." He said Trump's loss in his state stemmed from Trump's narrower margins in rural Pennsylvania and Trump's decline in suburban support.

Hawley, in his response to Toomey, said the state's mail ballots had not been litigated sufficiently.

For the love of Pete.

"No one has mounted a substantive defense of the state law under which the November election was conducted."

Perhaps that's because there isn't a substantive defense to be mounted. Maybe someone should mount a lawsuit against Josh Hawley who doesn't even have a home in Missouri even though he represents the state in the US Senate.

The group of Republicans insisted their effort wasn’t an attempt to thwart Biden or overturn the election, but rather aimed to protect “election integrity.” Likewise, Hawley said he was not trying to overturn the election.

Not even they believe that steaming pile.

Biden's win will be certified by majorities in the Democratic House and Republican Senate, however, as enough GOP senators have already said they will oppose efforts to object to the election results. The question, though, is how many might eventually sign on: Many Republican senators have not indicated yet how they will vote.

Cowards. 

 ...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:

God, Ted Cruz is disgusting.

I hope Dick Cheney is proud

He who mastered leaking stories to the Times and then quoting the Times' report as proof.

The statement.

Yep.  That's about the size of it.  And when their January 6 stunt fails, they'll come up with something else.

Gohmert and allied goobers are suing Mike Pence

It's because Pence drew the line at refusing to count Biden's electoral win on January 6.

The suit asks Texas federal judge appointed by Trump to declare that Pence has the “exclusive authority and sole discretion” to decide which electoral votes from a given state should be counted.

  CNBC

Absolutely absurd. He has no such thing.

When are these assholes going to get sanctioned?

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE: Dismissed. Of course.  On the grounds that they lack standing.  Unfortunately, the merits are not discussed.  I should say, the lack of merits.  Gohmert says he will appeal.  I doubt it.

Suck harder, GOP Trumpies

Vice President Pence was sued Sunday by Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) and several other Republicans in a far-fetched bid that appeared aimed at overturning President-elect Joe Biden's election win.

The lawsuit focuses on Pence’s role in an upcoming Jan. 6 meeting of Congress to count states’ electoral votes and finalize Biden’s victory over President Trump. Typically, the vice president’s role in presiding over the meeting is a largely ceremonial one governed by an 1887 federal law known as the Electoral Count Act.

But the Republican lawsuit, which was filed against Pence in his official capacity as vice president, asks a federal judge in Texas to strike down the law as unconstitutional. The GOP plaintiffs go further: They ask the court to grant Pence the authority on Jan. 6 to effectively overturn Trump’s defeat in key battleground states.

  The Hill

Even Gohmert isn't this stupid. It's just an attempt to kiss further up Trump's ass.

And here's the pleading naming the ass kissers:

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Uh-oh

The Hotel Harrington released a statement on Monday saying the hotel will shut down between Monday, Jan. 4, and Wednesday, Jan. 6, as Trump’s supporters plan to protest that Wednesday when Congress is scheduled to certify the election results.

The hotel said it will not host guests except for long-term residents and it will provide refunds to all prepaid reservations made for during that time period.

[...]

The hotel bar, known as Harry’s, has also seen an influx of Proud Boys members, and its website said it will not operate on Jan. 5 and 6.

[...]

The Hotel Harrington announced it would close the three days next week after The Washington Post published an article detailing how the Proud Boys have been gathering at the hotel in recent months.

[...]

The closure will come after the president has predicted a “wild” protest in D.C. on Jan. 6 — the day Congress is expected to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s election win.

[...]

“While we cannot control what happens outside of the hotel, we are taking additional steps to protect the safety of our visitors, guests and employees.”

[...]

Two employees at the hotel and bar told the Post that the Proud Boys’ presence at their workplace has intimidated some of the workers, many of whom are Black and Hispanic.

[...]

The expected demonstration will follow after Trump supporters took to the streets on the night of Dec. 12, with many wearing helmets and bulletproof vests and shouting “F--- antifa!” among other chants.

The D.C. police worked to separate the pro-Trump demonstrators from protesters near Black Lives Matter Plaza. When several Proud Boys members could not break through the police line, some took and burnt a Black Lives Matter banner from a church.

Clashes between the groups of protesters resulted in at least four people being stabbed near Harry’s, although police have not revealed the political motivations of those involved, according to the Post.

  The Hill

We can guess.

Sure, and double the current room rate.

Mo Brooks picks the prick spot for himself

Some asshole was going to do it. Mo claimed the honors.

Republican Rep. Mo Brooks (Ala.) on Wednesday told reporters that he plans to challenge the Electoral College votes when Congress meets to certify the election for President-elect Joe Biden on Jan. 6.

[...]

“I'm doing this because in my judgment this is the worst election theft in the history of the United States. And if there was a way to determine the Electoral College outcome using only lawful votes cast by eligible American citizens, then Donald Trump won the Electoral College,” he told The Hill in an interview.

[...]

The Alabama Republican said he believes the issue extends beyond the court cases filed by the Trump campaign, arguing that Congress is better suited to look into the matter.

“It is extremely difficult in a court of law to determine how many illegal votes were cast and who they were cast for. And that is one of the reasons why the FBI, the Justice Department and the federal judiciary are wholly inadequate for handling this issue,” he said.

  The Hill

Apparently only Trump fanatics are qualified to do that.

“Number one is the 1993 national voter rights act that was rammed through Congress by a Democratic House and a Democratic Senate and signed by a Democratic president over the objection of Republican congressmen and Republican senators,” he said.

“The chief evil in that legislation is that it makes it illegal for voter registrars to require proof of citizenship before allowing someone to register to vote. So that in and of itself opens the floodgates for illegal aliens and other noncitizens to register to vote,” he added.

Brooks also said he sees voter ID laws as an area that needs to be strengthened.

[...]

"There’s zero evidence of even dozens, let alone millions, of non citizens voting in this or any other election," David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, told Politifact.

[...]

Brooks would not disclose “any direct or indirect communications” with senators or their staffs but is actively seeking a lawmaker in the upper chamber to join his efforts.

[...]

The congressman said he may still object to the vote if no others decide to join him, acknowledging it would serve as a symbolic protest rather than a forceful challenge to the election result.

[...]

The news comes as Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican, told reporters Wednesday that he found it unlikely that someone would object to elector certification.

“I can’t imagine that that would ever happen,” Thune said, adding that while a Republican “could” stand up and object, he doubted “that goes anywhere.”

John Thune doesn't know his own people.

Norman Ornstein from Washington, D.C.-based think tank American Enterprise Institute told reporters on a call Wednesday that while he thinks there is a likelihood that at least one House member and one Senator will come forward to challenge a slate of electors, he does not believe it will have any substantial impact on the election result.

“What happens is the House and Senate meet together, and if there’s a challenge, they go back to their respective chambers and resolve the issue,” Ornstein explained. “That can happen pretty quickly. I would think it would not have significant debate, although it could have some debate before you get votes.”

I wouldn't bet my life on it. Not if I wanted to live. 

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Come on, Georgia

You can do it.

UPDATE 45 minutes later: 

 

  Come on, Georgia!

Where we are

In limbo.

But, hey...

Way past time to do away with the electoral college.

And Trump is desperate to stop the counting.

The sad commentary on democracy that is America's electoral system