Crafty Conservative Comebacks for Loony Leftist Lines – The Electoral College


Without fail, after Leftists lose a Presidential election, they start talking about abolishing the Electoral College. (Funny how this isn’t a topic of discussion after a Democrat wins the White House, but that’s neither here nor there.) And this time around, the Left is bringing up the Founding Fathers as a means to try to justify their position. But fear not. I have some information you can use to turn back the arguments they present.

As with my previous attempts in this vein, I will separate the Leftist arguments with bold italics like so. My responses will be in normal type face. Granted, this is about as normal as I get, so be warned. And with that out of the way, let’s get started!

We should get rid of the Electoral College because it doesn’t work anymore.

Why do you think it doesn’t work anymore?

We’re a totally different country now. The Electoral College is outdated.

Just because something is outdated by modern standards doesn’t mean it lacks use in today’s world. We still use trains to transport goods across the country even though we have other and faster means to do it. Rotary and push-button phones work as well at making phone calls as an iPhone does. Even basic farming techniques haven’t changed in spite of the advances in farm technology.

Yeah, well, we should still change the way we elect the President. We should adopt a national popular vote so everyone’s voice gets heard.

If you voted in the last Presidential election and your ballot wasn’t removed due to legal or illegal activities, your voice got heard. You just didn’t win.

But shouldn’t the people get to elect the President?

They already do, just not in the way they think. When you vote in a Presidential election, you are actually voting for a slate of electors chosen by the state political parties. That is a feature of our constitutional republic, not a flaw.

More to your point, though, if you want to have a direct election of Presidents going forward, propose a Constitutional Amendment and see if you can get a convention of the states to go along with it.

Why do we have to do that? We should always elect the President by the popular vote.

At one time during our nation’s history, people went ga-ga over pet rocks. Then a little later, people went ga-ga over electronic pets. Both were popular, but eventually lost favor and are now the source of a lot of “what were we thinking” comments. Choosing a President is a bit more important than the fad of the month and has greater consequences. The Electoral College helps us not make rash decisions based on popularity. It doesn’t always guarantee a good President, but it certainly helps weed out bad ones who are popular, but not suitable for the job.

But we have so much better technology now than we did back when the Electoral College was put in place. We need to change with the times.

Better technology doesn’t guarantee smarter people. Our system of government relies on an informed electorate, but these days we use technology to numb our brains and keep us isolated from all but those we choose to associate with. That’s not a good model for governing because leaders don’t always have the option to block or ban people we don’t like. Good governance comes through honest compromise, and you can’t get that on Twitter.

Okay, but shouldn’t we get rid of the Electoral College because of its ties to slavery?

Not once you look at the context. At the time the Founding Fathers were discussing how to choose a President, they toyed with the idea of the Electoral College being based on population like the House of Representatives. The slave states loved this idea because they would have more votes to elect the President. Eventually, this idea was scrapped with the end goal being to end slavery, not to maintain it.

But it was created by racist white males who kept slaves!

Again, you need to look at the context. Yes, they owned slaves, while at the same time trying to end the practice altogether. The Electoral College shouldn’t be abolished because of its ties to slave owners, especially considering the institution itself literally has no other job than to elect a President. Even if it had any opinions on slavery, the power vested within it makes it a moot point.

Okay. Let’s say you’re right about the past, but what about the present? Electors in Wyoming have more say in a Presidential election than California does, but California has more people.

You are correct about California having more people. Which is why they have more Electoral College votes in the first place. The number of Electors is based on the number of Representatives and Senators a state has. Since the House is based on population, California has vastly more votes towards the Presidency than Wyoming does. And since California is a winner-take-all state, all the Electors go to the Presidential candidate who wins the popular vote. If we’re using population to representation as a measuring stick, Wyoming’s Electoral votes have more weight. If we’re using sheer number of representatives as the measuring stick, though, California runs away with it easily.

But here’s the twist. An Electoral vote from Wyoming counts exactly the same as an Electoral vote from California: precisely…one. When viewed from this perspective, the concept of one vote holding more weight than another gets blown out the water.

Perhaps the fix to the Electoral College issue is to do away with winner-take-all states and apportion the Electors by the percentage of votes each candidate gets. That addresses your concerns and mine simultaneously, and no one gets left out.

We have to abolish the Electoral College! We don’t want another President to win the Electoral vote and lose the popular vote!

Although this very scenario has happened twice in 20 years, it’s still a pretty rare occurrence. Prior to 2000, it had only occurred 3 other times, and twice within 12 years, for a grand total of 8.6% of the time the Electoral College winner doesn’t coincide with the popular vote winner. That equates to 91.4% of the two votes going for the same candidate. And in 0% of the elections did the country fall apart when it didn’t happen. No system is going to be perfect, but I think a 91% success rating is still pretty good.

If we had a direct popular vote for President, it would be 100%.

But only because we would eliminate the need for an Electoral College, and it wouldn’t guarantee the winning candidate would step foot outside of population centers on the East and West Coasts where the majority of people live. Although you would achieve your “one person, one vote” goal, it would be at the expense of the entire country. Cities can be pretty isolated places when it comes to ideology and life experience. It would be like trying to compose a Tweet using only the most used letters. You might be able to get your point across, but it’s harder than it needs to be.

And let’s not forget the possibility of voter fraud.

Those instances are rare and wouldn’t impact a national election.

We know about the people who get caught, but that may be only a fraction of the times voter fraud has been committed successfully. And, yes, it’s being done by both sides. However, the problem is even when the number of fraudulent votes is small, it only takes 1 over 50% for a candidate to win. The 2000 Presidential election was won by a few hundred votes. If even 1 vote out of 1000 was fraudulent, that can be enough to swing the results. Not every election is going to be a blowout, so we need to be able to account for each and every vote tallied and why it was accepted or rejected.

With the current dismal state of our election security, a national popular vote would open up the possibility of greater and more diverse forms of voter fraud, ranging from fraudulent registrations to multiple votes for a candidate from the same person to even counting votes from people who shouldn’t be voting in the first place, such as illegal immigrants and the deceased. A national popular vote would overwhelm the current process to the point of breaking. Then, one person, one vote might turn out to be one person, many votes.

We wouldn’t be in this mess if it weren’t for Republicans gerrymandering states for votes.

Gerrymandering doesn’t affect the Electoral College vote, only the number of votes a state has. And even if one party or the other reconfigures Congressional districts to its advantage, the vote for the slate of Electors is still based on the popular vote.

I agree gerrymandering is a problem and should be abolished, but it’s no reason to get rid of the Electoral College. It’s like saying we should get rid of the designated hitter rule because hockey’s too violent.

By this time, the Leftist might be getting upset and willing to punch you, so I’d better stop here. If you have any suggestions to add to this list or ideas for future Crafty Conservative Comebacks for Loony Leftist Lines topics, let me know!

Voter ID


It’s funny how the Left thinks that Voter ID laws are unconstitutional. They falsely claim it is a poll tax but it is clearly not one at all.

Voter ID laws are to cut down on voter fraud. And as we have been shown recently, thanks to several undercover investigations, voter fraud is very real. People are bused in from out of State to vote. Dead people vote. Non-citizens vote. People vote more than once. And the list goes on.

Proving one’s identity is a part of every day life. You must have a valid ID to open a bank account, to board a plane, to get a loan, or to cash a check. You need that valid ID to rent property, to get a job, to drive a vehicle, and to obtain insurance. These are just some of things that an ID is required to prove one’s identity. It is required to purchase tobacco and alcohol as well.

To claim it is unfair to require an ID to vote is absurd. Everyone has an ID. Even illegal aliens generally have a drivers license. And if for some twist of fate you do not have an ID. Then the Voter ID laws take that into account and have the Secretary of State’s office issue one to you without cost when you register to vote.

There are additional reforms needed to cut down voter fraud as well but these are subjects for another and much larger post. But Voter ID should be supported by everyone who believes in our Republic and wants to keep it free.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


For the past couple of weeks, Donald Trump has been floating the idea the upcoming Presidential election is rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton. Some…well, most of the media have written this off as the delusional ramblings of a loser. And given they have given cover for Joe Biden for a number of years, they know how to do it.

But is there something to the accusations? That depends on how you define voter and/or election fraud.

voter/election fraud

What the Left believe it means – something that rarely happens, but always gets mentioned by right wing nut jobs as part of a conspiracy

What it really means – Leftists rigging elections

This may be one time where I actually agree with Trump. Elections are rigged, and although both sides do it, it seems the Left has a Paul Bunyon leg up on the Right when it comes to voter and election fraud. There’s a reason there is a joke about dead people voting Democrat in Chicago; it actually happened. And as far as I know, it may still be happening. Imagine if Chicago residents spent as much time finding a decent quarterback for the Bears as they spent making sure dead people vote blue, Chicago might be seen as Title Town.

All kidding aside, Democrats and voter fraud go together like peanut butter and raw sewage. One is a horrible substance that few, if any, people want to eat, and the other is sewage. (Sorry, I couldn’t stop kidding. Then again, it’s hard to pick out which one of the two items referenced above would represent sewage.)

Over the past few years, Democrats have figured out a way to massage election laws in ways that would make Bill Clinton really happy, if you know what I mean. And if you don’t, don’t ask his wife because she doesn’t know either. Whether it’s busing people from place to place to vote or finding ways to use absentee ballots to stuff ballot boxes or “helping” people in adult living centers to fill out ballots (oddly enough all for Democrats), it always seems as though Democrats are the masters of maximizing fraud.

Of course, the media don’t seem to think it’s a problem. Ask them and they will tell you voter and election fraud are more rare than the way Dracula takes his steaks. Yeah, about that. Seems it happens more regularly that they care to admit, and I can prove it with one five letter acronym.


No, wait. I mean ACORN. No matter what you think of the way ACORN acquitted itself in light of video evidence proving they were part of a massive voter fraud attempt, the fact they were caught so many times in so many states doing things that were even slightly dishonest should be enough to make even the most honest Leftist blush in shame. Of course, that would require Leftists to be honest and have shame, but we can dream, can’t we?

And what have Republicans done to combat it? Attempted to pass voter ID laws without having much of a gameplan on how to promote them. Republicans not having an idea of how to convince people their ideas are worth exploring? The hell???

In their attempts to go along to get along, Republican leaders have dropped the ball more than Jay Cutler on a day when he’s playing football. (See? I told you Chicago needed to change their focus from fraud to football.) In doing so, Republicans have let Leftists walk all over them and ignore actual instances of fraud. And what have they gotten out of it?

Well, losing two Presidential elections in a row against a part-time Senator from Illinois with a resume thinner than an anorexic stick insect, and setting up to lose a third to a woman with more failures under her pantsuit belt than Bialystok and Bloom. And people wonder why grassroots Republicans are lining up to vote for Donald Trump?

With this election coming down to the wire, we cannot ignore the possibility…well, probability…well, certainty the Left is going to try to play fast and loose with election laws, and it shouldn’t take videos from Project Veritas or emails from Wikileaks to prove it to people. This is the Left’s M.O., and it has been for decades. But there is one way to beat them; make it so it’s impossible for them to manufacture enough votes to win.

Either that, or hope for the Cubs to win the World Series before the Sweet Meteor of Death shows up. That may not stop Democrats from cheating, but it would make me happy.

Voter Fraud


Recent undercover videos have given evidence of wide-spread voter fraud being committed by the Democratic Party. And since this is the party that currently controls the White House and the Department of Justice, nothing will be done about it.

President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will do nothing about the evidence of voter fraud. Even though back in 2008 Hillary claimed Obama won by busing in voters illegally. It is her turn now to do the same so she can win the general election in November.

Both of these people are criminals. Both of them have committed voter fraud. Both should be in jail. Neither one of them should be President of the United States. And the Democratic Party needs to be investigated for additional evidence and crimes of voter fraud.

We need to have some major changes in the election laws to prevent this wide spread fraud from ever being committed again by any party. We need to have a national registered voter database that the states update. This will help prevent voters from being registered in multiple states. As of now there are millions of voters who are registered in more than one state. We also have to end same day voter registration, it’s not enough time to find someone that is committing fraud.

And we need to have voter ID laws in place. You have to show a photo ID to drive, board an airplane, travel overseas, cash a check, write a check, open an account, and get a job. So everyone already has an ID. It’s not hard to show it when you go to the polls.