An Unintentional Leftist Case for the Electoral College
Should we disenfranchise the majority in each state to preserve the national majority?
The presidential election season is an exciting time for the country. Candidates hop from state to state, mingling with coal miners, electricians, and school teachers in small-town diners and pizza parlors. Every four years, all those forgotten states in America’s “flyover country” suddenly become just as important as any big-city voter.
And that’s the point.
Thanks to the Electoral College, candidates actually go to Arizona, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina to listen to voters and ask for their support. There’s something authentically and wonderfully American about seeing some of the most powerful people in the country having a conversation with a librarian in Des Moines, listening to her views on taxes and infrastructure.
But that’s all about to change if the Left has its way.
While the rest of us are working and raising families, leftists continuously concoct schemes to complete their revolution and force their way of life on the rest of us. One method they’re pushing hard these days is the national popular vote, and they’re sending out an army of writers, political pundits, and personalities to attack the Electoral College.
Jesse Wegman of the New York Times editorial board is only the latest. He suggests the national popular vote is necessary because “the presidency is the only office whose occupant must represent all Americans equally, no matter where they live.” Thus, he says, “The person who holds that office should have to win the most votes from all Americans, everywhere.”
Of course, Wegman just made the case for the Electoral College.
Without it, presidential candidates would represent New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles, but few others. By contrast, the electoral system the Founders wisely designed ensures those running for president have to win the most votes from Americans across the country. That’s one of the main reasons why we should keep it.
The title of Wegman’s piece, “The Electoral College will destroy America,” is worth noting. The system isn’t some new design foisted upon us in recent years by a tyrannical minority bent on stealing power. America has operated under this system for more than two centuries, during which time the United States has become the most prosperous and powerful country in world history.
Wegman’s argument continues to fall apart when he claims to favor a popular vote but bemoans the fact that nearly all states currently award their electoral votes to the winner of each state’s popular vote. So, he wants to negate the popular vote in each state by implementing the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. This nightmare would create a scenario in which the vast majority of voters in a state vote for candidate A only to have the state award the state’s electoral votes to candidate B, the hypothetical winner of the national vote.
As Kevin D. Williamson observes, “There is more to intelligent and decent government than sheer numeric might and majoritarianism.” That’s one of the main reasons why our system has served us so well.
But be warned — the NPV compact is only a handful of states away from replacing the Electoral College, and then coastal elites will dominate the rest of us. Why? It’s all about power masked as fairness.
Leftists are so close to total power they can taste it, which is why they’re pushing harder than ever to abolish the Electoral College. And we may have less than eight weeks to save it.
Start a conversation using these share links: