Lawsuit Says Trump Must Not Become President Because of Global Warming

A lawsuit has been filed in Washington State asking a federal judge to throw out a law that requires members of the Electoral College vote according to their state’s popular vote.

In other words, based on the rhetoric of the left, these liberals want a racist institution to be left to its own devices instead of honoring the wishes of their own state’s voters. Washington, it should be noted, went for Hillary Clinton.

The most hilarious part of the lawsuit is the statement in their complaint about why this should happen.

“Donald Trump is unfit for office due to, among other factors, his myriad conflicts of interests; his foreign business dealings; his scientifically baseless belief that climate change and global warming are a ‘hoax.’

That’s right. The very people upset about Trump wanting to find out who in the Department of Energy worked on global warming issues want Trump stopped because of global warming.

These people are not serious. Except they are.

Everything Was Fine Till It Was Racist

Up until the polls closed on Election Day, the Democrats’ secret strategy was to rely on a system of racism and misogyny to get Hillary Clinton elected. They openly bragged about doing it.

In fact, as Jonah Goldberg noted Friday, the Democrats were even on television bragging about their open and widely known use of a key racist strategy. They were bragging about it and declared that this racism was how Barack Obama got elected and Hillary Clinton would get elected too.

It was a sure thing.

It is called the Electoral College. The Electoral College gave the Democrats a near insurmountable advantage over the Republicans. It was a “blue wall” that benefited them in New England where Republicans supposedly cannot win, the Rust Belt, the Midwest, and the left coast.

But Trump shook up the Electoral College map. On Election Night, the Democrats finally lost their final grip on the Rust Belt where their environmentalist policies have devastated local economies.

So now?

Now the Electoral College must be scrapped. It is a vile and racist institution that a group of white, male misogynist, racists created to keep hermaphrodidic, multi-racial, homosexual, transgendered, and multi-gendered candidates in the back of the bus.

This is why it is so hard to take their complaints about the Electoral College seriously.

They were openly bragging about what an advantage they had because of it. But the moment that advantage went away, suddenly we have to scrap the very system they relied on for years for an advantage with the Presidency.

What stands out more than anything is that if the Democrats really do think the Electoral College is a racist, misogynist institution, they were willing to use that racism and misogyny for their own gain and advantage and therefore have the dirty hands they think only Republicans are capable of having.

Christopher Suprun Shows the System Works

Christopher Suprun is a member of the Electoral College from Texas. Texas voted for Donald Trump, but Suprun announced in the New York Times this morning that he will not honor the wishes of Texas’s voters and he will refuse to cast a vote for Donald Trump.

This is exactly as the system is supposed to work.

Let me be up front that I disagree with Suprun. While at one time I had dreams and visions of an Electoral College revolt, I think because I got the election so terribly wrong that I need to exercise enough humility to consider many, many Americans clearly have deep rooted issues that I failed to appreciate and I suspect Mr. Suprun did as well. These Americans, long ignored by Washington, spoke loudly.

Mr. Suprun’s statements about Trump being erratic, undisciplined, and unexperienced were true before and after the voters voted. Nothing has really changed.

But whether I disagree with Mr. Suprun or not, I respect and encourage him to stand up for what he believes as a member of the Electoral College. Our founders hated direct democracy and states like California with its ridiculous ballot initiatives, etc. continue to prove our founders right. Direct democracy is mob rule and mobs often operate at the level of the lowest common denominator.

The founders envisioned a system where electors would be picked who could make wise and informed decisions about our leadership, while removing the Presidency both from direct control of the congress and direct control of the people.

I oppose “faithless elector” laws because I believe the Electoral College members should be free to cast their votes as they see fit. Each party picks people to serve in the Electoral College and the people chosen are chosen by whichever candidate wins the popular vote of their state.

Between the election in November and the real election for President in December, events should be able to change the mind of the electors and inform their vote. Mr. Suprun has every right to do his duty as he sees it to protect and defend the constitution of the United States.

Good for him being so bold. His future in Republican politics is probably at an end, but he goes out not as a faithless elector, but as an elector most faithful to the vision of the founders of this country.

Georgia Secretary of State to Crybabies: Quit Threatening the Electors

Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp issued this press release today:

ATLANTA, GEORGIA – On December 19, 2016, Georgia’s 16 Republican Presidential Electors will convene under the Gold Dome to cast votes for the next President and Vice-President of the United States. In light of recent reports, Secretary of State Brian Kemp strongly urges Georgians and others to refrain from using threatening or disparaging language to manipulate electors.

“The Presidential election is over but, unfortunately, the vitriol remains,” stated Secretary of State Brian Kemp. “Our office has received numerous reports of individuals hurling insults and threats at Georgia’s Electors because they are unsettled with America’s choice for President of the United States. This is absolutely unacceptable and those participating in or encouraging these efforts should stop. The electoral process in America has worked, and everyone – Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and others – should respect the will of Georgia’s voters and the Electors who represent them.”

Apparently, anti-Trump crybabies aren’t just confined to college campuses and the streets of liberal enclaves like Portland, Oregon. Yeah, very persuasive, threatening the electors like that. I’m sure they’ll all be persuaded that Hillary Clinton should have won the election because of your hissy fits.

Bunch of babies.

Who Really Won the Popular Vote?

Posts surfaced on the internet within days of the election claiming that the “final election 2016 numbers” showed that Donald Trump had won both the Electoral College and popular vote. While not all absentee votes have been counted and Michigan’s vote count is still incomplete as of this writing, it appears that Hillary Clinton will have received more popular votes than Donald Trump when the final count is made.

At present, all major news sources agree that Hillary Clinton is leading Donald Trump in the popular vote. A check of Fox News and CNN showed identical vote tallies for the two candidates. Donald Trump is credited with 60,834,437 votes and Hillary Clinton has 61,782,016. The reported returns give Clinton a lead of almost a million votes.

The claims that Trump received more votes seem to stem from a blog post on Nov. 12 that claimed Trump had won 62.9 million to 62.2 million when the “final election 2016 numbers” were in. The blog cites an unsourced Twitter post for its claim.

The author of the blog updated his post on Nov. 15 to argue that his unsourced numbers were correct. “The popular vote number still need [sic] to be updated in Wikipedia or MSM media – which may take another few days because the liberals are still reeling and recovering from Trump-shock victory,” the blog states. The blog also says that 3 million votes “should be removed from Hillary Clinton” because of voting by illegal aliens and voter fraud. “Trump by default is the winner in the popular vote,” the site exults.

Different states have different rules and deadlines for counting votes, but they all face a common deadline in the meeting of the Electoral College. Members of the Electoral College meet in their states on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. This year that date falls on December 19. The final, official popular vote tallies should be available by that date.

It is possible that recounts could flip some states. According to the International Business Times on Nov. 14, Trump currently leads Michigan by just over 13,000 votes and Clinton’s edge in New Hampshire is only 2,700 votes. Nevertheless, it would take the reversal of more than one swing state to change the Electoral College outcome.

It is somewhat of a mystery why the popular vote is such a contentious issue. Above state level, it matters only for bragging rights. Popular vote is only used in determining the winner of each state’s electoral votes. If the current trends continue, Trump would not be first president to win with a minority of the popular vote. reports that it has happened four times previously in U.S. history, including George W. Bush’s 2000 victory over Al Gore.

There’s Nothing Stopping ‘Moral Electors’ From Dumping Trump Except 60 Million Voters

Of course it’s not going to happen. But there’s no federal law preventing members of the Electoral College from voting against Donald Trump when they meet on December 19.

Politico reported Monday that two Democratic electors are calling for their GOP colleagues to write in (stifling a laugh) John Kasich or Mitt Romney.

P. Bret Chiafalo, a Washington State elector who has already declared his opposition to Hillary Clinton, and Micheal Baca of Colorado have launched what they’ve dubbed “Moral Electors,” an attempt to persuade 37 of their Republican colleagues to bail on Trump — just enough to block Trump’s election and leave the final decision to the House of Representatives. They have the support of a third elector, Washington State’s Robert Satiacum.

Chiafalo called it a “longshot.” “It’s a Hail Mary,” he told Politico.

No, not a longshot. It’s the same odds as aliens landing on the mall in Washington D.C. and declaring Trump to be a fugitive from Planet Krypton, known there as General Zod.

The time to declare and recognize Trump’s unfitness for office has passed. It passed at the Republican National Convention in July. Then it passed again on November 8th when voters chose him over Hillary Clinton. It doesn’t matter who won a plurality of the popular vote.

As David French wrote:

Here’s a fact: We don’t know who would have won the 2016 (or 2000) presidential races if the president was elected by popular vote because the race would have been run completely differently. Forget the millions of dollars spent squeezing a few-thousand votes out of New Hampshire precincts. Forget the micro-targeting of Iowa voters. Who really cares how Hamilton County, Ohio, turnout changed from 2012? After all, that’s just noise in the great race to, say, 65 million or 70 million votes.

Both campaigns knew the electoral rules and campaigned accordingly. Trump tweeted: “If the election were based on total popular vote I would have campaigned in N.Y. Florida and California and won even bigger and more easily.”

A few weeks before the election, I called upon electors to reject Hillary Clinton, believing she would win. My faith in American voters was misplaced. The Electoral College is not a device to prevent Americans from having the president they want–it’s actually a system to ensure that Americans get to choose the right president without a particular demographic or geographic population achieving hegemony.

Americans rejected Hillary Clinton, playing by the rules of the Electoral College.

It’s expected that Trump will have 306 electors to Clinton’s 232 by December 19 (all the votes are not yet counted, and all the state races are not yet certified). Two or three faithless electors (or “moral electors”) will make zero difference in the end result.

However, we know that America has one last parachute to stop an obvious mistake. Many of us think that Trump is not the optimal person to take over the reins of government, but that is not sufficient to overturn the Constitution and the voters of each state. I may have even been wrong calling for an electoral overthrow of Clinton–unless of course the race was within just a few electoral votes.

It’s not. The rest is hypothetical. Let us move on.

Electors Threaten To Go Rogue

The Electoral College system is a unique institution. Americans don’t vote for a presidential candidate. They vote for electors who then go to the Electoral College and vote for a president in their place. Normally the Electoral College election is a formality, but this year at least two electors have indicated that they may not vote for their party’s candidate. Two electors from party base states, one from Texas and the other from Washington, have threatened to go their own way due to their displeasure with their respective party nominees.

Chris Suprun, a firefighter from Texas who is a Republican elector, told Politico in August that he may not vote for Donald Trump, assuming that Trump wins Texas, because the candidate was “saying things that in an otherwise typical election year would have you disqualified.” In particular, Suprun took issue with Trump’s foreign policy, characterizing it as “The generals are going to commit war crimes because I tell them to.”

“I’m still amazed he made it through the process,” Suprun said. “I’m not sure who his voters were or how they identify him with what I would consider Republican principles of small government.”

Suprun, who was a first responder at the Pentagon on 9/11, said that he ran for a position as an elector with the intention of voting for the party nominee, but had second thoughts because of Trump’s behavior and rhetoric. He also noted that his congressional district is a district that has a Democratic congressman and will not go for Trump.

Robert Satiacum, a Washington State elector, has gone a step further. “She will not get my vote, period,” Satiacum said of Hillary Clinton in the Associated Press on Monday. Satiacum is a member of the Puyallup Tribe and does not believe that Clinton has done enough for Native Americans and that she lied about her private email server.

Satiacum, who was a delegate for Bernie Sanders, told ABC News, “Maybe I’ll vote Mickey Mouse. In all seriousness, maybe I should vote for Bozo the Clown.” In contrast, Chris Suprun indicated that he may vote for Hillary Clinton.

Some states have laws designed to prevent electors from defecting. Washington State law requires electors to pledge that they will vote for their party nominee. A violation is punishable by a $1,000 fine. Texas electors must take an oath to support their party candidate, but there is no penalty. Twenty-nine states have laws that prohibit electors from deviating from the will of the voters according to FairVote.

There have been “faithless electors” in the past. The most recent example of a faithless elector was in 2004 when an elector from Minnesota voted for John Edwards instead of John Kerry. In 1972, CBS News notes, the co-creator of “Little House on the Prairie,” Roger McBride, was an elector for Richard Nixon, but voted instead for the Libertarian candidate. The vote earned several footnotes in political history. It was the only electoral vote ever won by the Libertarian Party and the Libertarian vice-presidential candidate, Tonie Nathan, became the first woman and the first Jew to win an electoral vote. Faithless electors have never changed the outcome of an election.

The defection of electors would mean that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton would have to win more than 270 electoral votes to clinch the presidency. Their final decisions may not be known for weeks and may affect the outcome of a close election. Members of the Electoral College meet in their states on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. This year that date falls on December 19. The winner of the election will not be officially declared before then.

With continuing revelations about both Trump’s and Clinton’s pasts, as well as Trump’s penchant for outrageous behavior, the month between the general election and the Electoral College election could see additional electors who find that they cannot support the candidate chosen by the people. It is possible, especially if the general election is close, that the end result of the Electoral College could be different than what the popular vote indicates.

Suprun argues that the Founding Fathers didn’t intend the Electoral College to be a rubber stamp. Electors should “take a look at all the facts, figure it out and make the right call,” he said in Politico.

“I would never say never to anything.”

Resurgent Predictions for Tuesday

Erick Erickson:

Click the map to create your own at

Josh Hammer:

Click the map to create your own at

Steve Berman:

Click the map to create your own at

Jesse Kelly:

Click the map to create your own at

Cal Davenport:

Click the map to create your own at

David Thornton:

Click the map to create your own at

Philip Swicegood:

Click the map to create your own at