THE ASSOCIATED PRESS ADMITS DEFEAT
The Associated Press did all it could to elect Hillary Clinton, but today it (almost) gave up the ghost. The “news” service headlined: “Trump cruises to Electoral College victory despite protests.”
“Despite protests”? What does that mean? Are we supposed to take seriously the idea that a handful of slackers waving signs at state capitols around the country could somehow reverse Donald Trump’s victory?
And can Democrats quit whining about the “national popular vote”? Democrats complaining that their defeat was unfair because Hillary got more votes is like a basketball team complaining that it was robbed because it got more rebounds than the other team, and still lost the game. Sorry, but that isn’t how the contest is scored. And you knew that going in.
The electoral college does, of course, give more weight to less populated states, since electors equal the sum of a state’s representatives and senators. But that isn’t the only reason, or necessarily the main reason, why the person who gets the most votes may not be elected president. The more basic point, ignored by the AP, is that it does no good to run up the vote in a handful of states, while losing in many others. That is what happened to Hillary Clinton–she got lots of votes in California and New York, which Donald Trump did little or nothing to contest. But you can only win a state once.
Despite everything, the AP hasn’t quite given up hope:
“Despite protests”? What does that mean? Are we supposed to take seriously the idea that a handful of slackers waving signs at state capitols around the country could somehow reverse Donald Trump’s victory?
Trump’s polarizing victory Nov. 8 and the fact Democrat Hillary Clinton had won the national popular vote had stirred an intense lobbying effort, but to no avail.
Why was Trump’s victory “polarizing”? Would it be any less polarizing if Hillary Clinton had won? No.
And can Democrats quit whining about the “national popular vote”? Democrats complaining that their defeat was unfair because Hillary got more votes is like a basketball team complaining that it was robbed because it got more rebounds than the other team, and still lost the game. Sorry, but that isn’t how the contest is scored. And you knew that going in.
Some Democrats have argued that the Electoral College is undemocratic because it gives more weight to less populated states. That is how Clinton, who got more than 2.8 million more votes nationwide, lost the election to Trump.
The electoral college does, of course, give more weight to less populated states, since electors equal the sum of a state’s representatives and senators. But that isn’t the only reason, or necessarily the main reason, why the person who gets the most votes may not be elected president. The more basic point, ignored by the AP, is that it does no good to run up the vote in a handful of states, while losing in many others. That is what happened to Hillary Clinton–she got lots of votes in California and New York, which Donald Trump did little or nothing to contest. But you can only win a state once.
Despite everything, the AP hasn’t quite given up hope:
A joint session of Congress is scheduled for Jan. 6 to certify the results of the Electoral College vote, with Vice President Joe Biden presiding as president of the Senate. Once the result is certified, the winner — almost certainly Trump — will be sworn in on Jan. 20.
“Almost certainly Trump”? I have no idea what loophole the AP has in mind. Trump won the election, and it is 100% certain that he will be certified as the winner, however much that may dismay America’s reporters and editors.
