The Dems like to trot out the official figures for the 2016 elections for President and note the Hillary actually beat Donald in the popular vote even though she was soundly defeated in the Electoral College. Does this mean that more Americans preferred Clinton over Trump? The answer is --ABSOLUTELY NOT.
Why is that? Let us examine how Presidential elections are handled. All candidates for the Presidency know that it is the Electoral College that needs to be won in order to win the office. So what do they do? They concentrate all their resources and time toward that end. They all employ huge staffs working toward that end and hire high priced consultants to map the road to victory headed by a Campaign Manager. They spend untold hours developing strategies based on expensive polls that they commission, in addition to the national polls that are a daily item in the media. So the entire strategy is aimed toward winning the Electoral College.
Using that strategy they concentrate their resources on so called purple states. That is, states that the campaign strategists consider up for grabs. The only reason they visit states they know they can't win or they consider in their pocket is for fund raising.
For instance, and the perfect example, Clinton nor Trump bothered to actually campaign in California, a state that is so Democratic in bleeds blue. The only reason Hillary showed up at all is to wring money from the rich folks in the bay area, Silicon Valley and the entertainment industry, all strong liberal centers and big supporters of the Dems.
California may be unique in that the people running for all state and federal offices, except President, are the two top vote getters from the primary election. I didn't look it up, so I don't know if other states hold their election the same way or not. I wouldn't be surprised if California stood alone in this type of ballot stuffing, but California isn't known as the land of fruits and nuts for no reason.
So, the ballot for the general election had a lot of offices except the President up for election with nothing but Democrats listed. As a side note, almost all state offices in California, such as Secretary of State, Attorney General, are elected. That was almost universal for those big population centers along the coast, stretching from the bay area south to the border. Republicans, in large numbers see no reason to go to the polls. It was a forgone conclusion that Clinton was going to win the Presidential vote in the state and the candidates for the Senate, House, state and local offices along the coasts were all Dems. Only when you get away from the big coastal centers into the interior of the state do you find a Republican presence. But, inland California does not have the population numbers as does the coastal cities.
So the largest state in the union with over 30 million people has pretty much made the Republicans outsiders to the political process for the moment. So in a system where the Electoral College elects the President, their vote has no weight at all. So they don't bother to vote. Most of them live in districts that are heavily Democratic so the their vote don't mean much for the state offices as well as federal.
That type of scenario is played out in other states, probably to lesser extent because they don't have Californians rigged system, where one party of the other has a commanding majority. The candidates spend no time in those states and the minority party is actually discouraged from even showing up at the polls because their vote is meaningless.
So the conclusion one has to reach is that the popular vote means virtually nothing and is not indicative of what most of people think or how they would have voted if they had a reason to vote. So even counting the popular vote on a nation wide basis has no meaning at all.
But what would happen if the Constitution where amended to change the Presidential election to the popular vote? The entire strategy for conducting a campaign would change. In the last election Trump would have campaigned in California and Clinton would have campaigned in Texas. But, they would not have spent any resources at all, of very little, in the smaller states. The partition of the states into red, blue and purple would have no meaning. The candidates would have to campaign where the votes are, i. e. the big population centers. And, the popular vote would have been quite a bit different for the 2016 election. This is not even a possibility now or in the foreseeable future. The small states wouldn't put up with it.
Under those rules the Republicans in California and New York would have a reason to vote. The Democrats in the so called Red states would have a reason to go to the polls.
Whether that's a good thing or not, the founding fathers considered that the election of the President by state rather than by popular vote to be the best choice. After all we are a nation of united states. It is intended that the states would retain all the power except that detailed in the Constitution. They were very much afraid, and rightly so, that if left to the popular vote, the large states would dominate the political process and sweep the small states aside. In the present environment the nation would be ruled by the coastal states with the great heartland of American largely ignored. That was what they wrote into the constitution and that is what the candidates have to live with.
The message is clear. The popular vote is not a meaningful measure of the population as a whole toward the election of the President.
QED
Tuesday, September 19, 2017
Friday, September 8, 2017
North Korea and Kim Jong-un
There seems to be a consensus among the talking heads at the Fox News Network and CNN that North Korea, in the person of Kim Jung-un is crazy, or at least unstable. I think the characterization of the little guy with the funny haircut is far from true. If Kim is crazy he's crazy like a fox.
What he and his father Kim Jong-il and his grandfather Kim Il-Sung have done is played the western world, and the United States in particular, like a well tuned harp.
Perhaps a little review of the history will help. After WWII Korea, after being liberated from Japan, was occupied by two powers. By agreement the United States would occupy territory south of the 38th parallel and the Soviet Union would occupy north of that line. There was some talk about a general election to solidify the country which had the same outcome as the same promises by the Soviets concerning eastern Europe. The Soviets then established a puppet state in the north and named Kim il-Sung as the head. They thought they had a puppet they could control. Later, when they tried to replace him, they found that they had lost control of their puppet.
However, with the Soviets help the North was supported and armed with Soviet military equipment and advisors. The Chinese, glad to have a buffer between a western power and themselves were very supportive of North Korea.
That became really evident when the United Nations forces reached the Yalu River during the Korean War and the Chinese reacted with a huge force. They did not want a western leaning country bordering China. During the Korean War the Chinese warned the Americans not to cross the 38th parallel and move to the borders of China, but MacArthur chose to ignore the warnings. When you look at the present situation, it is evident that feeling is still the overriding consideration of the Chinese today. It drives their foreign policy concerning Korea and the United States/ They will not continence a western power at their borders. It overrides every other consideration. When we think that economics or sanctions will deter the Chinese from that stance, then we're just blowing smoke.
Early on the Kims, articulated by Kim Jong-il, developed the policy of Songun (military first). That policy has been picked up and carried forward by his son Kim Jong-un. As a result the North Koreans have the 4th largest military force in the world. Some 1,106,000 on active duty with 8,389,000 in reserve. They also have huge tank, artillery and mechanized forces. As we all know they now have developed nuclear weapons and the missile force to deliver them.
Why do they spend so much of their countries resources on the military and the hugely expensive program to develop nuclear weapons and ICBMs? The answer is simple. They want to insure that they will not be another Iraq. They watched what happened there and Kim doesn't want to be another Saddam. His position is quite clear. If Iraq had a nuclear arsenal, the Americans would have never have invaded the country. So he sees a nuclear capability and a means to deliver a bomb on the United States itself is the greatest deterrent for aggressive action against his country.
Kim Jong-il managed an agreement with Bill Clinton in 1994 to curtail his nuclear bomb program for aid. It isn't clear he ever did really comply as there was no means to monitor the program. But, when his father died, the push to develop an atomic bomb was accelerated under Kim Jong-un. The United States and most of the western world was decrying their pursuit of atomic weapons, threatening them with sanctions. But, all the wringing of hands by the western powers hasn't made a dent in their efforts. The pundits think that China should step in and put a stop to the effort, but China has it's own agenda. And. China isn't likely to stand by and allow western powers to move against North Korea militarily.
Now they have the bomb, even a thermonuclear version, and a long way toward perfecting the missiles to deliver that bomb directly to the American mainland. They have demonstrated that they can reach Japan already.
So the little guy with the funny haircut is sitting in pretty good position at the moment. He got there because of a lot of missteps by the United States since the end of WWII. I'm afraid we're in a pickle now. Damned if we do and Damned if we don't do something about North Korea. I don't think Kim is suicidal, so I don't think he would unilaterally launch an attack against the United States. But, the North Koreans could sell their technology to rogue nations that have a different view of the world.
What he and his father Kim Jong-il and his grandfather Kim Il-Sung have done is played the western world, and the United States in particular, like a well tuned harp.
Perhaps a little review of the history will help. After WWII Korea, after being liberated from Japan, was occupied by two powers. By agreement the United States would occupy territory south of the 38th parallel and the Soviet Union would occupy north of that line. There was some talk about a general election to solidify the country which had the same outcome as the same promises by the Soviets concerning eastern Europe. The Soviets then established a puppet state in the north and named Kim il-Sung as the head. They thought they had a puppet they could control. Later, when they tried to replace him, they found that they had lost control of their puppet.
However, with the Soviets help the North was supported and armed with Soviet military equipment and advisors. The Chinese, glad to have a buffer between a western power and themselves were very supportive of North Korea.
That became really evident when the United Nations forces reached the Yalu River during the Korean War and the Chinese reacted with a huge force. They did not want a western leaning country bordering China. During the Korean War the Chinese warned the Americans not to cross the 38th parallel and move to the borders of China, but MacArthur chose to ignore the warnings. When you look at the present situation, it is evident that feeling is still the overriding consideration of the Chinese today. It drives their foreign policy concerning Korea and the United States/ They will not continence a western power at their borders. It overrides every other consideration. When we think that economics or sanctions will deter the Chinese from that stance, then we're just blowing smoke.
Early on the Kims, articulated by Kim Jong-il, developed the policy of Songun (military first). That policy has been picked up and carried forward by his son Kim Jong-un. As a result the North Koreans have the 4th largest military force in the world. Some 1,106,000 on active duty with 8,389,000 in reserve. They also have huge tank, artillery and mechanized forces. As we all know they now have developed nuclear weapons and the missile force to deliver them.
Why do they spend so much of their countries resources on the military and the hugely expensive program to develop nuclear weapons and ICBMs? The answer is simple. They want to insure that they will not be another Iraq. They watched what happened there and Kim doesn't want to be another Saddam. His position is quite clear. If Iraq had a nuclear arsenal, the Americans would have never have invaded the country. So he sees a nuclear capability and a means to deliver a bomb on the United States itself is the greatest deterrent for aggressive action against his country.
Kim Jong-il managed an agreement with Bill Clinton in 1994 to curtail his nuclear bomb program for aid. It isn't clear he ever did really comply as there was no means to monitor the program. But, when his father died, the push to develop an atomic bomb was accelerated under Kim Jong-un. The United States and most of the western world was decrying their pursuit of atomic weapons, threatening them with sanctions. But, all the wringing of hands by the western powers hasn't made a dent in their efforts. The pundits think that China should step in and put a stop to the effort, but China has it's own agenda. And. China isn't likely to stand by and allow western powers to move against North Korea militarily.
Now they have the bomb, even a thermonuclear version, and a long way toward perfecting the missiles to deliver that bomb directly to the American mainland. They have demonstrated that they can reach Japan already.
So the little guy with the funny haircut is sitting in pretty good position at the moment. He got there because of a lot of missteps by the United States since the end of WWII. I'm afraid we're in a pickle now. Damned if we do and Damned if we don't do something about North Korea. I don't think Kim is suicidal, so I don't think he would unilaterally launch an attack against the United States. But, the North Koreans could sell their technology to rogue nations that have a different view of the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)