Many of us have been sitting uneasy while being consistently and gleefully taunted by the left of the legal “losses” by Trump campaign lawyers and cases brought to courts by Lin Wood and Sidney Powell. But good defense lawyers don’t always go for the win; they try to hang a jury with reasonable doubt.

Thanks to a media that depends on the ignorance of their consumers, it’s believed the Trump strategy is to flip states that voted for Joe Biden. That may not be the sole objective. Instead of going from blue to red, the goal may be to get the electors to not certify their state for any candidate. That would mean the Electoral College votes would not go to either candidate and in the case of states where Biden was declared the winner by the media*, his vote count would be reduced and as Fareed Zakaria reminded us in September, it would bring both candidates below the required 270 votes needed to outright win the presidency.

According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives settles the matter. Of course, the ignorant left would be reassured Biden would win because the Democrats control the House, but hold on.

That’s not how it works….

Instead of a full vote among House members, each state is awarded one vote and seeing how there are currently more Republican-controlled states than Democrat states, that vote will fall in President Trump’s favor and he would win a second term.

So, tolerate the minutia and collateral damage (on both sides) for the time being: the drama over voting machines and “spikes”, count irregularities, public hearings and pundit hand-wringing that we don’t just bend over and accept the election result they prefer. That’s all being compiled for the long-overdue Democrat coup d’état-deep state-swamp-fake news media reckoning.

For now, it’s all being accumulated to create reasonable doubt and give electors the cover required to do the Constitutional thing.

Nadler quotes Founders’ warnings in impeachment inquiry
Founding Fathers would be ‘horrified’: Legal experts testify Trump should be impeached
The Founders Would Have Impeached Trump for His Ukraine-Related Misconduct
We are finally on the path to Trump impeachment and saving what our Founders gave us
The Founding Fathers would have impeached corrupt Trump in a New York minute
Robert Reich: The Founding Fathers Would Have Impeached Trump

But it was not long ago (and could rear an ugly head again at any convenient time) when these same liberals considered the Founders racist, white men and the national discourse we have today is a direct result of their failed thinking.

Founding Fathers, Founding Villains
NEA Throws Evil Shade On Founding Fathers
There’s No Defending Founding Fathers Who Practiced Slavery
5 Stories That Prove The Founding Fathers Were Total Maniacs
Did the Founding Fathers Screw Up?
What’s the Difference Between Confederate Leaders and Slave-owning Founding Fathers?
Sexual abuse of slaves by students at Founding Father’s university revealed by historians
The founding fathers were evil

Impeachment is only one topic where the genius of the Founders are dashed when not in line with a Democrat agenda. The wisdom of the Electoral College, for example, was the perfect system to liberals when Bill Clinton lost the popular vote in 1992 but won the presidency based on the established Electoral College process. When liberals win, the Electoral College was perfectly crafted and implemented.

A key reason the founders wanted the electoral college: To keep out demagogues and bullies
The Founders Knew What They Were Doing with the Electoral College
Electoral college reflects wisdom of Founding Fathers
The Electoral College Was Meant to Stop Men Like Trump From Being President

However, the Founders’ brilliant system was deemed antiquated and very flawed when Hillary Clinton failed to meet its benchmark.

Not Your Founding Fathers’ Electoral College
The Electoral College Has Been Divisive Since Day One
The electoral college is a failure. The Founding Fathers would probably agree.
Founding Fathers distrusted popular vote to pick a president
The real reason we have an Electoral College: to protect slave states
All of the Arguments for Keeping the Electoral College are Stupid.

No mention of the liberal Democrat “disenfranchisement” dog whistle when they lose but that’s ultimately what they wish to do, whether it’s devising ways to assure their elections or justifying the removal of a uber-successful president they know they can’t beat at the ballot box and need an insurance policy. When they can’t rely on the American people to do what they want, they find end-arounds and base their actions on what they say the Founders foresaw and defended against.

The Founding Fathers came from all professions of the day. They weren’t professional politicians and may or may not have not been able to predict and prepare for the swamp we have today, but when Democrats praise or hate on the Founders, you can be sure it’s because of something they want; not what’s necessarily best for the country.

The National Football League has made the game’s objective very simple for those who have any doubts as to the possibly antiquated motivations of those who started playing professionally as early as 1892.

The team that scores the greater number of points during the entire game is the winner.
— NFL Operations: The Rules

If total yardage were an overall determining factor during the 2017 season, the Philadelphia Eagles would not even be eligible to compete for the Super Bowl.

Given their dominance during the regular season through the playoffs, the New England Patriots should have been declared the winner of Super Bowl LII because they won the total yardage tally in a record-breaking effort.

Despite the effort, the Philadelphia Eagles were awarded the Lombardi trophy because they scored more total points than the Patriots and as total points was the formally accepted determining factor on who wins football games, the final score was accepted by both teams and the New England region is not in full #resist mode, contesting the outcome of a Super Bowl and trying to undo the results.

Going into the 2016 presidential election, the Clinton and Trump campaigns understood and ran on the established rules that determine who wins the presidency: which campaign won the Electoral College (total points) and NOT who received more popular votes (total yardage).

Overview of the Presidential Election Process
During the general election, Americans head to the polls to cast their vote for President. But the tally of those votes—the popular vote—does not determine the winner. Instead, Presidential elections use the Electoral College. To win the election, a candidate must receive a majority of electoral votes.

This was simply explained as logical by liberal Democrats for Democrats in 2008….

The New England Patriots organization and their fans nationwide would be roundly (and justifiably) ridiculed had they taken to the mics during the post-game press conference and whined that they really won the game because they broke the all-time Super Bowl record for total yardage. It would be even more damning to their reputation if they mobilized fans across the country to #resist the results and question the legitimacy of the Philadelphia Eagles as the duly victorious on the field.

The sanity of Patriots nation would also be questioned, especially if the sports media also went along with the sore-loser narrative, attempted to create a divide between Philadelphia and the rest of the nation, and even repeated an unproven storyline that the Patriots cheated because they somehow colluded with the Canadian Football League in rigging the game.

During the last couple of weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump observed the established rules and campaigned heavily in states needed to win the game. Unlike Hillary who maybe had one or two appearances every day or so, Trump appeared in four to six events per day. At the end of November 8, 2016, Donald Trump scored more points than Hillary, yet her supporters are still trying to make the case they really won because they got more yards.

If short sighted Democrats manage to get their way and change our election process to the popular vote, both sides know the new rules and if the Democrat loses the popular vote, suddenly discovers the wisdom of the Founders and their reasoning for creating the Electoral College process, they’ll DEMAND we go back to that very well thought out (albeit “antiquated”) system.

That’ll be as logical as the National Football League changing the rules so total points are no longer the determining factor on who wins a game.

Although back in 2008, it wasn’t about so-called voter suppression of blacks by Republicans. It was even more important: the possible “disenfranchisement” of white Democrats by Hillary’s Democrats.

As we all know, getting rid of the Electoral College in favor of the popular vote (as mentioned above) means candidates would only campaign in the large urban areas and disregard the more Republican rural areas.

One thing the liberal media and Democrat pundits conveniently haven’t mentioned that there are also millions of Democrats who live in those red areas as well. Democrats who volunteer and donate to the party. Wouldn’t want to have the ground machines halted and potentially lose out on those all-important dollars squandered on politicians who will blow off their states altogether.

But they’ll find a way to justify that later.

Field’s ignorance of why we have an Electoral College is startlingly arrogant, not to mention her liberal recitation that it was created to water down the “three-fifths clause” and diminish the power of the Democrat slave-owning states.

Sally Field needs also remember that when Hillary Clinton believed she would win, she lectured us all how we should respect the election process, including the Electoral College; a system created by the Founding Fathers as a check on placing an unqualified person in the presidency as well as assure politicians would not ignore the nation as a whole in favor of large urban areas (which is exactly what the failed Hillary campaign did). A similar process she successfully exploited using the superdelegate process during the primary to freeze out Bernie Sanders, but why would we expect a woman who repeats she doesn’t understand to know what she’s talking about?

It would appear her supporters took her words with a grain of salt as well….

Neither Hillary Clinton or President Obama will stop their children from taking to the streets in a collective, disruptive hissy fit, or assure them safe spaces aren’t really necessary. Of course, adults see this for what it is: a millennial social event run amok where people and property are disregarded simply because the spoiled children (and those ready to relive the 60’s) who may or may not have even bothered to vote, didn’t get THEIR way.

When you have useful idiots in your pocket, you can play them as long as you want.

As politics is ironically cyclical, it will be fun to hear their mental contortions in a few years when their candidate receives more Electoral College votes while losing the popular vote. The Founding Fathers will again be brilliant, albeit old white men, Bernie Sanders notwithstanding.