This morning, Greg Sargent articulates an obvious concern: in the future, would a Republican controlled Congress just refuse to let a duly elected Democrat become President?
It’s a rhetorical question—with an answer that is obvious, or at least it’s obvious to me: Yessir, they would indeedy do that very little thing, as long as they were dealing with a rabidly irrational base demanding a coup.
So, yes, we have a problem with hypocritical, timid politicians. And we have a problem with institutions like the Electoral College that give disproportionate political power to rural Americans. All true. But the biggest problem is the gullible, white, uneducated, culturally resentful, racist base.
Back on December 23, Jonathan Chait wrote a piece, Liberals Need ‘Republicans for Biden’ to Stick Around a While, that very much bears reading. You should click the link and read it, but let me just quote Chait’s concluding thoughts:
One day, though perhaps not for years or even decades, the Republican Party can be made safe for democracy again. In the meantime, the Democratic Party has to remain a broad anti-authoritarian coalition. The Republican dissidents who revolted against Trump should stay a while. Liberals are going to need their help.
For the time being, it’s not going to be liberals versus conservatives. It’s going to be the Coalition of Reality and Reason versus the Fascist Gullible Fools Faction.
We will see what happens on Wednesday evening going into Thursday, as the Hogwarts sorting hat sorts the Slytherins from the Gryffindors, the Ravenclaws, and the Hufflepuffs.
All things considered, the only thing that surprises me is that more Republican politicians haven’t openly declared their allegiance to the Fascist Gullible Fools Faction.
And, more specifically, continuing to speak of things that surprise me, here is …
The Unspeakable (on Most Days) Tom Cotton Speaking as the Guardian of Democracy:
Washington, D.C. — Senator Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) released the following statement on the joint session of Congress later this week:
“I share the concerns of many Arkansans about irregularities in the presidential election, especially in states that rushed through election-law changes to relax standards for voting-by-mail. I also share their disappointment with the election results. I therefore support a commission to study the last election and propose reforms to protect the integrity of our elections. And after Republicans win in Georgia, the Senate should also hold more hearings on these matters. All Americans deserve to have confidence in the elections that undergird our free government.
Nevertheless, the Founders entrusted our elections chiefly to the states—not Congress. They entrusted the election of our president to the people, acting through the Electoral College—not Congress. And they entrusted the adjudication of election disputes to the courts—not Congress. Under the Constitution and federal law, Congress’s power is limited to counting electoral votes submitted by the states.
If Congress purported to overturn the results of the Electoral College, it would not only exceed that power, but also establish unwise precedents. First, Congress would take away the power to choose the president from the people, which would essentially end presidential elections and place that power in the hands of whichever party controls Congress. Second, Congress would imperil the Electoral College, which gives small states like Arkansas a voice in presidential elections. Democrats could achieve their longstanding goal of eliminating the Electoral College in effect by refusing to count electoral votes in the future for a Republican president-elect. Third, Congress would take another big step toward federalizing election law, another longstanding Democratic priority that Republicans have consistently opposed.
Thus, I will not oppose the counting of certified electoral votes on January 6. I’m grateful for what the president accomplished over the past four years, which is why I campaigned vigorously for his reelection. But objecting to certified electoral votes won’t give him a second term—it will only embolden those Democrats who want to erode further our system of constitutional government.”