Editor,
How destructively arbitrary elections of the U.S. president have become. Shouldn’t the election of the holder of the most powerful and prestigious office in the world be based on more complete information and careful forethought, to avoid regrets and costly lawsuits after the damage is done?
Some points to support my claim of arbitrariness, and necessary Electoral College abolishment:
George W. Bush Jr. was EC-selected in 2000, helped by the SCOTUS, with Sandra O’Connor the deciding vote. She later regretted it, wishing she had voted otherwise. If so, we would have elected majority-supported Al Gore, and thus, possibly avoided both 9/11, and two unnecessary, unwinnable, disastrous wars in the Middle East, which also upset some slight counterbalance between Iraq and Iran.
What difference would it have made, if the Access Hollywood video, prostitute silencing payoffs, Trump’s bankruptcies, rapes, criminality and cheating, and that he was far from a successful businessman, had been better known before the 2016 election, instead of endless lawsuits afterwards?
What if FBI director James Comey hadn’t published his Hillary Clinton e-mail statement just before the election, found baseless afterwards?
And for anyone disagreeing with the wisdom of abolishing the EC, read Yale University History Professor Timothy Snyder’s book “The Road to Unfreedom,” where he explains why the EC should be abolished as a destructive compromise, which even the framers disagreed on. If you still don’t get it, explain why and how you disagree with such a highly respected historian and multiple New York Times-bestseller author.
Jorg Aadahl
San Mateo
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(31) comments
Why does the SMDJ allow Jorg and others to regurgitate the same opinions, the same false narratives and same absolute lies every three months? Certainly there are far more intelligent, unbiased and well read individuals who can write LTE's on different subjects that are based on facts and are not ideologically driven. On a side note, it has been nice over the last few weeks to see little to nothing from Jorg, but like recurring body issues, he's back.
Let's see what the Editor has to say, if he even finds this worth responding to.
Well summarized, Not So Common. In some ways, it’s a good thing Jorg regurgitates his misunderstandings of the EC and the 2nd Amendment. It’s easy to cut/paste previous responses destroying his narrative and then watch as Jorg paints himself into a corner and attempt to dance his way out of it. Thanks to Mr. Fowler, below in several threads, providing the paint, Jorg is trying, unsuccessfully, to get out of his corner. We don't have Dilbert in the DJ, but we have Jorg's dance show. I’ve seen the show many times and it’s just as enjoyable as the first one.
Terence and Wags...
I am a lot closer to both of you philosophically than I ever will be to Jorg, but I may have break ranks on this fiber of the thread.
I agree Jorg submits the same thing over and over again... Same Schtick, Different Day... but that is his prerogative. (I just wish he wouldn't do so with pejoratives.) I see Jorg's commitment to SO, SO (Same Old, Same Old) LTEs as a First Amendment issue. He has every right to say the same thing over and over again... and we have the right to not read his LTEs.
Remember a while back when some lefty readers called for the DJ to cancel Matt Grocott's column? That was inappropriate then and suggesting Jorg should be cancelled is IMO inappropriate now. However, Jorg might run the risk of not getting something published due to space limitations on the op-ed page if he submits an SS, DD letter that competes for space with other letters addressing fresher topics and offering a greater variety of perspective. (I have never edited a newspaper... I could be wrong on that last one.)
I don't think Jorg ever played baseball. He's like a pitcher with only one pitch. He throws fastballs, and they keep getting hit out of the park. He would be much more effective by mixing in some change ups and breaking balls. (Don't you love sports analogies?) If I was making a trip to the mound, I'd tell Jorg to mix up his pitches. That's how he could really help the blue team.
Ray, well said. But who likes watching the Jorg Beanballs lose 100-0 every game?
Again... thanks for the compliment.
Yes, the stream of "Orange Man Bad!" and abolish the Electoral College LTEs has become tiresome. Ya gotta wonder why we don't see responses to reasoned and fact-based rebuttals challenging those LTEs. C’est la vie!
What a tangled web we weave when first we try to deceive. The supreme example of this was when the Democrat appointed head of the FBI, James Comey, loosing the election for Hillary to save his own skin. It was only topped by the Dems electing an old man with dementia who has been behind Trump all year in the polls and including the battle ground polls. Too bad we don't have another choice of candidates.
Poop LTE - as per usually with Jorgy Porgy Pudding and Pie
Oh, thank you so very much, LittleOne! That’s got to be the best, most intelligent and insightful contribution you have ever made to this opinion site! Did it all by yourself, - no help at all? Impressive!
Thanks for the compliment Jorgy - probably the nicest you have ever been. :) You will get exactly what you put out moving forward sweet-pea.
You really deserved the top prize among very heavy competition. You won with flying colors! Imagine now the envy that must have stricken your two top contenders!
Not a single one of the more or less unrelated comments addressed the topic of my LTE, where I only used indisputable facts to support my allegation of the arbitrariness of presidential elections. The comments all got more or less hung up on the EC, which was only a factor, and not the main contributor, although Professor Snyder found it necessary to at least mention it as one of the factors among many others in his “The Road to Unfreedom”. That’s how important he feels it is! What EC-supporters are reluctant to admit, is that without the EC, elections would be far less arbitrary, far more secure, and more likely to elect more competent WH occupants. Sorry, Right-wingers, - we have seen now how incompetent troublemakers make it to the WH, and how much damage they can do, - thanks to the EC.
Playtime is over.
Hi, Jorg, how is your Sunday going?
Hmmm… it appears you’re disappointed that no one addressed your LTE in the way you believe it should have been discussed. Well, you cannot control how anyone responds in the DJ. This is not your blog site where you can delete and edit commentary you do not like. At first blush, yesterday’s LTE looked to have all the trappings of one of dozens of letters and blog posts where you have expressed your loathing for all things Republican as well as one of your very, very common themes… dismantling the Electoral College. I’m sure plenty of DJ readers would agree setting aside the Electoral College can be described as your personal cause célèbre. N’est-ce pas?
Perhaps if you had clarified what you meant by arbitrary presidential elections, the debate you hoped would follow could have materialized. Do you feel too many persons who don’t have what you believe is adequate information just cast their votes arbitrarily? If that’s the case, while you can lament such choices, voters can cast their votes for anyone for any number of reasons or no particular reason. How would you propose to overcome such arbitrariness? Or is voting for presidents arbitrary because the Electoral College favors state by state vote tallying instead of a national popularity contest?
Gosh… why would someone think an important theme of your most current LTE was eliminating the Electoral College? Well, you introduce the body of your LTE with these words, “Some points to support my claim of arbitrariness, and necessary Electoral College abolishment…” Then, you directly reference the Electoral College three more times in your letter. You closed your LTE with a call to scrap the Electoral College because an Ivy League expert in Eastern European history happens to share your dislike of the Electoral College with this closing remark, “If you still don’t get it, explain why and how you disagree with such a highly respected historian and multiple New York Times-bestseller author."
There’s no percentage in posting a rebuttal to your calls to dismantle the Electoral College. You do not answer those challenges. However, I did submit a response questioning your choice of a book you claim supports abolishing the Electoral College when that book is actually about something else. Look back at my initial post following your LTE. I merely pointed out that the academician’s book you cited to support your belief the Electoral College should be eliminated was not about eliminating the Electoral College. That’s it. After an exchange of five more posts, you finally admitted the professor mentioned the Electoral College only once in his 360 page book. Thank you. If I need to research something about Russian or Eastern European history, I will check the professor’s work. He is a credible expert on those topics. Thank you for that, too.
Based on your history in the DJ plus the way you worded your most recent LTE, you cannot be surprised that other readers might think your LTE was yet another call to close down the Electoral College.
It’s Mother’s Day… I’m sure Gurli would be proud of her baby boy!
Ray: You still don’t understand what I wrote, or perhaps you just don’t want to. The few examples of arbitrariness I cited had nothing to do with the EC, and were not caused by the EC. They were totally independent of the EC, but wouldn’t have had the impact on the subsequent elections they had, without the EC controlling the counting of votes. In other words, without the EC, the same arbitrariness would in all likelihood have happened, but without the same impact on the final result, as they had with the EC in force. Clearer now?
Hello, Jorg
The examples you gave in your LTE are hardly arbitrary. Sandra Say O'Connor the swing vote? Given her push behind the scenes to craft a legal decision that stopped recounts in Florida, it's very likely she was not the swing vote. That behind-the-scenes push was purposeful not arbitrary. Don't forget... Kennedy, Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas also voted in the majority. Could you say one of them was actually the swing vote? Rehnquist was probably closer to being the swing vote, especially early in the court's review of the vote recount case. You're suggesting O'Connor regretted her vote and might have swung the court in the other direction. No... she later regretted that the issue came before the court... not her vote. By whatever means, if the issue winds up being laid at the feet of the court, it's likely her vote remains the same.
Trump's past? Sordid. His checkered past does not seem to be making a difference in 2024, so why do you believe it would have derailed his candidacy in 2016? Remember... he was running against one of the most unlikable candidates the Democratic Party ever nominated. Was Hillary's selection arbitrary? Quite the contrary, the DNC purposely torpedoed Bernie before the July 2016 convention.
Jim Comey. While it may seem he arbitrarily released info about Hillary's illegal use of computers and emails, it is his duty to report such. That duty is not optional or arbitrary. Where you can make an argument that Comey may have acted arbitrarily are his later statements saying Hillary would not be prosecuted. Skrrrrip! That's not his decision. That was Loretta Lynch's decision. You recall Loretta don't you? She met with Bill Clinton on the tarmac in Phoenix. Nothing arbitrary about that meeting.
None of this is arbitrary... Bush v Gore going to SCOTUS, Hillary's candidacy, Trump's candidacy, Comey's grandstanding, etc. Things happen for a reason. Do you think the DNC's suppressing the story about Hunter's laptop just weeks before the 2020 election was arbitrary? C'mon, Jorg... you've been around the block a time or two. So, how 'bout that Electoral College?
Ray, you are always kind in your replies. The reason people don't reply the way Jorg hopes is because, thankfully, most people have the ability to reason without twisting the facts to support their political and social desires.
Thanks for the compliment. Have a great week.
Yawn, snore… Hey Jorg, it would probably help if Mr. Snyder were a constitutional law professor instead of a historian. Mr. Snyder’s and your opinions mean nothing if you can’t convince the hundreds, if not thousands, of judges who have ruled on Electoral College challenges, rejecting all of them. Instead of wasting time on Mr. Snyder's book you may want to educate yourself by reading Supreme Court opinions in regards to rulings on the Electoral College, and in your case, the Second Amendment, too. They’ll explain why your interpretations of both concepts are on the track to nowhere. Have a blessed day.
Meanwhile, a hat tip to the inimitable Ray Fowler for his infinitely patient and well-reasoned rebuttal (some might say destruction) of Mr. Aadahl’s LTE and comments. I hope all is well in the Fowler universe, Northern Lights and all. And thanks for the book recommendations.
Good morning, Jorg
Same schtick, different day…
I don’t disagree with Professor Snyder’s expertise, especially in matters affecting Eastern Europe. However, I do disagree with presenting his work as an indictment against the Electoral College when that’s not what his book, “The Road to Unfreedom,” is about.
Yale’s Department of History describes Professor Snyder as “a renowned historian of Eastern Europe…” He specializes in European history, Russian politics, and the Holocaust. Here’s a link https://history.yale.edu/people/timothy-snyder to Professor Snyder’s bio. No mention of the Electoral College.
Professor Snyder’s book, “The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America”… note the full title… has been welcomed by plenty of liberal readers to be sure, but others have found it to be a paranoid liberal narrative. In the end, it matters none whether someone likes or dislikes Professor Snyder’s book, it’s simply not about the Electoral College.
Consulting Miss Google, you’ll find “The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America” described as a work about “Russian attempts to influence Western democracies and the influence of philosopher Ivan Ilyin on Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian Federation in general.” If you search reviews of Professor Snyder’s book, you’ll be hard pressed to find any mention of the Electoral College… it’s just not the call to abolish the Electoral College you have suggested.
Ray: Despite what you have the nerve to claim, it is quite obvious that you haven’t read Professor Snyder’s book, as I have. He clearly has a strong opinion about the Electoral College, and also explains why it is a part of “road to unfreedom”, as we have seen so many examples of. As usual, if there is something you don’t like to hear, you just search for something, anything, that you think is enough to demonstrate disagreement. Back to school, Ray!
C'mon, Jorg... we've had this same conversation in the past.
Professor Snyder's book is not about dismantling the Electoral College. It does, however, speak to 2016 Russian interference in the form of social media disinformation. Let me see... who was President when Russian bots... according to Professor Snyder... were trying to influence a US election?
You tried to make a case that AG Eric Holder's book, "Our Unfinished March," was about eliminating the Electoral College, and you invited me to read it. I did... every word. That book focused on the history of African-Americans and voting rights... not abolishing the Electoral College as you suggested.
BTW... thanks for the compliment. When I read something that does quite look correct, I will start searching. In this case, I found plenty to support disagreement with your premise. With respect to Professor Snyder... I read about a dozen reviews (most of them positive) about his book. Not one of those reviews mentioned the Electoral College... not one. Why? It's about something else.
Yes, Ray, Professor Snyder’s book is mainly about wars back in Europe, also pointing out that the hundred years long struggle between Russia and Ukraine, is greatly inspired by religion, like most wars.
Nevertheless, whether or not Miss Google told you so, and whether or not you like it, he also deals with the EC, quite strongly! Read it yourself, - for a change!
Yes, Ray, I finally gave up trying to make you understand why the Electoral College was one of the obstacles underlying AG Holder’s wish to “reverse this tide of voter suppression and become a true democracy where every voice is heard and every vote is counted.” How can that not include the EC, which excludes all minority votes in every state? That’s another book you obviously hadn’t read, either, and instead, you searched through trying to find “Electoral College” clearly spelled out!
Sorry, Jorg... with a dozen or so professional reviews summarizing Professor Snyder's book as a treatment of Russian political dominance in Eastern Europe... which you also acknowledge... that's fairly convincing evidence that his book is not about the US Electoral College.
I think you would look askance at another DJ reader who tosses out the titles of books then says, "This book proves my point. So, there can be no disagreement with my position."
Let me try... hey, everybody! Read "The Electoral College: Critical to our Republic" by Josiah Peterson, "The Indispensable Electoral College: How the Founders' Plan Saves Our Country" by Tara Ross, "Why We Must Defend the Electoral College" by Trent England, and "Saving the Electoral College: Why the National Popular Vote Would Undermine Democracy" by Robert Hardaway. These books unequivocally prove we must keep the Electoral College in place. These books end all debate on the Electoral College.
Well, they don't. Instead, gather information from both sides of the topic before forming an opinion. That's at the heart of my viewpoint that says we have solid reasons for keeping the Electoral College, and that eliminating it would cause serious problems. Still waiting for your rebuttal...
Ray: You keep wiggling around and around instead of responding directly to the core of my letter! Although Professor Snyder specifically uses the wording “Electoral College” only once, he refers to the concept in several places in his book, but I only referred to his mentioning it as a “Btw.” Get it now?
Jorg... in a 360-page paperback, the author mentions the term "Electoral Collège" once? That really suggests that the book was not about the EC.
I have to say... your LTE statement, "If you still don’t get it, explain why and how you disagree with such a highly respected historian and multiple New York Times-bestseller author," is a little bit stronger than a "btw."
I'm through. Playtime.
Btw. Ray: Seriously, instead of letting Miss Google read for you, why don’t you respond directly to the main point I make, namely the arbitrariness of presidential elections, of which the EC is just a part, although a major one? Couldn’t find anything against it? You didn’t like it, so that’s why you went on a frantic search to find something? Anything!
Btw.: When I was little, my dad read for me. But when I went to school, and finally learned to read myself, I have been doing it myself. Recommended!
Didn't take long for the ad hominem to rear its head...
Jorg, you have exhorted others to check with Miss Google many, many times over the years. Well, when I did... I discovered your claim about Professor Snyder's book to be false.
Re: the "arbitrariness of presidential elections"... I have provided you with reasons why the Electoral College should stay in place and the problems that would be created if it was eliminated. I'm still waiting for a response.
Ray: I stand by what I said about Professor Snyder’s dealing with the Electoral College in his book, which I have read, and you haven’t. If I had been taking you more seriously, I would have felt offended by your allegation that I lied about what I read.
However, more importantly, you don’t seem to have anything of value to contribute to this conversation, and not a word directed to the main topic of my LTE! What a shame.
Jorg... three quick points.
I clearly stated I disagree with your conclusion about Professor Snyder's book. IMO your interpretation is wrong. I did not say anywhere that you lied about the book. I believe the "L" word finds its way into the mix far too often. Again, IMO your assumption about the book is false. A false assumption is not a lie unless it is meant to purposefully deceive. Deception does not appear to be the reason you submitted your LTE.
Holder's book... as you recall, I sent you a very, very detailed summary of his book when I finished reading it. You've suggested I did not read Holder's book. So, I forwarded that summary to you. Does my summary look like it came from someone who did not read the book?
Last item... go outside and play. That's where I'm headed.
Ray: OK, so you read AG Holder's book, - but did you fully understand all he said, especially the line I quoted? What else did he mean by “reverse this tide of voter suppression and become a true democracy where every voice is heard and every vote is counted.” ? That’s exactly the opposite of what the EC does, by eliminating all minority votes in all states.
And why would Professor Snyder even mention the EC in his book “The Road to Unfreedom”, unless he felt it was important in the context?
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.