Method: Challenge the legitimacy of the electoral college.
If you want to win, you may have to challenge or defend the electoral college.
An article in USA Today covers historical examples of US Presidents who were elected to office without the popular vote. “In 1824, John Quincy Adams was elected president despite not winning either the popular vote or the electoral vote. Andrew Jackson was the winner in both categories. Jackson received 38,000 more popular votes than Adams, and beat him in the electoral vote 99 to 84. Despite his victories, Jackson didn’t reach the majority 131 votes needed in the Electoral College to be declared president. In fact, neither candidate did. The decision went to the House of Representatives, which voted Adams into the White House.”
Do we even need to cover what happened between George W. Bush and Al Gore in the 2000 elections?
In the 2016 election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the upset was so severe for democrats that they immediately moved to attempt to delegitimize the electoral college voting system, saying that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and therefore should be the president of the United States.
The problem is, people have zero understanding of the purpose of the electoral college and the reasons for not holding a pure democratic vote; nor do they understand the inherent dangers of direct democracy.
That’s where you come in. This strategy takes advantage of people’s lack of understanding about the reasons they do not vote directly. Start by calling up your buddies in the news media, and start spreading news stories to all of the low-information voters to get them furious and afraid. Tell them how unfair it is and how they need to insist on changing the entire system so that you can attain your rightful place.
Take this example from November 12, 2016, in which Sean Illing of Vox wrote The real reason we have an Electoral College: to protect slave states. Notice Sean’s beautiful use of sophistry as he spells out his non-argument against the electoral college. “The reasons for the Electoral College are unclear to most people. On the surface, it appears anti-democratic and needlessly complicated. What did the American founders have in mind when they erected this ostensible firewall against majority will?”
Or this example from November 10, 2016, by John Kass of the Chicago Tribune. John claims “Without Electoral College, we’d live in real-life ‘Hunger Games.” In this piece, he spells out a world in which the fly-over states would turn into a desolate wasteland somewhat akin to District 13 in the Hunger Games if we didn’t have the electoral college to protect us.
Notice these two authors focused on fear-mongering; an excellent strategy when you don’t want your victims… I mean, readers to think critically. One author says you should be scared because we have the electoral college. The other says we should be scared if we didn’t have the electoral college. The strategy you use will depend on which side of the election results you end up on.
[ don’t miss out on the official release of the full article. Subscribe to my email list at http://www.unframeofmind.com/about/ ]