While we’re watching President Trump pummel the Democrats (progressives and the media) with distractions, it seemed appropriate to dredge this up again.
Do we want a president who wins by running up the score in one or two states, or do we want a president who wins by garnering narrower victories in a wide array of states? Clinton won New York and California. Trump won Texas. And Florida. And North Carolina, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and even one electoral vote in Maine. He won the Electoral College by assembling a more politically and geographically diverse group of states than Clinton did. In our system, winning the Electoral College confers legitimacy because such a victory exemplifies the reality the Electoral College was created to ground in our political order: that the United States is a federal union of semi-sovereign states.
The liberal answer to “do we want a president who wins by _____”, if you didn’t know, is yes if they win. Winning by any means is acceptable if the “means” only apply to the Democrat. If it gives power to their opponents, it is illegitimate. And this maxim applies to everything they believe. Just ask a black, female, or gay Republican.
