Recounts, Amendments, and Blame: The Left in Denial

Democrats and the media remain mired in grief three weeks after the historic 2016 election

Here’s what mainstream media newsrooms across the nation probably sounded like last week:

Editor: “Quick! Bang out an article on how Trump is only appointing white males to serve on his cabinet! Need it by this afternoon!”

Social justice warrior Jill Stein doesn’t always raise millions of dollars, but when she does, she spends it on a pointless recount.

Writer: “What’s the hurry?”

Editor: “He’s about to appoint a couple women and a black guy.”

Don’t believe me? “Donald Trump’s Binder Full of White Men,” read a headline from The Washington Post on Nov. 18.

Do you support individual military members being able to opt out of getting the COVID vaccine?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from LifeZette, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

“White Men Dominate Trump’s Early Staff Selections,” said Politico that same day.

[lz_ndn video= 31616284]

Two days before, Newsweek asserted: “Leaving Women Out of Donald Trump’s Cabinet is Not Just Wrong — It’s Dangerous.”

This sort of fallacy is like popping two green M&Ms out of a bag and then boldly declaring, “All the M&Ms will be green!” Better to be cool and wait until you’ve seen a few more.

Since the election, the mainstream media and the Democratic Party have stood there — mouths agape, Hillary’s crown tucked under their arm — in total disbelief. How is this happening? Why is Trump the one appointing people? We almost won, shouldn’t that mean we won? Warning: These are the grown-ups you get when you stop keeping score at T-ball games.

Donald Trump has been president-elect for nearly three weeks, and while Trump, his transition team, and much of the American public has moved on to the business of the country, the mainstream media and the Democratic Party still have their collective heads jammed down the rabbit hole of denial.

This isn’t how it was supposed to be!

Newsweek’s recalled “Madam President” issue — a Dewey-Defeats-Truman-level screw up — is the perfect snapshot of how things were supposed to go, teeming with anti-truths like “President-Elect Hillary Clinton continued to push for an issues-based campaign” and “President-elect Hillary Clinton ‘went high’ when her opponent and his supporters went ever lower.” Every word dripping with joy.

That’s how Nov. 9 was supposed to be. One gigantic, liberal end-zone dance. And media narratives not about Clinton’s chaotic transition or possible conflicts of interest or too many white men — but about the fun stuff. “What are we going to call Bill?” and “Why Republican presidents have become mathematically impossible.” But they got something else — the Election Day equivalent of a lump of coal (and you know how they hate coal).

Given their resounding defeat at every level of government, Democrats should look like Hamlet right now — storming back and forth across the political stage, introspectively chiding themselves for getting it all wrong. Instead, they look like Kanye West babbling incoherently about how they’re geniuses and everyone else — the Constitution, the voting machines, Russia — is to blame. And the mainstream media can’t muster an ounce of skepticism toward any of it. So the hopeless narrative becomes:

1) We need to amend the Constitution to get rid of the Electoral College!
To hear the liberal opinion writers tell it, the Founding Fathers made a huge mistake with this whole federalism thing. We tried it for a couple hundred years, and now it’s benefited Republicans twice. Twice! What are Democrats supposed to do? Create a platform that appeals to all those rural counties? Like what? Free pitchforks? Not a chance. They’d rather re-create Article II in their own image.

I won’t make the argument in favor of the Electoral College because Laura Ingraham already Ivy-league-lawyered that argument, but I will say — and if you’re a Democrat, I urge you to un-clench, press pause on your tantrum, and listen to me — you control 13 state legislatures. That is just barely enough to block a constitutional amendment. Win 25 more state legislatures, and then the rest of us will take your threats to amend the Constitution seriously.

2) We need to recount the votes in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan because they’re the traitors who — I mean… Russian hackers and stuff.
Social justice warrior Jill Stein doesn’t always raise millions of dollars, but when she does, she spends it on a pointless recount. When you love democracy as much as Jill Stein does, sometimes you have to call into question the results of a fair election by recounting votes when no evidence of any wrongdoing exists.

Here’s what happened: A computer scientist from the University of Michigan, J. Alex Halderman, has discovered that there’s zero evidence — zero — that the voting machines were tampered with or hacked, and zero is the exact amount of evidence the Russians would try to leave if they did hack the voting machines. In fact, his sole evidence for advocating for a recount seems to be that he finds it fishy that Donald Trump won.

Even if it’s a waste of time, he believes that calling the results into question weeks after one candidate has already conceded “can only lead to strengthened electoral integrity.”

Here’s what actual election experts are saying about the New York Magazine article that outlines Halderman’s reasoning:

Statistics guru Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight tweeted, “Patterns in Trump’s vote in swing states are well-explained by demographics — not hacking.”

Nate Cohn from The New York Times Upshot tweeted, “It’s hard to stress how weak this is.”

Here’s a crazy theory about why Clinton lost. She’s one of the worst politicians ever. She’s not skilled at campaigning for political office. Remember Neera Tanden complaining, “God. Her instincts are suboptimal”?

[lz_related_box id=”252173″]

Clinton won a Senate seat in New York because Rudy Giuliani had to drop out. She blew a huge lead against Obama in the 2008 primaries and lost. This year, she blew an even bigger lead against a 74-year old socialist who barely clings to the fringe of American political thought — and she may have lost without Donna Brazile feeding her debate questions and the entire Democratic machine churning for her.

And all those losses came before FBI Director James Comey told us how careless she was with classified information. Before WikiLeaks exposed that the Democratic National Committee helped her win the primaries. Before the Podesta emails verified her mendacity. Before she ragged on millennials for living at home and before Bill Clinton told the truth about Obamacare. The revisionism of Newsweek notwithstanding, she never once “went high.” She never once pushed “for an issues-based campaign.”

Hillary Clinton lost because she ran a terrible campaign without a single idea. The Democrats have ceased to be a national party because they’d rather be an exclusive social club.

Eddie Zipperer is an assistant professor of political science at Georgia Military College and a regular LifeZette contributor.

Join the Discussion

Comments are currently closed.