The Sanctity of the Electoral Process and Trump’s Efforts to Destroy It

Nothing is so contemptibly small as a sore loser, Donald Trump.

Diane Ravitch's blog

Some years ago, I visited Constitution Hall in Philadelphia with my then-young children. The guide, a young man, said, “One of the most momentous events in world history happened in this room.” Long pause. He continued: “George Washington decided not to run for re-election. He could have but he didn’t. He could have appointed himself king. He was the most popular man in the new nation. But he stepped aside and there was another election. And he was succeeded by John Adams. Adams didn’t inherit the office. He had to win the election.” He went on to explain how unusual it was to have a peaceful transfer of power in a world of hereditary kings, tribes, and dynasties.

The young man’s reverence for our democracy has remained with me all these years. In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the election in Florida by 537 votes. The…

View original post 317 more words

4 responses to “The Sanctity of the Electoral Process and Trump’s Efforts to Destroy It”

  1. Apparently, LL, you’ve not yet figured out that Trump, an old Clinton pal, is simply a stalking horse for her – she could never get elected without his efforts. He knocked out the other competition, and is now working hard to knock himself out of the running. Classic stalking horse. Anyone who votes for either of those is doing our system a major disfavor.

    1. That is something I considered briefly, and rejected totally, because your assumption doesn’t take into account that even the Clintons have no control over the GOP primaries where millions of registered Republicans voted for Donald Trump when there were so many other bad choices, because these voters are the fear filled racists deplorables that would prefer a fascist dictator over any semblance of a messy democracy. Donald Trump is being himself. He doesn’t have to work hard to knock himself out, because he is being who he has always been.

      And as far as both candidates doing “our system” a major disfavor, do you base that observation on your own biased political beliefs or on the language of the U.S. Constitution? I certainly wouldn’t base it on all the allegations and investigations that the Clinton’s have weathered over the years, because that’s what the 7th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does: “innocent until proven guilty” and no court has found the Clintons guilty of anything. With all the powerful and wealthy enemies that the Clintons have made, if the evidence of guilt was there, then they would have been out of power long ago.

  2. Please send this in to some more public blog….NY Times?? More people need to see this.Are you able to submit it as a editorial to newspapers aroudn the country? Maybe someone will grab it…. My hometown: Philadelphiaand I just saw 1776, a serious musical about all the twists and turns that went into the writing and signing of the Declaration of Indendencea hug

    1. This post came from a very public blog, and I Reblogged this post from Diane Ravitch’s Blog that has had almost 30 million views since 2012. That one post has probably already been read on Ravitch’s blog by tens of thousands of her followers. I’m one of her followers.

      Ravitch has written Op-Eds for the New York Times before. Here’s one of them.

Comments are welcome — pro or con. However, comments must focus on the topic of the post, be civil and avoid ad hominem attacks.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.