http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26842 Obama Was Selected, Not Elected by Ann Coulter (more by this author) Posted 06/04/2008 ET Updated 06/04/2008 ET Words mean nothing to liberals. They say whatever will help advance their cause at the moment, switch talking points in a heartbeat, and then act indignant if anyone uses the exact same argument they were using five minutes ago. When Gore won the popular vote in the 2000 election by half a percentage point, but lost the Electoral College -- or, for short, "the constitutionally prescribed method for choosing presidents" -- anyone who denied the sacred importance of the popular vote was either an idiot or a dangerous partisan. But now Hillary has won the popular vote in a Democratic primary, while Obambi has won under the rules. In a spectacular turnabout, media commentators are heaping sarcasm on our plucky Hillary for imagining the "popular vote" has any relevance whatsoever. It's the exact same situation as in 2000, with Hillary in the position of Gore and Obama in the position of Bush. The only difference is: Hillary has a much stronger argument than Gore ever did (and Hillary's more of a man than Gore ever was). Unbeknownst to liberals, who seem to imagine the Constitution is a treatise on gay marriage, our Constitution sets forth rules for the election of a president. Under the Constitution that has led to the greatest individual liberty, prosperity and security ever known to mankind, Americans have no constitutional right to vote for president, at all. (Don't fret Democrats: According to five liberals on the Supreme Court, you do have a right to sodomy and abortion!) Americans certainly have no right to demand that their vote prevail over the electors' vote. The Constitution states that electors from each state are to choose the president, and it is up to state legislatures to determine how those electors are selected. It is only by happenstance that most states use a popular vote to choose their electors. When you vote for president this fall, you will not be voting for Barack Obama or John McCain; you will be voting for an elector who pledges to cast his vote for Obama or McCain. (For those new Obama voters who may be reading, it's like voting for Paula, Randy or Simon to represent you, instead of texting your vote directly.) Any state could abolish general elections for president tomorrow and have the legislature pick the electors. States could also abolish their winner-take-all method of choosing presidential electors -- as Nebraska and Maine have already done, allowing their electors to be allocated in proportion to the popular vote. And of course there's always the option of voting electors off the island one by one. If presidential elections were popular vote contests, Bush might have spent more than five minutes campaigning in big liberal states like California and New York. But under a winner-take-all regime, close doesn't count. If a Republican doesn't have a chance to actually win a state, he may as well lose in a landslide. Using the same logic, Gore didn't spend a lot of time campaigning in Texas (and Walter Mondale campaigned exclusively in Minnesota). Consequently, under both the law and common sense, the famed "popular vote" is utterly irrelevant to presidential elections. It would be like the winner of "Miss Congeniality" claiming that title also made her "Miss America." Obviously, Bush might well have won the popular vote, but he would have used a completely different campaign strategy. By contrast, there are no constitutional rules to follow with party primaries. Primaries are specifically designed by the parties to choose their strongest candidate for the general election. Hillary's argument that she won the popular vote is manifestly relevant to that determination. Our brave Hillary has every right to take her delegates to the Democratic National Convention and put her case to a vote. She is much closer to B. Hussein Obama than the sainted Teddy Kennedy was to Carter in 1980 when Teddy staged an obviously hopeless rules challenge at the convention. (I mean rules about choosing the candidate, not rules about crushed ice at after-parties.) And yet every time Hillary breathes a word about her victory in the popular vote, TV hosts respond with sneering contempt at her gaucherie for even mentioning it. (Of course, if popularity mattered, networks like MSNBC wouldn't exist. That's a station that depends entirely on "superviewers.") After nearly eight years of having to listen to liberals crow that Bush was "selected, not elected," this is a shocking about-face. Apparently unaware of the new party line that the popular vote amounts to nothing more than warm spit, just last week HBO ran its movie "Recount," about the 2000 Florida election, the premise of which is that sneaky Republicans stole the presidency from popular vote champion Al Gore. (Despite massive publicity, the movie bombed, with only about 1 million viewers, so now HBO is demanding a "recount.") So where is Kevin Spacey from HBO's "Recount," to defend Hillary, shouting: "WHO WON THIS PRIMARY?" In the Democrats' "1984" world, the popular vote is an unconcept, doubleplusungood verging on crimethink. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

I love it.

The Dems have backed themselves into such a hypocritical corner.  This couldn't have been engineered any better.  They fought the whole way to the convention, Hillary won the popular vote, there are two minorities pitted against each other...

This is great.

Ugh. That woman commits war crimes against the English language when she writes.

(Of course, if popularity mattered, networks like MSNBC wouldn't exist. That's a station that depends entirely on "superviewers.")

I thought this was funny.  I hate Ann Coulter but agree with her main point.

Quoted: I love it. The Dems have backed themselves into such a hypocritical corner.  This couldn't have been engineered any better.  They fought the whole way to the convention, Hillary won the popular vote, there are two minorities pitted against each other... This is great.

Dems always seem to back themselves into a hypocritical corner, which is then totally ignored by mainstream media.

Quoted: Ugh. That woman commits war crimes against the English language when she writes.

WAY too many cutsie statements in parentheses.

Quoted: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26842 Obama Was Selected, Not Elected (and Hillary's more of a man than Gore ever was).

Quoted: Ugh. That woman commits war crimes against the English language when she writes.

The message is dead on though. I'm totally cerial.

Unfortunately, ManBearPig is going to get elected president.

She is a fucking loon.

Quoted: Quoted: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26842 Obama Was Selected, Not Elected (and Hillary's more of a man than Gore ever was).

+1

Quoted: For those new Obama voters who may be reading, it's like voting for Paula, Randy or Simon to represent you, instead of texting your vote directly.

Ann Coulter is a waste of DNA...

But she's more of a man than Rush Limbaugh could ever hope to be.

Liberal dumb fucks hate being made to look foolish and hypocritical by a woman.


That doesn't stop them from posting in these threads and confirming their stupidity.

Since apparently the DU is in here trolling, I will now go to DU under MY troll account and even the score.

I can't stand her generally, but Ann got this one right.

Quoted: Since apparently the DU is in here trolling, I will now go to DU under MY troll account and even the score.

+1.  It is raining DU here.

Like many other women, she is simply pissed that the "woman" lost. They made their rules and he won playing by his own team's rules. Coulter herself said she was going to vote for Hillary. I have lost much respect for her in recent years.

Ann is spot on and she is hot.  

Quoted: Ugh. That woman commits war crimes against the English language when she writes.

She is a well known political writer.....and you are........?

Sheesh, how many weak-kneed metrosexual castrati Republicans are on this board anyways?

This article was spot-on. Good job, liberal-killing ninja Coulter.

Quoted: Ann Coulter is a waste of DNA... But she's more of a man than Rush Limbaugh could ever hope to be.

jealousy is unbecoming.

Quoted: I can't stand her generally, but Ann got this one right.

+1

Hope she takes it to the DNC

she is hot.

As much as i don't like her, she's right.   I wonder what the percentage is of people who have actually red and understand the contitution and how all this works?

J

Democrats being hypocritical?

Quoted: she is hot.

But I wonder why always the long face on her?

Ann is a piece of work but she has a good point here.

For those that want to shed some light on the Obamasheeple with real numbers.  RealClearPolitics.com  has a nice breakdown of the states won, but there is the whole MI debacle.

If we add up all the states minus WI we get these numbers:

Obama: 17,535,458
Clinton: 17,493,836

Which puts Obama ahead by 41,622 votes.

In MI 328,309 ballots were cast for Clinton brining her total to: 17,822,145

Obama was not on the MI ballot, but 238,168 votes were cast for "uncommitted".  If we give all these votes to Obama his final tally is: 17,773,626.

Clinton now pulls ahead of the popular vote count by 48,519 votes.



While not a huge AC fan, I am baffled by the number of outright haters here.  Seems like in the last few months she's been dead on balls accurate.

Ann would vote for Hillary before the McCain or Obama.

That woman is such a f***ing idiot.  If she weren't one the only hot conservative pundits in the country no one would pay any attention to her.  She twists, distorts and simplifies the facts, and then draws completely illogical conclusions from them.  Conservatives have a lot of logical points and a lot of intelligent criticisms they can direct towards liberals, but none of them are being made by Ms. Colter.  

For example, her assertion that Hillary "won the popular vote".  Of course it's a little more complicated than that.  Obama wasn't even on the ballet in Michigan.  Hillary was.  Does that mean that Hillary is credited with all the votes she received in Michigan and we assume that not one single person in the state would have voted for Obama if they had the chance?  Then there's the fact that many states permitted Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary and that Rush Limbaugh encouraged conservatives in those states to vote for Hillary because in his view she would be a weaker opponent against McCain in the general election.  How many conservatives who despise Hillary voted for her to help McCain?  And then there's the caucus states, how do we deal with those?  And places like Puerto Rico, that vote in the primaries, but not the general elections.  But Ann doesn't do complicated.

Then there's her effort to distinguish between the electoral college and the primaries.  But it's a distinction without a difference.   In both cases the election is governed by a set of rules.  Rules that each side agreed to bound by ahead of time.  The winner is the person who wins under the rules.  Not that complicated.  If I were playing a game of poker against Ann and in the middle of a hand announced that one eyed jacks were wild even she would understand that I was cheating.  The fact that there's nothing in the Consititution about the wildness of one eyed jacks is irrelevant.

Finally, the real issue in the Bush/Gore election was who won the state of Florida and should receive it's ELECTORAL votes.  If Gore had received those electoral votes, he would have been President.   Democrats were upset because the Republicans tried to prevent a recount to insure that the votes had been tabulated correctly, improperly removed a large number of voters from the roles, many of whom were minority voters, etc.  Democrats were upset because it was unclear who had actually won the popular vote in that state, and therefore who was to receive the ELECTORAL votes, and the Republican appointed person responsible for certifying the vote, the infamous Katherine Harris, was unwilling to make a good faith effort to determine who had actually won the state.

But I am glad to see Ann is standing shoulder to shoulder with her sister Hillary.  Honestly, the hypocracy of this woman knows no bounds.

Why is Ann Coulter beating up on Hillary by calling her names?

I thought that Hillary was Ann's candidate. I though John McCain had no honor, wasn't a conservative and that Ann would rather vote for The Devil himself than John McCain (all her words). Why then is Ann beating up on her candidates Hillary and Obama?

Oh, and Ann Coulter has no room to go around tossing out accusations of sexual ambiguity. There's some question as to her gender as well I believe.

In summary, Ann Coulter can go and fuck herself with a cattle prod. I have not and will not forget what she tried to do to John McCain in the name of trying to give the most liberal candidate from either party (Mitt Romney) a boost.

Quoted: I love Ann. And, as usual, she is right on. There are many on this forum that ought to study this article to gain an understanding about the Electoral College.

You say that in every thread. Do you condone her statement that John McCain has no honor? Was she right on about that too? Do you condone her attempt to torpedo Fred Thompson for voting against impeachment for Bill Clinton? Was she right on about that too?

And let's not forget Hannity.

Quoted: I love Ann. And, as usual, she is right on. There are many on this forum that ought to study this article to gain an understanding about the Electoral College.

You say that in every thread. Do you condone her statement that John McCain has no honor? Was she right on about that too? Do you condone her attempt to torpedo Fred Thompson for voting against impeachment for Bill Clinton? Was she right on about that too?

height=8

Ann Coulter can go and fuck herself with a cattle prod.

I am generally not into internet porn, but I would pay to see that one. Ann is hot.

It sounds like she is describing herself

Quoted: Words mean nothing to liberals. They say whatever will help advance their cause at the moment, switch talking points in a heartbeat, and then act indignant if anyone uses the exact same argument they were using five minutes ago.

Ann is right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





----------134thSIGNAL

Quoted: That woman is such a f***ing idiot.  If she weren't one the only hot conservative pundits in the country no one would pay any attention to her.  She twists, distorts and simplifies the facts, and then draws completely illogical conclusions from them.  Conservatives have a lot of logical points and a lot of intelligent criticisms they can direct towards liberals, but none of them are being made by Ms. Colter.   For example, her assertion that Hillary "won the popular vote".  Of course it's a little more complicated than that.  Obama wasn't even on the ballet in Michigan.  Hillary was.  Does that mean that Hillary is credited with all the votes she received in Michigan and we assume that not one single person in the state would have voted for Obama if they had the chance?  Then there's the fact that many states permitted Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary and that Rush Limbaugh encouraged conservatives in those states to vote for Hillary because in his view she would be a weaker opponent against McCain in the general election.  How many conservatives who despise Hillary voted for her to help McCain?  And then there's the caucus states, how do we deal with those?  And places like Puerto Rico, that vote in the primaries, but not the general elections.  But Ann doesn't do complicated.

Coulter's point was that the party that has said for eight years has said that, regardless of the rules (i.e. the Constitution), the popular vote trumps everything is now suddenly unconcerned about the "will of the people."  As for Michigan, if you give every "uncommitted" vote to Obama, Hillary STILL beats him.

Then there's her effort to distinguish between the electoral college and the primaries.  But it's a distinction without a difference.   In both cases the election is governed by a set of rules.  Rules that each side agreed to bound by ahead of time.  The winner is the person who wins under the rules.  Not that complicated.  If I were playing a game of poker against Ann and in the middle of a hand announced that one eyed jacks were wild even she would understand that I was cheating.  The fact that there's nothing in the Constitution about the wildness of one eyed jacks is irrelevant.

Again, she is merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Democrats in suddenly being more concerned with the rules as opposed to who won the most votes.

Finally, the real issue in the Bush/Gore election was who won the state of Florida and should receive it's ELECTORAL votes.  If Gore had received those electoral votes, he would have been President.   Democrats were upset because the Republicans tried to prevent a recount to insure that the votes had been tabulated correctly, improperly removed a large number of voters from the roles, many of whom were minority voters, etc.  Democrats were upset because it was unclear who had actually won the popular vote in that state, and therefore who was to receive the ELECTORAL votes, and the Republican appointed person responsible for certifying the vote, the infamous Katherine Harris, was unwilling to make a good faith effort to determine who had actually won the state.

You fail to mention that when the news media got together and counted the votes exactly the way Gore's team wanted them counted, Bush STILL won.  Katherine Harris was enforcing the laws of the State of Florida.  It was Gore's team who was trying to game the system until their man won.

But I am glad to see Ann is standing shoulder to shoulder with her sister Hillary.  Honestly, the hypocrisy of this woman knows no bounds.

Quoted: She is a fucking loon.

I have to say though, she's much better when using a word processor and not her mouth.

Quoted: Ann Coulter is a waste of DNA... But she's more of a man than Rush Limbaugh could ever hope to be.

And what have you ever contributed to mankind?

TXL

They have Al Franken and we have Ann Coulter....both being mildly entertaining windbags who make their own side look a just a little worse by their attempt at attack prose.  Both have dicks that are roughly the same size as well.

Quoted: Quoted: I love Ann. And, as usual, she is right on. There are many on this forum that ought to study this article to gain an understanding about the Electoral College. You say that in every thread.

And you say the same thing over and over as well.

McCain is not a conservative??? Do we really have a disagreement on this point?

Another Grand Slam by Ann!

I've been saying "Selected, not elected!" about Obama for weeks. The irony is simply scrumptious. I can't wait to throw it in the face of the first liberal asshole who talks to me about their new MESSiah.

Seriously, can't Goatboy write some software that scans these idiots browser history?
That way If they are jumping back and forth between AR15.com and DU they could get a shock from their keyboard every time they try to post here?

That's possible isn't it?

If it isn't, it should be.


Oh, and by the way, No one (including Ann) likes McCain, but he's 10,000x better than Stalin Obsama.

I look forward to the riots after the McCain landslide victory.

Quoted: Ann Coulter is a waste of DNA... But she's more of a man than Rush Limbaugh could ever hope to be.

Does mommy know you're on the computer?

I just love Ann!

HH

Quoted: Notice all the ann haters are leaches?

Bloodsucking leeches, really.  Same players everytime.  

HH