"Constitutional Responsibility" Means Senate Defeats Nominee But House Decides Prez

[Land Shark]

33. There are a few parts of Constitution that are very unpopular but not yet amended like electoral

College.

Post Bush v. GORE arguably the worst thing about it was not losing the Presidency by a "constitutional" coup, but the silence afterward in the sense of lack of protest.

In this case, if everyone gets in board with a "constitutional responsibility" band wagon, they are neutered or at least somewhat neutralized when it comes to the House making undemocratic choices. So....

If the question goes to the House, we would want to scream with all our being to DO THE DEMOCRATIC THING AND RESPECT THE PEOPLE.

If we are not on that message now, and indeed are insisting on constitutional responsibility, our ability to put appropriate democratic/moral pressure on the House is greatly impaired. Those who flip to wanting democracy will be hypocrites.

I believe the person with most votes OUGHT TO WIN. In the House the election is a political question. Arguments for democracy have a lot of force, but wouod be neutered by charges of hypocrisy.

So I'm saying don't commit to the framing that is being proposed, namely that of "constitutional responsibility." Preserve our ability to argue vociferously for democracy.