At the conclusion of the 3rd presidential discussion, Republican nominee Donald Trump refused to commit to accepting the eventual election outcome.
Led by his opponent Hillary Clinton, commentators and the media were being convulsed in sanctimonious suits saying Trump’s refusal was an assault on the American democratic system.
A Washington Article headline study: “Trump’s election-rigging allegations are impacting people’s religion in democracy.”
A conservative publication alleged that U.S. federal government companies were being arming quietly to counteract the civil unrest that could occur immediately after a Trump election defeat.
This unexpected, if hypocritical, concern about regard for the rule of law reminded me of the abject poverty both of those candidates have demonstrated thus much in the 2016 election about their understanding of, or adherence to, the United States Constitution.
The 2016 election has been overloaded with superfluous, titillating difficulties, even though both of those big candidates disregarded really critical difficulties – the massive reduction of our private privacy and freedom in a police point out, the country’s imminent collapse less than $twenty trillion in personal debt, federal government controlled by favored fiscal interests that purchase politicians, a failed training system, and quite actual threats, both of those overseas and domestic.
American heritage, a forgotten topic in our schools, is replete with close, even dare I say, rigged elections… and compromise.
A Government of Compromise
Right after the election of 1824, John Quincy Adams was elected president in 1825 in excess of Andrew Jackson by the Dwelling of Reps. No candidate had a the greater part of the electoral vote, but Jackson had a plurality, a supply of wonderful bitterness for Jackson supporters, who proclaimed the election of Adams a corrupt discount.
In 1876, Samuel J. Tilden, the Democratic candidate, had a preferred the greater part but lacked one vote to carry a the greater part of the electoral higher education. Virtually right up until Inauguration Day, Democrats in Congress blocked a conclusion right up until Republicans privately agreed to take out federal troops from the South, properly ending Reconstruction and abandoning African-Us citizens to their Jim Crow fate. Republican Rutherford Hayes grew to become president in what grew to become identified as the Compromise of 1877.
I well keep in mind the election of 1960 when I was active nationally in University Youth for Nixon. John F. Kennedy defeated Nixon by a margin of only 118,571 votes, just a tenth of a %, out of in excess of 68 million preferred votes forged – the desired votes provided in Chicago by Mayor Daley’s ballot-stuffing equipment. Nixon declined to contest the outcome because he considered that would lead to prolonged countrywide political turmoil.
In 2000, in a replay of the Hayes-Tilden debacle, George W. Bush defeated Albert Gore, who had the the greater part of preferred votes, but only immediately after the U.S. Supreme Courtroom made a decision who got Florida’s electoral votes. Vice President Gore conceded and called on his supporters to take the outcome.
Or we can go again to 1800, when among the 5 candidates, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr were being tied with 73 electoral votes each. Below the policies then in area, the U.S. Dwelling of Reps voted for Jefferson as president.
The Proper to Rational Community Discourse
In 1787, Jefferson, then our emissary in France, wrote a letter with words that have been quoted to affirm the ideal of the American men and women to rebel versus the federal government: “The tree of liberty ought to be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its pure manure.”
Jefferson wrote shortly immediately after Shays’ Riot, an armed anti-tax rebellion in Massachusetts, and he rightfully felt the Americans’ “lethargy” and ignorance about difficulties would destroy the country.
Noting that men and women are seldom well-knowledgeable on all difficulties, Jefferson prompt: “The treatment is to set them ideal as to specifics, pardon and pacify them. The treatment is not suppression or rejection of community discontent, rather persuasion and community discourse.”
Unfortunately for our beloved region, the 2016 election has generated little if any rational persuasion, but certainly a surfeit of manure – which renews my former assistance specified to audience: “Maintain your nose and vote.”
Bob Bauman J.d