Life After Fox News

Paul Ryan cartoon from Cagle Comics at Utah Independent 

Yes, Fox is moving relentlessly leftward, and in our household, we click the “Mute” button during prime time viewing -- or turn the channel. Judi McLeod at Canada Free Press quotes Breitbart to begin her report:

. . . Former House Speaker Paul Ryan, who currently sits on the board of Fox News Corp., and who, according to Vanity Fair, is reportedly urging Fox News to “decisively break” with President Donald Trump—news in the magazine’s report documenting the network’s “management bedlam”. (Tony Lee at Breitbart, Sept. 26, 2019)

Ryan, the longtime Trump antagonist, has reportedly been suggesting to Murdoch that “Fox should decisively break with the president” as Murdoch holds “strategy conversations with Fox executives and anchors about how Fox News should prepare for life after Trump.”

Downright laughable that while “strategy conversations” are taking place to decide how Fox News “should prepare for life after Trump” that legions in the unwashed masses are already preparing themselves for life after Fox News.

. . .

Full report is here. 

Related: While I find Mark Levin abrasive most of the time, he dials it down on his Sunday evening program on Fox. This Sunday, Peter Schweizer is the scheduled guest. Having read his books Clinton Cash, Extortion, and Secret Empires, I plan to tune in. Mr. Schweizer is the go-to source on the Joe Biden scandals.

# # #

What is an Electoral College compact?

Electoral College History page

 art credit:fremontcountychamber.com

I had not seen reference to an “Electoral College compact” until now. Here is Glenn K. Beaton’s “Dems shooting themselves in foot with Electoral College compact” at the Aspen Times:

Dems are still smarting from losing the 2016 presidential election by losing the Electoral College.

So they have an idea. Apart from the dubious constitutionality of their idea, it's a bad one which can only help the GOP.

. . . [then follows a good summary of the Electoral College]

The Dems would like to abolish this system because it hurt them in 2016. Of course, it could help them in some election in the future, but politicians don't have the analytical ability to fight any war but the last one.

Despite the Dems' wish, the College won't be abolished. That would require an amendment to the Constitution. The odds of that happening are 0.00 percent.

Here's their fallback idea.

The states would enter into a "compact" that would work something like a multiparty contract. They would each agree that they would cast their respective College votes for the candidate that wins the national popular vote. If all the states entered into this compact, and if it survived Constitutional challenges, then the winner of the popular vote would thereby win all the electoral votes. Every election would be a 538-to-0 decision in the College.

But in the real world, not all states will enter into this compact. That's because the College currently seems to favor the GOP. Sure, the blue states like California, New York and Illinois will sign up. But red states like Texas and the rest of the south and the mountain states won't. And purple states like Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and others probably won't.

So only the blue states will be bound by their compact.

. . .

Here's the bottom line.

Unless the Dems convince plenty of red or at least purple states to join their compact, which is unlikely, the net effect of their compact will be that they will override the will of their citizens only when their citizens vote for the Dem candidate.

Mr. Beaton’s article is here and it’s worth a read. But I am more apprehensive than he is. Considering how the integrity of our elections remains at risk (see Judi McLeod today at Canada Free Press here, for example), I would view the "compact" as just another attempt to rig the system.

# # #