Blog

Levin: The Electoral College Is ‘Absolutely Brilliant’

Matthew Hrozencik
By Matthew Hrozencik | November 10, 2016 | 3:42 PM EST

Nationally syndicated radio talk show host Mark Levin (AP Photo/AJ Mast)

On Wednesday, nationally syndicated radio talk show host Mark Levin lauded the Founding Fathers’ design of the U.S. presidential election process, saying, “Was absolutely brilliant, the electoral college.”

“You can’t just basically leave it up to six, eight, ten states and three or four regions to select the president,” said Mark Levin. “Was absolutely brilliant, the electoral college, which is exactly why it comes under attack by the statist progressives and other buffoons who don’t even know what they’re talking about.”

Here is a transcript of what Levin had to say:

Levin: First of all, Clinton should not have won because the Constitution requires the electoral college for you to win. You have to win the electoral college. So, I know you’re going to get to your next point, but I just want to make it abundantly clear that it’s not the popular vote, it’s the electoral college. Now you’re going to go to the wisdom of that. Go right ahead.”

Caller: “Right. Yeah, because the Founders – the way I understand it – wanted to prevent the concentration of power in just a few largely populated states with a specific ideology.”

Levin: “That’s correct.”

Caller: “So you take California, and they got millions of people over there. They’re very liberal. They could dominate the nation, but this prevents it.”

Levin: “Well, California, the East Coast, and you’re exactly right. Because they didn’t want factionalism. They wanted diversity in terms of the states, but not factionalism.

“So let me ask you something: If we didn’t have an electoral college, how many campaign visits would there have been to New Hampshire?”

Caller: “Exactly.”

Levin: “Zero.”

Caller: “Right.”

Levin: “Or Nevada? Zero.

“Or North Dakota?  Zero.

“Or a number of states? Zero

“And so you’re right. You would’ve had essentially the East Coast, the West Coast, maybe the Chicago area and the Houston area, things like that going on, but you certainly would not have candidates campaigning all over the country. So they were exactly right in what they did.

“And that’s the other thing people don’t understand. We are a federal republic. We’re not a democracy. And so the states were to have a primary role in this republic, a primary role – a bigger role than the federal government.

“That’s why I don’t buy, ‘Oh, we’re nationalist.’ No we’re not. We’re federalist.”

Caller: “The folly of the 17th Amendment, because that removed power from the states.”

Levin: “Yes. Yeah, wipe them out because, you know, as you well know, the lawmaking process, the states, where the senate was to represent the state legislature.”

Caller: “Exactly, and so they no longer got to pick their senators, so they lost power.”

Levin: “And the state is cut out.

Caller: “Yep.”

Levin: “Now the federal departments and agencies are more powerful than the states.”

Caller: “Well, my response to everybody that was questioning me was it did was it was supposed to do. It provided power to the states.”

Levin: “That’s correct. And really it’s helpful to the people because we’re a big country. We have a lot of territory. We have a lot of geographic diversity. We have a diverse population and so forth. You can’t just leave it up to, basically, six, eight, ten states and three or four regions to select the president.

“Alright, my friend, thank you for your call. Was absolutely brilliant, the electoral college, which is exactly why it comes under attack by the statist progressives and other buffoons who don’t even know what they’re talking about.”


Please support CNSNews today! (a 501c3 non-profit production of the Media Research Center)

DONATE