Donald Trump attended his first major league baseball game since taking office on Sunday evening and it did not go well.
The president – who didn’t throw out the first pitch – was greeted with a chorus of boos as he appeared on the in-stadium video screen following the third inning.
For a man who cannot suffer criticism, it was a truly embarrassing spectacle.
There was no ambiguity. And Trump’s attempts to play it off with claps and smiles were wholly ineffective. The president was roundly jeered by thousands upon thousands of Americans at a World Series game in the nation’s capital on a day when he scored arguably the biggest win of his presidency (early Sunday, he announced the death of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a US raid).
The Nationals attempted to control the situation by switching to a shot of US service members waving – a message said “Thank You For Your Service”. The crowd deftly navigated the situation, cheering initially, and pivoting quickly to the boos as soon as Trump’s orange visage materialized on the jumbotron.
Trump brought along an entourage that included the five wounded veterans, Melania and a gaggle of sycophants including Lindsey Graham, Kevin Brady, Matt Gaetz and Kevin McCarthy.
Gaetz – who led the farcical “storming” of a closed briefing room where impeachment proceedings were taking place last week – basked in the glory of Trump’s mango aura.
Things got progressively worse. Shortly after the chorus of boos, the crowded started in with crisp chants of “Lock him up!”
The video immediately went viral, and “Lock him up!” was a trending topic on Trump’s favorite social media platform all evening and into Monday morning.
Later, a sign appeared behind home plate. It read: “VETERANS FOR IMPEACHMENT.”
The game was broadcast on Fox.
Not quite as funny as being golfing during the Baghdadi at 3:30 and then coming back and having a ridiculous staged photo done in the situation room at 5.
I think he actually did watch the raid. Subsequent reporting suggested that although the photo was likely staged, he did see it
Attending Game 5 of the World Series. Great. Attending Game 5 of the World Series while the crowd serenades Donald Trump with chants of “Lock him up!” Priceless.
It is tempting to see this as the end of Trump, but I would not count him out. A bad economic backdrop will finish him off, but if that does not happen, he still has a pretty good shot at winning. G-d help us.
Makes you wonder if all those cheering fans at his rallies were paid to be there??
I hope McConnell, Romney, Burr, and other Republicans in Congress (forget about Mad Trumper sycophants like Graham, Rubio, Perdue, McCarthy, Meadows, Nunes, et al) are paying attention. The majority of Americans despise Trump and are going to vote accordingly in 2020.
As much as I would love for it to be the case, it is a bit of a stretch to extrapolate that crowd reaction into the entire electorate. Also, he could win even if he loses the popular vote as in 2016 (sigh).
Wonderful videos!!! That booing music made me wonder what will happen if the election results are highly fragmented and there is no clear winner, which seems very likely as the impeachment facts roll forward. Maybe the fragmentation isn’t so bad after all …
What happens if no presidential candidate gets 270 Electoral votes?
If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote. The Senate would elect the Vice President from the 2 Vice Presidential candidates with the most Electoral votes. Each Senator would cast one vote for Vice President. If the House of Representatives fails to elect a President by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President Elect serves as acting President until the deadlock is resolved in the House.
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/faq.html#no270
Stevie Wonder could have seen this coming.
So, what-if, the Democrats changed the game and allowed 3 or 4 people to run for president and by-pass “the normal” single candidate? Is that possible — and what if that became a game-changer to mess around with the electoral votes – would that backfire or end up being disruptive in a good way? Obviously, I have no clue, but on the surface, the rules seem as if they can be bent??? Why not make this election a game changer, since we have nazis and gangsters destroying America??
To become the presidential nominee, a candidate “”typically”” has to win a majority of delegates. This usually happens through the party’s primaries and caucuses. It’s then confirmed through a vote of the delegates at the national convention.
But if no candidate gets the majority of a party’s delegates during the primaries and caucuses, convention delegates choose the nominee. This happens through additional rounds of voting.
FYI:
The 1796 election is the only instance during which the faithless electors successfully changed the outcome of an election. During this election 18 electors pledged to the Federalist voted as pledged for John Adams, however they refused to vote for Pinckney.[6] As a result Adams attained 71 electoral votes, Jefferson received 68, and Pinckney received 59.[21] Had the 18 electors remained faithful Pinckney would have won the presidency with 77 electoral votes and Adams would have remained vice president.
Total electoral vote = 138
Electoral Vote Winner: 71 Main Opponent: 68
John Adams, of Massachusetts won with 71 votes
Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia lost with 68 votes
“Votes for Others:”
Thomas Pinckney (59), Aaron Burr (30), Samuel Adams (15), O. Ellsworth (11), George Clinton (7), John Jay (5), James Iredell (3), S. Johnston (2), George Washington (2), John Henry (2), Charles C. Pinckney (1)
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/votes/1789_1821.html#1796
==> The Federalists coalesced behind Adams and the Democratic-Republicans supported Jefferson, but each party ran multiple candidates. Under the electoral rules in place prior to the 1804 ratification of the Twelfth Amendment,
This election would provide part of the impetus for the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution. On January 6, 1797, Representative William L. Smith of South Carolina presented a resolution on the floor of the House of Representatives for an amendment to the Constitution by which the presidential electors would designate which candidate would be president and which would be vice-president.[14] However, no action was taken on his proposal, setting the stage for the deadlocked election of 1800.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1796_United_States_presidential_election
If no candidate for President has a majority of the total votes, the House of Representatives, voting by states and with the same quorum requirements as under the original procedure, chooses the President. The Twelfth Amendment requires the House to choose from the three highest receivers of electoral votes, compared to five under the original procedure.
The Twelfth Amendment requires a person to receive a majority of the electoral votes for Vice President for that person to be elected Vice President by the Electoral College. If no candidate for Vice President has a majority of the total votes, the Senate, with each Senator having one vote, chooses the Vice President. The Twelfth Amendment requires the Senate to choose between the candidates with the “two highest numbers” of electoral votes. If multiple individuals are tied for second place, the Senate may consider all of them, in addition to the individual with the greatest number of votes. The Twelfth Amendment introduced a quorum requirement of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators for the conduct of balloting. Furthermore, the Twelfth Amendment requires the Senate to choose a Vice President by way of the affirmative votes of “a majority of the whole number” of Senators.
Oh well