Why Didn’t Any Democrats Object to Trump’s Certification?

In the past, I have pointed out that Democrats objected to every single Republican presidential victory in this century. The Washington Times however notes that this time around,.”It was the first time congressional Democrats did not raise a challenge to a Republican winner of the presidential election since certifying George H.W. Bush’s victory in 1989.”

The obvious question is why not?

Beyond objecting to George W. Bush’s first win over hanging chads, Democrats raised objections to Bush’s second win over their claims of “voter suppression”. And everyone remembers the madness in 2016 when Democrats tried everything from recruiting faithless electors to claiming Trump conspired with Russia to win.

Here’s a little flashback to that circus.

Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts rose to object to the certificate from Alabama.

“The electors were not lawfully certified, especially given the confirmed and illegal activities engaged by the government of Russia,” McGovern said.

Rep. Barbara Lee of California brought up voting machines and Russian hacking when she objected following the counting of Michigan’s votes.

“People are horrified by the overwhelming evidence of Russian interference in our election,” Lee said.

After New York’s tally was read, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas stood up to object.

“I object on the massive voter suppression that included –” Jackson Lee began.

Hillary Clinton won New York, but Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee was the dumbest person in Congress.

Now suddenly Democrats are on their best behavior and bragging about it.

“We accept the results, even though we don’t like them, because our loyalties lie with the Constitution and with the rule of law,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, said in floor remarks ahead of the certification. “We hope what happens today, rather than what happened four years ago, stands as a shining example for future generations of how one conducts themselves in a free democracy.”

“We have to show our colleagues that you cannot turn on and turn off your fidelity to the Constitution according to whether or not it serves your party interest,” Rep. Jamie Raskin said of Republicans.

Really? Let’s go back to 2016.

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland rose to object to 10 of Florida’s 29 electoral votes.

“They violated Florida’s prohibition against dual office holders,” Raskin said.

Why did Raskin, who wouldn’t even commit to the process a few weeks ago, and who objected in 2016, go along with things now?

The short answer is that the whole thing was tactical. Democrats decided a while back that the 2016 tantrums are not advisable and no longer work. And are probably pointless anyway since Trump secured his second term. Now they’re bragging about how much they respect the constitutional process, not because they actually do, but because it serves to cover a change of strategies.