Introduction
If you will allow me, I would like to share a few snapshot thoughts of where we currently are.
As I write this, the president has not conceded, the Electoral College has not yet done its thing, although they are about to, and the inauguration of Biden has not occurred. The disputing continues, in other words, with one side beyond exasperated that the disputing is continuing. Erick Erickson recently called those challenging the integrity of the election, for one of the riper examples, “leg-humpin’ idiots.”
Now what I am about to write is not an example of me being a bitter-end die hard, certainly not wanting to draw any of Erickson’s ire, but rather simply an example of pointing out something that seems to me rather obvious. It is not obvious to me that anything will actually unfold this way—because the Electoral College starts meeting today—but it is just obvious to me that in principle it could have. And the fact that it could have illustrates just how poor the Supremes were on the standing of Texas, and what do I mean?
In Effect, a 9-0 Decision
The lawsuit brought by Texas, and a passel of other states, asked the Supreme Court to kick the election back to the state legislatures of certain swing states, in effect voiding their normal procedures on account of the unconstitutional local corruptions in those procedures (illegal deadline extensions, etc.). I do think this was a reasonable case, and not a clown car parade, and I think that Ted Cruz would have acquitted himself very well in arguing the case before the Supreme Court. I am grateful he agreed to take it up, despite the derision of those conservatives who have been hooting at the lawsuit.
But the Supreme Court decided not to hear the case (7-2) because Texas didn’t have standing. Two justices (Alito and Thomas) basically said they would have heard the case, but would have decided against Texas. That, in effect, made it a 9-0 decision against the president, including all the conservative justices, and all of Trump’s appointees. At a bare minimum, this means there is a very strong sentiment on the High Court against letting one state interfere with the internal doings of another state, even when it comes to how they govern their electoral processes in a presidential election—and even if the way they govern their internal processes might be more than a little dodgy. So deposit that part in the bank. We will come back in just a moment and write a few checks on it.
So don’t you see what this means? If this kind of thing is purely a process/standing issue, then it means the following: If Texas has no standing to ask the Supreme Court to step in to make the Pennsylvania legislature settle what happened in Philadelphia on November 3, then Massachusetts and California would have no standing if the Pennsylvania legislature took that task up on their own initiative. Or if Georgia did, or Michigan.
To spell it out, if those legislatures said that they were in fact persuaded of widespread voter fraud in their very own state, and that they couldn’t see any way to unscramble the egg, and so they assumed original jurisdiction over the apportionment of their electors and assigned them to Trump, it wouldn’t matter if California didn’t like it. California would have no standing. California would be standing in the boots of Texas, and not liking it very much. Besides not filling them very well.
Now I am not so naive as to believe that if such a thing were to happen, and if California complained about the Pennsylvania legislature giving their electors to Trump, that the Supreme Court would rebuff California 9-0. I didn’t just fall of the turnip truck. But I do know that those justices who wanted to hear California out would have to turn themselves into an Auntie Anne’s pretzel in order to explain why California has standing to complain about an election irregularity in another state and Texas doesn’t.
And I, among others, think it would have been grand if that bluff had been called. But fortunately for them, twisting oneself into an Auntie Anne’s pretzel is something they know how to do.
Think of It This Way
Now why does this matter since it is not going to happen?
Let us say that is two years from now, and one of the conservative Supreme Court justices were to give a speech somewhere that indicates he thought that the Texas case had both standing and merit. The obvious comeback would be, “Well, then why did you vote the way you did then?” So they wouldn’t be in a position to say or do anything like that. They would be more discrete than that. That would give the game away.
In the same way, and for the same reason, Republican legislators in these swing states, who control those legislatures, were given (on paper) an opportunity to rise up or to flame out. What they don’t get to do is nothing, and then complain afterwards about a stolen election, or even a suspicious election. The comeback will be, “Why didn’t you stop it then? The Supreme Court had just decided (9-0) that you had the authority to govern your own state without interference from other states that might not like it.”
It was only a window of a few days, but whether Biden or Trump would serve as our next president was given to a handful of Republican-controlled legislatures. The Supreme Court just gave it to them, 9-0. The fact that it will not be done is illustrative of how Biden was actually selected by Democrats and Republicans alike. He will be the president, or so it seems, because the cheating was open and manifest, and those who were cheated against allowed it to happen. The complaining was very loud, but that is what it was—complaining.
What I am saying is that Republicans, even the current loud ones, in fact especially the current loud ones, will not be able to do anything politically in the future if there was an actual thing they could have done in this situation but in actual fact did not do.
And to Reiterate a Matter of Some Importance . . .
Such a move would only be open to those who honestly believe that there was massive cheating from the Biden side in these swing states, and who honestly believed it because they have followed the evidence, and had come to that conclusion. If your only beef was that Biden won, and you believed that cheating occurred for no other reason, then you would have just been part of the general political dishonesty, hypocrisy, and all-round hackery that is burning our country down.
Why Isn’t This More Obvious to More People?
We have been living with a system of unequal weights and measures for a long time now. Conservatives have been gaslit for a very long time. It is not obvious to us because we have been trained in the arts of suppressing the obvious.
I mean that if Antifa wants to burn down a few cities to blow off their anger, this is just taken in stride for all concerned. If a Tea Party rally leaves a nearby trash can overflowing a little bit, it will be declared a racist threat to the republic. If there is a whiff of an allegation of a report that a dossier somewhere might contain negative information about Trump, for years we will all be tied into knots until the day of impeachment arrives. But let us say that sometime during the night, YouTube, Google, Facebook, and Twitter were all subjected to a hostile takeover by a secretive cabal of right wing financiers, and then they started banning any suggestions that Trump be impeached for anything, and demonetizing those platforms that kept trying to bring it up. Give yourself a moment to imagine the reaction. Try to include the colors of the mushroom cloud.
Yeah, this is whataboutism. So what about it? Giving something a name like whataboutism is not the same thing as giving a reasonable response.
You might not know the truth about what happened in this election. But as sure as the ground under your feet, you do know what position is going to be censored. Do you not?
Rhetoric and Division
We are in a time, obviously, when tempers are running high, and lots of things get said. I note again Erik Erikson’s comment at the top.
But we need to understand something. In my view, the rhetoric is not so much a cause of our divisions as the divisions are a cause of the rhetoric. We can see this in a stark form with Biden’s appeals for national unity after the election. We should all come together now, right? But why on earth would Biden want to unify with misogynistic and racist bigots who want nothing more than to put black people back in chains? He is not really calling for unity, but rather for conformity.
The same problem exists among what used to be the conservative movement. If you are going to do anything whatever in politics, there will be coalitions. But when hateful things are said, this can make the coalition impossible, depending on the nature of the thing said.
Some times intemperate things get said in the heat of the moment, you know? In such situations, it would be possible later to come back and say “that was the close political campaign talking. Sorry about that.” This is standard with primary opponents who bury the hatchet for the general election. And sometimes the hatchets can be pretty big. You do remember, do you not, that Kamala Harris believed the woman who accused Joe Biden of sexual assault?
But other times the intemperate things that get said are actually revelations of a deep animus, one that runs really deep, and is not the result of a heated campaign. It is the result of irreconcilable differences. One of Trump’s great successes is that he revealed that kind of fissure within what used to be the conservative movement. More on that in months to come, I am sure.
But There Is Reason for Hope
Given what is likely to play out, however, which is that we are in for it with Biden, there remains great reason for principled optimism. I will set out my reasons for believing this, along with my suggestions for what thoughtful Christians should do, once the yelling has stopped. I mean either a Trump concession, or an Electoral College settlement that is decisive, or an inauguration of Biden, or some combination thereof. When we are at that point, it will be time to consider what we should do next, and why there will be no countermeasures for it. The one thing I will say now is that it will have ramifications for politics, but it won’t be politics.
So stay tuned.