At the core of the debate about the function of the electoral college is who needs need to be in ~ the facility of American politics. In an unexpected monologue Tuesday night, Fox News Channel"s bill O"Reilly make that point clearly, although more than likely not in the method he intended.
You are watching: Bill o reilly why hillary lost
“Summing up,” he said, “left wants power taken away from the white establishment. They desire a profound adjust in the method America is run.”
The phrase “white establishment” is what has drawn most of the attention, arguing that O"Reilly"s argument for the electoral university is an clear defense of the political power of white people. Which, in the wider context that the segment, it was.
O"Reilly points the end that democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton"s margin of win in the popular vote to be a duty of how greatly she won California. He says that Democrats desire to abolish the electoral college so that candidates would then be compelled to campaign in densely populated locations — areas that are more heavily nonwhite.
“Very couple of commentators will tell you that the love of liberalism in America this particular day is based upon race,” O"Reilly said. “It permeates virtually every issue. The white males have set up a device of oppression. ... So-called white privilege bad. Diversity good.”
The irony is that O"Reilly"s entire argument is an clearly defense of white privilege. Clinton"s margin of win does vanish if you eliminate California"s votes — yet California is house to nearly one the end of every eight Americans. (Similarly, Republican Donald Trump"s margin of win in the electoral university vanishes if you flip Texas.) voter in the state room underrepresented by the electoral college loved one to other states, v each electoral university member representing about 258,000 ballots cast. In Wyoming, every elector to represent 85,000 voters. That"s one argument for the famous vote: that it treats every poll equally, regardless of where it originates.
California theatre a special role in the nation"s political creativity — a majority-minority state that"s residence to hippie-dippy san Francisco and also Berkeley. O"Reilly"s dismissal of its votes is no unique; it has been a common refrain in the wake up of the election. Often, race and ethnicity overlap with that argument, v any variety of people arguing that Clinton"s big win in the state to be a duty of ballots actors by numerous thousands the illegal immigrants (that is, Mexicans). This isn"t the case, of course. Trump"s rhetoric just didn"t paris in the state. Along with the lefty bay Area there"s the much more conservative southern part of the state — and Trump also lost conservative Orange County, making the the very first Republican to carry out so since 1936.
In Tuesday"s broadcast, O"Reilly was specifically suggesting that areas in i m sorry fewer civilization live should have actually disproportionate political strength so that presidential candidates are required to project in those places in order to win. In other words, he"s arguing that the power of the renowned vote must be muted to give an ext power come the minority of Americans that live outside of cities. Eighty percent the the nation lives in an city area and also those who live in rural areas are disproportionately white. O"Reilly is arguing that those rural voter deserve a one-of-a-kind privilege — an ext weighted electoral votes — and he"s reinforcing that argument by stating that that will benefit whites. Privilege for whites. White privilege.
There is a “white establishment,” of course. Congress is overwhelmingly white — more heavily white than the population as a whole. The Senate is even whiter than the House; nearly as many Kennedys have been chosen to the Senate as have actually black people. Not coincidentally, the Senate likewise gives disproportionate power to less-populated and often whiter states. (You"ve heard the before: Wyoming and also California obtain the same variety of senators.)
Moreover, there"s a straight overlap in between race and partisanship, as we provided in July. The Republican Party is a greatly white party; the autonomous Party is much more diverse. (The overwhelming bulk of the nonwhite members that the home are Democrats.) O"Reilly notes the white men have gravitated to the GOP, i m sorry is accurate and also which provides the gyeongju split much more stark.
Race and also party space tightly intertwined. The priorities of the next reflect their membership, and therefore talking around partisan opposition frequently overlaps with talking about racial tension. The also means that defenses of the power of Republican voters overlap v defenses of the power of white voters.
Another means to structure O"Reilly"s main premise is this: In the face of a diversifying American population, have to protections be preserved that proceed to support the political supremacy of white people? A lot of white people, including O"Reilly, would certainly say yes. A most nonwhite civilization would presumably speak no.
On Jan. 20, the power framework of the federal government will be conquered by the Republican Party. The new establishment will certainly be an ext white, will certainly be exhilaration on instead of of a greatly white party and will be much less inclined come answer the preceding question in the negative. Nonwhite voters preferred Clinton and also white voters desired Trump (generally, though no universally).
See more: The Best Way To Heat Pizza In Microwave, What Is The Best Way To Reheat Pizza
It"s the preference of the latter team that lugged the job — and also O"Reilly"s entire argument is the it deserved to.