Do Democrats’ Have a Quiet Plan to Use Puerto Rico to Win the next Election?

December 16, 2016   |   Sarah Cronin

(ANTIMEDIA) Congressman Alan Grayson filed a joint resolution last Friday proposing an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to treat Puerto Rico as a state “for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President.”

The move comes as no surprise from the Florida Congressman whose district is home to more than 100,000 Puerto Ricans and who has a record of supporting legislation related to Puerto Rico. The proposed resolution is an interesting move amid post-election calls from high-profile Democrats such as Senators Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer to abolish the Electoral College.

Since November, Democrats and progressives have been attacking the legitimacy of the electoral college results from multiple angles. There are the so-called “Hamilton Electors” and supporters, who are appealing to a vision of the Electoral College as a mandate for faithless electors, while still others are calling to abandon the ‘archaic’ Electoral College system entirely.

While the “Hamilton Electors” campaign is largely seen as a Democratic effort, one Harvard law professor claims that as many as 30 Republican electors are considering casting a vote against Trump.

The most recent efforts to undermine the electoral results came on Monday when the 10 “Hamilton Electors” sent a letter to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper demanding an intelligence briefing regarding allegations of the Russian government’s interference in the elections. As of Thursday, an additional 58 electors have signed the bipartisan letter.

Under the current rules of the Electoral College, as a commonwealth, Puerto Rico cannot participate in the general election. Puerto Rico does, however, host primary elections. As explained in Federal Register, these are held exclusively to choose delegates for representation at political party conventions.

Results from Puerto Rico’s primaries, combined with records of voting trends among mainland Latino voters, indicate that if added into the Union, Puerto Rico would be a blue state. While it is estimated that Puerto Rico would only stand to receive seven electoral votes, Puerto Rico’s comparably high voter turnout could make the current commonwealth an important Democratic stronghold in future elections, especially in the case of elections based solely on popular vote.

This is not the first time that the issue of statehood has been brought up. The topic arose most recently in 2012 when Puerto Ricans voted in favor of statehood for the first time. The outcome of the referendum was largely criticized for its leading forced-choice format, in which voters had to select a preferred non-territorial option regardless of whether they actually supported changing Puerto Rico’s commonwealth status. The reported 61% support for the Statehood option disregarded the 500,000 voters (24%) who left the question blank, leaving Congress at the time unconvinced.

A move for Statehood would also entitle Puerto Rico to two Senators and five representatives, presenting what The Economist called a “political nightmare for the GOP” in 2013.

Grayson’s current joint resolution has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, where Democratic members, which include Puerto Rico’s Resident Commissioner Pedro Pierluisi, are outnumbered by Republicans 23 to 16. This is a bleak assignment, especially considering that statistically, committees are where bills go to die.

A move towards Puerto Rican Statehood, while unlikely, is just one among various efforts we can expect from Democrats and others who are still reeling from the November upset and now find themselves having to reorganize to prepare for future elections.

---

This article (Do Democrats’ Have a Quiet Plan to Use Puerto Rico to Win the next Election?) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Sarah Cronin and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. Image credit: Ricardo’s Photography. f you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article to edits@theantimedia.org.

‘Anti-Establishment’ Trump Plans to Appoint Goldman Sachs and George Soros Insiders

Contrary to his anti-establishment stance — which supporters readily boast as a viable alternative to Hillary Clinton — Donald Trump’s establishment roots run so deep, the billionaire real estate mogul plans to appoint a former Goldman Sachs partner and George Soros Fund manager as Secretary of the Treasury should he win the election.

Steve Mnuchin came on board Trump’s campaign as finance chair in May, raising eyebrows of many who felt his 17-year history with Sachs — and affiliation with liberal globalist George Soros as an Investment Professional of Soros Fund Management — conflicted directly with the then-presumptive nominee’s conservative stance and criticisms of establishment politicians.

“It is difficult to see how a second-generation Goldman Sachs partner would secure such a prominent position in an administration delivered by a populist wind,” Compass Point analyst Isaac Boltansky told Politico of Trump’s curious choice for Treasury Secretary.

According to Fox Business Network, Trump’s confidence in winning the White House has fomented enough to begin picking Cabinet members, and besides the anomalous choice of Mnuchin for the Treasury, sources said he’s considering New Jersey Governor Chris Christie for Attorney General and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani for Homeland Security Secretary.

Trump has, of course, expended great efforts in criticizing opponent Hillary Clinton’s deep ties to the banking and Wall Street elite; and prior to garnering the Republican nomination, extended that critique to competitor Ted Cruz, saying in one debate:

“I know the guys at Goldman Sachs. They have total, total control over him. Just like they have total control over Hillary Clinton.”

Zero Hedge noted when Trump hired the left-leaning hedge fund manager and financier as finance chair that Mnuchin had previously donated multiple times to various Democrats, including Barack Obama and none other than Hillary Clinton.

Further substantiating his establishing banking insider status — the precise profile Trump claims publicly to loathe — Mnuchin worked at Goldman Sachs for 17 years, headed OneWest Bank prior to its purchase by CIT Group in 2015, and now sits on CIT’s board while also serving as chairman and chief executive of Dune Capital Management, a private investment firm with a focus on financing big-time Hollywood movies, like “Avatar.”

If Mnuchin’s Wall Street ties don’t trouble Trump’s supporters enough, the hedge fund manager’s links to George Soros — an ardent Clinton fan — certainly will.

In fact, in terms of opposition, Soros has spent billions influencing global politics by inserting his brand of leftism wherever possible — and earlier this year even pledged, with others, some $15 million specifically to mobilize Latinos and immigrants to defeat Donald Trump.

“Steven is a professional at the highest level with an extensive and very successful financial background,” Trump said upon bringing Mnuchin into his campaign. “He brings unprecedented experience and expertise to a fundraising operation that will benefit the Republican Party and ultimately defeat Hillary Clinton.”

Indeed, Trump’s campaign, quoted by the Daily Caller, said Mnuchin “has previously worked with Mr. Trump in a business capacity and brings his expertise in finance to what will be an extremely successful fundraising operation for the Republican Party.”

While business dealings certainly bring ordinarily clashing personalities into contact on occasion, these details about the relationship between Trump and Mnuchin evidence the former’s links to the left.

Despite the nominee’s many diatribes excoriating Hillary Clinton as out-of-touch with the American populace, Trump’s own status as a billionaire belies both their decades-old friendship and striking similarities — particularly as darlings of the establishment.

Should you choose to vote on the 8th, it would be prudent to keep in mind blustery campaign rhetoric — from any politician — only constitutes so much hot air.