There is no chance at this point that the 2020 presidential election will restore consensus on the legitimacy of the Presidency. We have noted in these columns several times over the last year that a successful democratic republic depends in no small measure on the consent of the losers. No matter the outcome of the upcoming election, some of the losing side’s supporters will not consent to the victors. A large number of voters will be convinced that one or the other of the candidates has won by illegitimate means: whether by voter suppression; ballot stuffing; buying votes; or by advancing a multitude of untruths and outright fabrications about the other side. A number of commentators declare that the victory of one of the candidates will be the “end of democracy” in the United States. An article in the Wall Street Journal suggests that should Mr. Trump prevail, the State of Oregon will actually choose to secede. This would perhaps be a good thing, as it would remove two democratic senators and, as its own country, Oregon could maintain its chosen status as a police-free sanctuary for criminals of all stripes, illegal immigrants as well as others. It would be an excellent natural experiment to test the progressive idea of nirvana. Those who have rejected Trump’s victory since election night 2016 will be exponentially more outraged if he snatches victory from defeat again, with a plethora of new complaints about October surprises along with an even greater conviction that the office should be theirs. They believe again that Trump has conspired with Russians, this time to manufacture the Hunter Biden laptop bruhaha, and will believe that he could not have won otherwise. They are already claiming electoral interference and intimidation. Should election disputes reach the Supreme Court, and should Justice Amy Coney Barrett cast a decisive vote that rules in favor of Trump, we will see further rioting and chaos. Anticipating a Biden victory, formerly rational pundits are redefining the meaning of “packing the court” to include the Trump administration’s filling of vacancies that have occurred naturally in his term of office. This redefinition seems plainly to envision actually expanding the court should Biden win, simply a tit-for-tat move they will say. ... Read More