If all else fails, go with the utterly ridiculous seems to be the tactic Politico has decided to employ in the left’s ongoing effort to rid the United States of a unique feature, that of the Electoral College.

They’ve moved on from whinging “but it’s not fair,” to a lame attempt at fear-mongering with the shiny new claim the EC is a national security threat. Really?

Sore loser Hillary Clinton has already said she won’t rule out questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election. And, despite people on her side saying she’s the wrong messenger, she’s hopped on “The Electoral College Should Be Abolished” bandwagon. But this latest of claiming the EC is a national security threat is laughable.

Politico’s thesis bases itself on the idea that the founders, namely Hamilton, could never have foreseen Facebook and the rise of fake news.

In Hamilton’s day, as he argued, it would have been nearly impossible for a hostile power to co-opt dozens of briefly chosen electors flung across 13 states with primitive roads. But in the social media age, the Electoral College system provides ripe microtargeting grounds for foreign actors who intend to sabotage presidential elections via information and disinformation campaigns, as well as by hacking our voting infrastructure. One reason is that citizens in certain states simply have more voting power than citizens in other states, such as Texas and California. This makes it easier for malign outside forces to direct their efforts.

The idea that members of the EC, which are elected by each state, are more penetrable and easier to manipulate than the masses is idiotic, to say the least. To purport that the voting public is purer in their choices and less affected by, or less malleable to, Russian bots to form a mob of manipulated voters neglects to consider everything we know about human nature and group mentality.

Again with the hacking, too. That’s a nice touch. Microtargeting is essentially a marketing tool used by political parties and isn’t  going anywhere. Perhaps the author should read the book The Blueprint and get a clue.

Can foreign actors use those same tactics? Of course. But saying that makes the EC a national security threat and the popular vote is less so, flies in the face of everything we’re supposed to have learned from the last two-plus years about fake news and social media.

The author at least admits population centers could be infiltrated by outside actors but fails to follow the logic.

Yes, a foreign entity could disseminate messages to major cities across the entire country or try to carry out a broad-based cyberattack, but widespread actions of this sort would be not only more resource-intensive, but also more easily noticed, exposed and addressed.

Okay. And the EC makes the likelihood of such a thing more improbable, not less. The illogic of the argument is truly astounding.

Saying the EC is a national security risk also fails to take into account the fact that electors vote based on how the majority voted in their state, and how those votes are apportioned are guided by state law.

But what if the national popular vote determined the president instead of the Electoral College? No voter would be more electorally powerful than another. It would be more difficult for a foreign entity to sway many millions of voters scattered across the country than concentrated groups of tens of thousands of voters in just a few states.

I mean, does the author know what a city is? A concentration of voters in a small area, potentially easily swayed by the interests of their area.

Of course, the author also mentions how rural white voters — you know, because only white people live outside the city — are able to have their vote count more than minorities living in urban areas. Inflicting their country bumpkin values on the oppressed masses, I’m sure, rather than the other way around.

Nothing has changed in regards to the founder’s reasons for having the Electoral College. Without the EC, a handful of cities would decide entire elections. Of course, that’s what the left wants as that’s where their bread and butter lies.

Of all the arguments for abolishing the Electoral College, the idea it’s a national security threat takes the cake for being the most ludicrous and speciously presented.