Dimms are planning to discard Electoral College
My comments:
We do not live in a democracy. We have a republic. In Canada they have a democracy. The higher population of Canada in the East decides all Canada elections. The people in the West do not even bother to vote as more than 51% of the people live in the East. A democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Every state should have a say in elections. That is what the Electoral College does.
The Whole state of Oklahoma has a population of 3.96 Million. The City of New York City alone has a population of about 8.66 million. Therefore, vote to vote the large population of both coasts alone can produce enough votes to get to 51%. Meaning we need each state to have a say, = Electoral College.
We do not live in a democracy. We have a republic. In Canada they have a democracy. The higher population of Canada in the East decides all Canada elections. The people in the West do not even bother to vote as more than 51% of the people live in the East. A democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Every state should have a say in elections. That is what the Electoral College does.
The Whole state of Oklahoma has a population of 3.96 Million. The City of New York City alone has a population of about 8.66 million. Therefore, vote to vote the large population of both coasts alone can produce enough votes to get to 51%. Meaning we need each state to have a say, = Electoral College.
0
-
Good luck updating the constitution. 0 -
0 -
repubs, independents, and all the other flavors better get their acts together or all we may see is democrap tail lights 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
Exactly, if the Dems (Dims?) ever get control of the Senate, there is really something wrong with the country.
Vote harvesting in California really paid big dividends for the Dims.
Wait, maybe it's "splitting the vote" ie: giving the election to a libtard because the other choice was just to personally painful,, (but not as painful as what the future will bring.)0 -
Thankfully it takes 3/4 of all the states to ratify an amendment to the Constitution.
Simply amazing how smart the founders of this country were.0 -
+100
there foresight into what was going to come was truly amazing
I know they would be disappointed in what we put up with now even
I would bet they would have been shooting long before now [^]
quote:Originally posted by Smitty500mag
Thankfully it takes 3/4 of all the states to ratify an amendment to the Constitution.
Simply amazing how smart the founders of this country were.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Smitty500mag
Thankfully it takes 3/4 of all the states to ratify an amendment to the Constitution.
Simply amazing how smart the founders of this country were.
I just wish that they could have seen the future.[V]0 -
If they want to eliminate the Electoral College then they might as well eliminate the Senate to complete the destruction of this country and start the second the War of Northern Aggression . 0 -
quote:Originally posted by bundy
If they want to eliminate the Electoral College then they might as well eliminate the Senate to complete the destruction of this country and start the second the War of Northern Aggression .
It is important to note that it is stated in Article 5 that no Amendment to the Constitution can change the equal representation of each State in the Senate.
Yes, they saw this crap coming, as they were aware of the tyranny that is mob- rule democracy.0 -
They'll simply change that, too. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Rocky Raab
They'll simply change that, too.
Yeah, a nuclear option will be normal in all matters up there in Washinton D.C. soon enough.
serf0 -
quote:Originally posted by Flying Clay Disk
Good luck getting that through the Senate!
After the ratification of the 17th Amendment, individual Senators have become as beholden to party as to their states. Lately it seems that party has taken precedence over their states.
If the Democrat party gains control of the Senate, it would not surprise me that such and amendment would be approved by the majority.
That said, I doubt that the amendment would gain approval in 3/4 of the individual states, though it seems to not be too difficult anymore to convince folks to vote away their rights and to vote against their actual self-interest.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Flying Clay Disk
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Flying Clay Disk
Good luck getting that through the Senate!
After the ratification of the 17th Amendment, individual Senators have become as beholden to party as to their states. Lately it seems that party has taken precedence over their states.
If the Democrat party gains control of the Senate, it would not surprise me that such and amendment would be approved by the majority.
That said, I doubt that the amendment would gain approval in 3/4 of the individual states, though it seems to not be too difficult anymore to convince folks to vote away their rights and to vote against their actual self-interest.
Well, as is clearly evidenced by the likes of Maxine Waters and now Ocasio Cortez, you don't have to be the sharpest tool in the shed to make it to Congress. Something tells me the Senate might have a little more upstairs (other than air and rocks) when it comes to the original reasons for the EC.
When Orrin Hatch asked Mark Zuckerberg how a company can make money without charging its clients, I came to the conclusion that Senators may be a little more polished, but not necessarily more intelligent than House members.
I guess he must have paid CBS News for years so that he could watch Walter Cronkite.
That said, there is no one in the same league, IMO, as Representative Hank Johnson.0 -
The dimms also are planning on bringing in more democrat senators. All they have to do is, bring in more states. The US still has territories that can be made states. These would be total freebee states that would be owned by the democrats.
I speak of Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin Islands.
If you think the dimms have not thought of this, you would be wrong.0 -
Give DEMOCRATs the power and especially the courts, they will totally ignore the US Constitution eventually expunge it. You can also be certain the media will be willing accomplices.
Barrack Obama ignored and Barrack Obama has proudly proclaimed the Constitution as a bill of negative rights.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Flying Clay Disk
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by Flying Clay Disk
Good luck getting that through the Senate!
After the ratification of the 17th Amendment, individual Senators have become as beholden to party as to their states. Lately it seems that party has taken precedence over their states.
If the Democrat party gains control of the Senate, it would not surprise me that such and amendment would be approved by the majority.
That said, I doubt that the amendment would gain approval in 3/4 of the individual states, though it seems to not be too difficult anymore to convince folks to vote away their rights and to vote against their actual self-interest.
Well, as is clearly evidenced by the likes of Maxine Waters and now Ocasio Cortez, you don't have to be the sharpest tool in the shed to make it to Congress. Something tells me the Senate might have a little more upstairs (other than air and rocks) when it comes to the original reasons for the EC.
When Orrin Hatch asked Mark Zuckerberg how a company can make money without charging its clients, I came to the conclusion that Senators may be a little more polished, but not necessarily more intelligent than House members.
I guess he must have paid CBS News for years so that he could watch Walter Cronkite.
That said, there is no one in the same league, IMO, as Representative Hank Johnson.
Johnson was worried about islands tipping over. Murray thought Bin Laden was building schools and infrastructure and Sheila Jackson Lee thinks men have landed on Mars.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
16 comments