Connecticut To Give Its Electoral College Votes To National Popular Vote Victor

Threedee said:
Your side hates the Constitution, which is why you want to repeal the Electoral College and the 2nd Amendment (and increasingly, the protections of the 1st).
Click to expand...

Lets start, Miss Drama Queen, with the fact that no one wants to repeal the 2nd amendment or any protections of the first. Its just another of your non ending lies. If your kind really cared about the constitution and the rule of law you would be way out front defending the ACLU, which is the only group that defends everyones constitutional rights. But, you hate them, just for the reasons I have enumerated.
 
floridafan said:
Lets start, Miss Drama Queen, with the fact that no one wants to repeal the 2nd amendment or any protections of the first. Its just another of your non ending lies. If your kind really cared about the constitution and the rule of law you would be way out front defending the ACLU, which is the only group that defends everyones constitutional rights. But, you hate them, just for the reasons I have enumerated.
Click to expand...

No, it picks and chooses.

And, liar, 1/3 of Dems want to fully repeal the 2nd, and the vast majority want to effectively repeal it by banning the sort of weapons which it actually is intended to guarantee the right to own.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/repeal-second-amendment-almost-half-democrats-say-yes/
 
Threedee said:
No, it picks and chooses.

And, liar, 1/3 of Dems want to fully repeal the 2nd, and the vast majority want to effectively repeal it by banning the sort of weapons which it actually is intended to guarantee the right to own.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/repeal-second-amendment-almost-half-democrats-say-yes/
Click to expand...

You failed to mention 21% of the American public, asshole. That includes republicans. No where does the second amendment guarantee the use of AR=-15's. In fact even the Supreme Court agreed that they can be regulated, cunt face.
 
floridafan said:
You failed to mention 21% of the American public, asshole. That includes republicans. No where does the second amendment guarantee the use of AR=-15's. In fact even the Supreme Court agreed that they can be regulated, cunt face.
Click to expand...

1) Republicans are very pro-2nd Amendment
2) The founders were clear that the 2nd Amendment was written so the people could overthrow the government. The movement to ban automatic weapons, and now semiautomatic weapons (like the AR-15), clearly violate the 2nd Amendment.
 
Threedee said:
1) Republicans are very pro-2nd Amendment
2) The founders were clear that the 2nd Amendment was written so the people could overthrow the government. The movement to ban automatic weapons, and now semiautomatic weapons (like the AR-15), clearly violate the 2nd Amendment.
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court has already indicated that the use of semi automatic weapons can be regulated, so cut the complete bull shit
 
floridafan said:
http://www.governing.com/topics/pub...hooting-gun-california-supreme-court-nra.html
Click to expand...

Granted, the right to bear arms (and self-defense in general) is an inalienable right that warrants Constitutional protection, I am more amenable to waiting periods, rigorous background checks, and so forth, that encumber an individual attempting to purchase a handgun or shotgun, because these weapons are merely for self and home defense. Ultimately, it is the weaponry to be utilized for the security of a free state that I am most concerned about. And a citizen can still stand to wait a couple of weeks if it means being adequately armed when radicals attempt to misuse government power.
 
Threedee said:
Granted, the right to bear arms (and self-defense in general) is an inalienable right that warrants Constitutional protection, I am more amenable to waiting periods, rigorous background checks, and so forth, that encumber an individual attempting to purchase a handgun or shotgun, because these weapons are merely for self and home defense. Ultimately, it is the weaponry to be utilized for the security of a free state that I am most concerned about. And a citizen can still stand to wait a couple of weeks if it means being adequately armed when radicals attempt to misuse government power.
Click to expand...

maybe you can find yourself a nice Uzi or other automatic weapon to keep away those hoards of dark skinned people who so threaten you.
 
floridafan said:
Will you accept the fact that every single one of our intelligence agencies confirmed Russian involvement in the election, as has the management of Facebook.
Click to expand...

I've heard lots of talking but no showing of evidence. After 16 months, you'd think something would back up all that talk.

A pile of shit has more credibility that the management of an entity that is as leftist as they come.
 
Eagle Eye said:
No they are trying to circumvent the Constitution. Electoral votes are won by the candidate that gets the majority of votes in a state. They want to throw that out and make it national popular votes. that is doing away with the Electoral College as it was intended. The left controls the most populist states that is why they want to change. You are right it is nothing but sour grapes.
Click to expand...

The Constitution says nothing about how a State has to divide its electoral votes. While I understand their motives are whining and crying over losing in 2016, a State can determine how it's Electoral votes are cast. There is no winner take all requirement for each State in the Constitution. If it existed, Maine and Nebraska couldn't do what they do and divide them by congressional district with the 2 representing Senators going to the statewide popular vote winner.

Again, their motivation is childish and based on losing but how a State divides its Electoral votes is up to the State. By the way, nothing in the Constitution says the Electoral votes have to be determined by popular vote. It says a State has a certain number based on a formula and other procedural items related to when those votes are to be cast.
 
aloysious said:
It wouldn't have made a difference in 2000 either.
Click to expand...

Floridafan keeps talking about what MIGHT happen IF more states join. As it stands today, no difference other than Hillary's total being 232 instead of 227 because those 5 faithless electors came from states that agreed to the provisions of the compact.
 
CFM said:
I've heard lots of talking but no showing of evidence. After 16 months, you'd think something would back up all that talk.

A pile of shit has more credibility that the management of an entity that is as leftist as they come.
Click to expand...

It takes a real pile of shit to defame our intelligence services- fuck you honey bunch
 
Althea said:
We hate the EC when it doesn't work for our side, and love it when it does. I can see why it's necessary, but this is an interesting development. So on election night, we won't know who won if the popular vote is close?
Click to expand...

I have always hated the undemocratic and archaic EC. As far back as I can remember.

Even in 2000, when it looked like a real possibility that Gore might win the EC while losing the popular vote - I thought the possibility of that happening was totally unfair and undemocratic.

There are no plausible excuses for the EC. The only reason for even considering having it, is to maintain a safety valve to prevent a maniac, a dangerously unqualified person, or an obese and dim-witted Reality TV star from fluking their way into the White House. The EC could not even manage to do that job correctly.

One American, one vote. Simple. Fair, Democratic.

The rural states already have wildly disproportionate representation at the federal level, through the institution of the U.S. Senate.

The congress has always had the power to remove criminal, insane, mentally incapacitated, or dangerously incompetent chumps through their existing constitutional authorities. The EC is irrelevant in that context.
 
floridafan said:
It takes a real pile of shit to defame our intelligence services- fuck you honey bunch
Click to expand...

It takes a real dumbass to accept something like that when no proof has been shown. If they're that intelligent, shouldn't they have been able to provide something by now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top