The founders said we are a democracy

T. A. Gardner said:
No, removing the 17th Amendment would go far to restoring the Republic. Do you even know what the 17th Amendment did and how things were done before it was enacted? I doubt it.
Click to expand...

You do realize that hole bag of slop you just wrote says nothing about the issue huh cum bag


I know what the 17th says



I posted about it in this thread already


Your turn you fake assed dope
 
evince said:
The original design was state legislators picked senators



If you want to go backwards please explain why we should go backwards to old definitions of words and eliminate the powers the FOUNDERS INTENDED us to have



You can’t have it both ways



Either we accept the legal changes in the constitution that the Founders created for us to make


Or face that your argument is fucking ridiculous
Click to expand...

Post 9



Maybe read a thread before you swing your tiny balls around next time
 
T. A. Gardner said:
No, removing the 17th Amendment would go far to restoring the Republic. Do you even know what the 17th Amendment did and how things were done before it was enacted? I doubt it.
Click to expand...

Well you number ten can of shit,



Thanks for proving Putin needs to educate his programmers better


But then if he allowed your programmer to study other governments …………………..

His threat of public execution rises
 
AProudLefty said:
Explain how the 17th made it worse.
Click to expand...

Because it turned the Senate into a second House. Prior to the 17th, senators were selected by the state they were from, not directly elected by the people of that state. This process varied by state some. States either had the legislature select the state's senators subject to approval by the governor, or the governor selected them subject to approval by the legislature. No election involved. State government selected their senators to represent the State, not the people. The People were represented by their representatives in the House.

With the 17th, the people selected their senators just like their representatives and defacto turned the Senate into a second House. The states were no longer represented.

The reason this was done by the founders was to further divide power among more different and disparate groups so none had too much.

At least you asked. All evince can do is rant and rave with profanity at her complete lack of knowledge on the subject preventing even a scintilla of rational response.
 
AProudLefty said:
Explain how the 17th made it worse.
Click to expand...

It is completely incapable of any in depth discussion of the founders



They all are

They pretend to know things with bluster


But it’s soooooo easy to crush them with facts


That is the beauty of being on the side of facts


Anytime you need to find info back an idea


There it is in a couple of targeted searches



They are at a HUGE disadvantage.



The facts back nothing they say


It’s why the can only use trash right wing sites


Or they just post some link and it doesn’t back what they claimed


They just lie and say it did


That been happening more lately


Because they get called out here from posting lies from shit sites



They know they are losing
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Because it turned the Senate into a second House. Prior to the 17th, senators were selected by the state they were from, not directly elected by the people of that state. This process varied by state some. States either had the legislature select the state's senators subject to approval by the governor, or the governor selected them subject to approval by the legislature. No election involved. State government selected their senators to represent the State, not the people. The People were represented by their representatives in the House.

With the 17th, the people selected their senators just like their representatives and defacto turned the Senate into a second House. The states were no longer represented.

The reason this was done by the founders was to further divide power among more different and disparate groups so none had too much.
Click to expand...

That doesn't answer my question.
 
AProudLefty said:
That doesn't answer my question.
Click to expand...

What? You can't make conclusions from that? It concentrated more power in the hands of the mob (aka public) rather than divided it up as the founders intended. The same thing would happen with direct election of Presidents. That's why the founders set things up like they did. They wanted power to be as divided as possible because they knew letting it be concentrated would lead to authoritarian and totalitarian rule once it was concentrated in the hands of a few.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Because it turned the Senate into a second House. Prior to the 17th, senators were selected by the state they were from, not directly elected by the people of that state. This process varied by state some. States either had the legislature select the state's senators subject to approval by the governor, or the governor selected them subject to approval by the legislature. No election involved. State government selected their senators to represent the State, not the people. The People were represented by their representatives in the House.

With the 17th, the people selected their senators just like their representatives and defacto turned the Senate into a second House. The states were no longer represented.

The reason this was done by the founders was to further divide power among more different and disparate groups so none had too much.

At least you asked. All evince can do is rant and rave with profanity at her complete lack of knowledge on the subject preventing even a scintilla of rational response.
Click to expand...

They feared the power of the people


Only land owing white men could vote

It stunted the power of the people


This was the first time that mankind was trying such a HUGE move to give the RABBLE power


They said themselves that their new government sought a MORE PERFECT UNION in its design



The design they settled on legally allowed the people to make that change


They would not want us taking powers away from people


Their whole DREAM was about stepping towards freedom


Once this nation took away the right to drink alcohol


Then realized it was a bad idea to try and be less free


They gave it back huh
 
T. A. Gardner said:
What? You can't make conclusions from that? It concentrated more power in the hands of the mob (aka public) rather than divided it up as the founders intended. The same thing would happen with direct election of Presidents. That's why the founders set things up like they did. They wanted power to be as divided as possible because they knew letting it be concentrated would lead to authoritarian and totalitarian rule once it was concentrated in the hands of a few.
Click to expand...

This isn't about electing Presidents. The voters in their states elect senators to represent their states.

What was the reason for the 17th Amendment and what make it worse since? Still waiting on that explanation.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
What? You can't make conclusions from that? It concentrated more power in the hands of the mob (aka public) rather than divided it up as the founders intended. The same thing would happen with direct election of Presidents. That's why the founders set things up like they did. They wanted power to be as divided as possible because they knew letting it be concentrated would lead to authoritarian and totalitarian rule once it was concentrated in the hands of a few.
Click to expand...

The mob??????



You hate the people


You hate democracy



You are not on the side of freedom


You are not an American
 
T. A. Gardner said:
What? You can't make conclusions from that? It concentrated more power in the hands of the mob (aka public) rather than divided it up as the founders intended. The same thing would happen with direct election of Presidents. That's why the founders set things up like they did. They wanted power to be as divided as possible because they knew letting it be concentrated would lead to authoritarian and totalitarian rule once it was concentrated in the hands of a few.
Click to expand...







I just read the rest of this gobbledygook


It self contradicts

It’s meaningless crap
 
The separation of powers wasn’t designed to protect the government from the people



It was designed to protect the people from the few in government concentrating power you idiot
 
T. A. Gardner said:
No, removing the 17th Amendment would go far to restoring the Republic. Do you even know what the 17th Amendment did and how things were done before it was enacted? I doubt it.
Click to expand...

One reason for the 17th was because of the corruption of buying and selling Senate seats in the states.

You can see the temptations when the governor of ILL wanted "something" for filling Obama's Senate seat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top