worthless coward....

PostmodernProphet

PostmodernProphet

fully immersed in faith..
HomeForumPolitical ForumsCurrent Events ForumAre you in favor of ending the Constitutional Republic?

Members banned from this thread: PostmodernProphet and Truth Detector
Click to expand...

hey Jarhead!....no, the demmycunts should not be allowed to change our electoral system......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
hey Jarhead!....no, the demmycunts should not be allowed to change our electoral system......
Click to expand...

He is either a fake lawyer or one so bad they made him an office manager. He ranks right up there with the top five here most infected with long term TDS.
He was even screeching about Melania Trump at Carter's funeral because she wore a gray coat over her black dress. Amazing how these zombies get through the day.
 
American elections are a fraud/scam now, and the Revolution is certainly not going to change their minds about elections now being pro-forma.

This will not change till the Revolution goes down, which almost certainly will not happen till America is burned to the ground and UTOPIA fails to rise from the smoldering ashes.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
American elections are a fraud/scam now, and the Revolution is certainly not going to change their minds about elections now being pro-forma.

This will not change till the Revolution goes down, which almost certainly will not happen till America is burned to the ground and UTOPIA fails to rise from the smoldering ashes.
Click to expand...

No Sir! You just don't know your up from down!

funny_rubber_chicken_sky_is_falling_cartoon_classic_round_sticker-r22a946dfcfb741dbbb9c230bf80ab1d8_0ugmp_8byvr_307.jpg
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Actually, proportioned electors would fix a lot of things, along with repealing the 17th Amendment.
Click to expand...

Sir, we need to get out of this Red State Vs. Blue state mentality. Not make it worse! :laugh:

T. A. I know you can't help yourself, because after all you are a Republican! :laugh:

OK, all joking aside, are you old enough to remember Barry Goldwater?

What did you think of him? I mean now that we all had to go back a little before our time, to understand why we became Democrats and Republicans.

Goldwater was from your state, and his nemesis and competition was LBJ from my state! So just for funzies.....

Who would you have voted for?

I have more than one reason for asking, but back in those days, it was the Republicans that were complaining about the Electoral College and for the reason why they lost that election.
 
Last edited:
Geeko Sportivo said:
Sir, we need to get out of this Red State Vs. Blue state mentality. Not make it worse! :laugh:

T. A. I know you can't help yourself, because after all you are a Republican! :laugh:

OK, all joking aside, are you old enough to remember Barry Goldwater?

What did you think of him? I mean now that we all had to go back a little before our time, to understand why we became Democrats and Republicans.

Goldwater was from your state, and his nemesis and competition was LBJ from my state! So just for funzies.....

Who would you have voted for?

I have more than one reason for asking, but back in those days, it was the Republicans that were complaining about the Electoral College and for the reason why they lost that election.
Click to expand...

This isn't a red / blue issue, its one about state's rights and voting that counts. The 17th Amendment turned the Senate into a second House. That's horribly bad. Before it, states got to pick their Senators, not 'The People.' That worked much better.
If electors were proportionally allotted by vote, big states couldn't overwhelm small ones with their electoral clout. The same goes for population heavy cities versus rural areas within a state under the 'winner take all' have little or no say in how electors are aportioned.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
This isn't a red / blue issue, its one about state's rights and voting that counts. The 17th Amendment turned the Senate into a second House. That's horribly bad. Before it, states got to pick their Senators, not 'The People.' That worked much better.

If electors were proportionally allotted by vote, big states couldn't overwhelm small ones with their electoral clout. The same goes for population heavy cities versus rural areas within a state under the 'winner take all' have little or no say in how electors are aportioned.
Click to expand...

Translation, let the rich people pick our senators, not the common man. I disagree. The present system isn't perfect, but it's an improvement to let Americans pick their own Senators.

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/amendments/amendment-xvii/interpretations/147
While many constitutional amendments have added to the rights held by Americans, changed the balance of power between the federal government and states, or altered elections for the President, the structure of Congress in the written Constitution has barely been touched since 1791. The only constitutional amendment to do so in a substantial way is the Seventeenth Amendment, which removed from state legislatures the power to choose U.S. Senators and gave that power directly to voters in each state.
Click to expand...

The Founders came up with the Electoral College as a compromise between high population states and low population states. The 12th Amendment fixed a problem with electing the President and VP. A pure democracy would be even more imbalanced by weighting all issues towards cities. The EC is a good compromise. The main change I'd make can be made in the States with ranked voting. If Florida had ranked voting in 1992, my Perot vote would have flipped to GHW Bush and Clinton probably would never have been President since Perot voters leaned right. Gore would have won in 2000 under such a system, but then he'd have never been VP is GHW Bush had beat Clinton.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
This isn't a red / blue issue, its one about state's rights and voting that counts. The 17th Amendment turned the Senate into a second House. That's horribly bad. Before it, states got to pick their Senators, not 'The People.' That worked much better.
If electors were proportionally allotted by vote, big states couldn't overwhelm small ones with their electoral clout. The same goes for population heavy cities versus rural areas within a state under the 'winner take all' have little or no say in how electors are aportioned.
Click to expand...

We want to put the government in the hands of the people- by the people- not the other way around.

This used to be the mantra of the Republican party!

I just don't recognize you Republicans anymore.

You guys are nothing like Barry Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan, Bush Daddy, McCain, Romney, or Bush Jr.!

Since ya'll got a taste of Donald Trump's Piss, you are all punch drunk or something!

And don't tell me you do not see the bat-shit-crazy Trumptards here in the forum, because I know you do.

And, TA, you may not realize it, but you sound just like them Sir- always defending Trump and his Bat-Shit-Crazy ways.

Maybe it's time to get back to what the Republicans once stood for and stop all the crazytown lunacy?
 
Last edited:
Geeko Sportivo said:
We want to put the government in the hands of the people- by the people- not the other way around.
Click to expand...

No, the original idea the Founders had was to divide power. Giving all of it to "The People" is as bad as a monarchy or dictatorship. It's mob rule. The original system they set up was The People selected their representatives in the House. The states, primarily state governments--elected by The People--would then select senators to represent The State in the senate. The President was elected by the electoral college to prevent any high pop state from dominating that election at the expense of low population states.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top