Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A Representative Republic.
As to the 17th amendment it needs to be repealed.
No. A constitutional republic and a representative democracy.
It appears some of you need to retake Civics 101.
I'm sorry you oppose representative democracy and oppose the right of the people to directly elect their representatives/leaders.
Sounds like you would prefer an oligarcy, perhaps even a dictatorship. Not really surprising given your support of Trump.
And no. I'm not even going to attempt an explanation.
Why no actually I'm a states rights guy.
A serious attempt to remove it would be the end of the United part.
TBH, that's about the dumbest answer I could have imagined you giving.What is true that a system based on popular vote was unacceptable to slave states because most of their people weren't allowed to vote.
I'm sure you aren't, because there is none.
Maybe you should go back to trying to convince everyone of your racial status.
No doubt about that.
You also support an oligarcy based on your posts. Just admit it. It's ok, we already know.
States having more of a voice in our federal government is an oligarchy to you?
The EC works just fine when the dims candidate prevail, duh
No.
Maybe you will catch up eventually. I'll wait.
There is no flaw in the EC. Run better candidates that can win the electoral college. It's really not a difficult concept.I personally kinda would like to see a Democratic candidate win the electoral college while the Republican wins the popular vote. I think we would finally then have a consensus on how flawed the Electoral College is and it would be done away with.
As long as Republicans only benefit though from this system, there is no incentive for them to want to amend the system. Thus they will continue to make the lame and flawed arguments we see on this thread in defense of it.
Doing away with the EC would be supporting a Oligarchy.
There is no flaw in the EC.
No it wouldn't. Giving power to all the people, one vote one person, is not an oligarchy.
I wonder, do you support the party presidential nominations being decided by the vote of the people in primaries? Or would you like to return to the days of political bosses having the power and the smoke-filled rooms?
There is no flaw in the EC. Run better candidates that can win the electoral college. It's really not a difficult concept.
I disagree. Believe it or not there are differences in what is important to different people. What is important to people in Big Cities is not the same as what is important to those that live in smaller cities or out in the country. If you look at a map of counties won by President Trump you will find that Trump won a huge majority of the country. Just because huge population centers voted for Clinton doesn't mean that is a representation of the will of the people.
What you want is for the people that live in the rust belt to have absolutely no say in how the country is run unless they happen to agree with big city liberals. IMO and the founders opinion that is wrong. Each state has a portion of the EC depending on the population of each. It doesn't get anymore fair than that. You know the rules instead of trying to change them learn to play by them.
IMO if you do somehow manage to change the EC, you will see states try to succeed and willing to fight to do so. That should be avoided at all cost. For now we live in a free country with rights that allow us to have our own opinions, whether liberals agree or not. Living in a country without representation is not freedom.
I disagree. Believe it or not there are differences in what is important to different people. What is important to people in Big Cities is not the same as what is important to those that live in smaller cities or out in the country. If you look at a map of counties won by President Trump you will find that Trump won a huge majority of the country. Just because huge population centers voted for Clinton doesn't mean that is a representation of the will of the people.
What you want is for the people that live in the rust belt to have absolutely no say in how the country is run unless they happen to agree with big city liberals.
IMO if you do somehow manage to change the EC, you will see states try to succeed and willing to fight to do so.
In Bearcat's simplest form: We don't have mob rule.
Wtf are talking about?TBH, that's about the dumbest answer I could have imagined you giving.
So southern states didn't want to include slaves who could not legally vote in their population count in order to increase their representation proportion in the federal government? Interesting. Can you travel back in time to 1787 and let the folks at the Constitutional Convention know that? It was quite the point of discussion. If the northern states knew that the southern states didn't want to include slaves in determining their population it probably would have saved days of discussion and negotiation.
PS... you might check the Federalist Papers for clarification on the thoughts of the Framers when it came to electing the President.
Can you point to a single sentence in the constitution addressing the topic of political parties and expand on why the framers wrote it in that way?@2012Bearcat ...
Do you support the party presidential nominations being decided by the vote of the people in primaries? Or would you like to return to the days of political bosses having the power and the smoke-filled rooms?
Can you point to a single sentence in the constitution addressing the topic of political parties and expand on why the framers wrote it in that way?
I’m sorry, I’m bored doing laundry for my trip tomorrow.Sure, as soon as you answer the question I asked 2012Bearcat instead of deflecting to a separate question.
I’m sorry, I’m bored doing laundry for my trip tomorrow.
I’ll let you continue making an ignorant “40 yr old” ass of yourself in peace.
BahahahahaYeah, probably best for you take the exit. You've already flamed out.
Addressing your answer. I can't help that it was stupid.Wtf are talking about?
There wouldn't be a single cluck from you "progressives" if Hillary had won. The real flaw for you is that the voters rejected 4 more years of shitty leftist leadership.Sure there are. Many flaws. And some of them have already been put forth on this thread.
@2012Bearcat ...
Do you support the party presidential nominations being decided by the vote of the people in primaries? Or would you like to return to the days of political bosses having the power and the smoke-filled rooms?
I think it's obvious that none of us support the way Hillary was given the Democratic Nomination, even the liberals.