Hey Colonel..., Whaddaya think?

[4est_4est_Gump]

Is the Electoral College Doomed?


http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...-college-national-popular-vote-compact-215541

 

[Rightguide]

I doubt the 36 Republican states would agree to a law that would allow New York and California to run the country.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I doubt the 36 Republican states would agree to a law that would allow New York and California to run the country.

Don't ever misunderestimate their fervent desire to be liked by the press and to curry favor with the venomous Left in order to avoid as many serious charges as possible...


Even in Red States, it is the Yellow Press of the Blue Cities that they have to kowtow too and it's going to be hard to stand up and explain...



"WHY do you HATE Democracy?"

 

[BB4evah]

Dumz are SORE LOSERS

 

[Rightguide]

"WHY do you HATE Democracy?"

Because as a constitutionalist I believe in a republican form of government.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

I know you are posing this question tongue-in-cheek, but, yeah, eventually I think the Electoral College is doomed. People don't give a shit why it was invented and they care even less about a disproportionate favoring of political power to smaller states.

Blatant gerrymandering of House districts probably isn't long for this world either, although I don't happen to have a problem with it.

It just offends the sensitivities of the simplistic, which is all most people are. I don't think it's much more complicated than that.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Because as a constitutionalist I believe in a republican form of government.

You don't know what REPUBLICAN means, asshead. Ever wonder why Jefferson was a DEMOCRAT-REPUBLICAN?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I know you are posing this question tongue-in-cheek, but, yeah, eventually I think the Electoral College is doomed. People don't give a shit why it was invented and they care even less about a disproportionate favoring of political power to smaller states.

Blatant gerrymandering of House districts probably isn't long for this world either, although I don't happen to have a problem with it.

It just offends the sensitivities of the simplistic, which is all most people are. I don't think it's much more complicated than that.

How does a state go about picking districts without being accused of gerrymandering?


That's one question that has always baffled me.


If the EC is doomed, as you say...,



then we are Venezuela!

 

[pointless]

for those of here who remember the 2012 election this thread is fairly amusing.

 

[Ishmael]

Is the Electoral College Doomed?


http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...-college-national-popular-vote-compact-215541

Where to start?

If this initiative can muster enough states to basically circumvent the Constitution, then they could certainly muster enough to amend it. Why not play it straight as opposed to this clever 'barracks lawyer' method?

It seems to me that the goal here is to use a back door approach to create a pure democracy and shit can the Republic. As long as that's the goal why not also amend the Constitution to allow for national referendums? There is no reason that the left should be allowed to have it both ways, a representative democracy for legislation but a pure democracy for the president. If you're going to go, go all the way.

A clever as these advocates think they are I'm wondering if the SCOTUS would go along with the notion of one state basically invalidating the votes of the citizens in one or more other states? For example, it NV were to join in with CA on this initiative then there would be no reason for the voters of NV to go to the polls.........ever.

The arch proponent of this 'barracks lawyer's' initiative also makes a silly argument re. the swing states. While it is true that swing states do determine the election, that has always been true and will continue to be the case even under this plan. Further what is considered to be 'the swing states' changes over time, not rapidly, but changes none the less. In this past election the states that actually did determine the outcome were NOT considered to be the swing states going into election day. That reality alone invalidates his argument.

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Just dead white slaveowners who could not foresee "societal evolution..."



More like evil-ution.

 

[Ishmael]

Just dead white slaveowners who could not foresee "societal evolution..."



More like evil-ution.

Want a pure democracy, why not go all the way?

There was an old Sci-Fi story I read where all elected representatives had a medallion strapped to their chests. Citizen voting booths were conveniently located damn near everywhere (who would have expected a 1950's sci-fi writer to have anticipated wifi?). After every vote by the elected official the voters in his/her area had 48 hours to agree or disagree with their position. In the event of a no confidence vote the medallion exploded.

Pure democracy AND term limits all in one whack.

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

This is one of those careful what you wish for things.




I'll bet that in the back of their minds is the notion that the courts will undo any damage done to them when they hold a minority position...


In good news, the Left is beginning to change hearts and minds:

http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/06/transgender-crusade-made-rethink-support-gay-marriage/

 

[Rightguide]

You don't know what REPUBLICAN means, asshead. Ever wonder why Jefferson was a DEMOCRAT-REPUBLICAN?

Read Art IV section 4, ya stupid son of a bitch.

 

[DrDelirium]

I know you are posing this question tongue-in-cheek, but, yeah, eventually I think the Electoral College is doomed. People don't give a shit why it was invented and they care even less about a disproportionate favoring of political power to smaller states.

Blatant gerrymandering of House districts probably isn't long for this world either, although I don't happen to have a problem with it.

It just offends the sensitivities of the simplistic, which is all most people are. I don't think it's much more complicated than that.

I don't disagree with any of this. I will just point out that they are powerful arguments for A) it doesn't much matter whether we have the Electoral College and blatant gerrymandering and B) electoral democracy is a sham.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

https://spectator.org/the-pain-of-the-contemporary-american-orthodox-jew/


3:1 the Doctor is only referring to "Republican" gerrymandering as an election loss excuse.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

They love the tyranny of the majority until it falls on them at which time they run crying to the Ninth Circus...

 

[Ishmael]

They love the tyranny of the majority until it falls on them at which time they run crying to the Ninth Circus...

They never quite grasp the concept that the pendulum swings both ways.

If closing the border and running ALL of the illegals out today were to be put to a national referendum it would pass by damn near 65%.

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You mean like when the majority passed legislation protecting "marriage?"

 

[RobDownSouth]

They never quite grasp the concept that the pendulum swings both ways.

If closing the border and running ALL of the illegals out today were to be put to a national referendum it would pass by damn near 65%.

Ishmael

I'd take that bet in a heartbeat. That might be popular with your dwindling low-income white bitter-ender demographic, but more and more of you are shufflin' off the mortal coil each day. You're rapidly becoming irrelevant.

 

[Rightguide]

They never quite grasp the concept that the pendulum swings both ways.

If closing the border and running ALL of the illegals out today were to be put to a national referendum it would pass by damn near 65%.

Ishmael

The most feared truth on the left.

 

[Rightguide]

I'd take that bet in a heartbeat.

Only because in doing so you know you'd take it up the ass, like you did last year, when the vote rolled in. So no need to scare folks by dropping your drawers in public the vote isn't going to happen again until 2018, .

 

[Ishmael]

https://spectator.org/the-pain-of-the-contemporary-american-orthodox-jew/


3:1 the Doctor is only referring to "Republican" gerrymandering as an election loss excuse.

Excellent read. Spending so much time in Miami I was exposed to all three sects of Judaism. The Orthodox really are conservatives in nature and action. The 'conservative' and 'reform' referred to pork as "pink beef" if that is any indication of their nature

What I came away with, generally, is that ALL Jews believe in a Theocracy. A notion held by most Christian sects as well as Hindu's, Muslim's, etc.

They are also not prone to evangelicalism. They don't go out looking for recruits. In that respect they do see themselves as a 'race' apart. You either have a Jewish mother, or you don't. (See the laws of Israel for more illumination on that aspect.) Of course the good news there is that it is highly improbable that some Jew is going to be knocking on your door to tell you about the Torah.

The 'conservative' and 'reform' Jew seem to be disciples of Hegel. "The state is the highest manifestation of God." If only the state would be formulated according to their own beliefs that is. (Back to the Theocracy theme.)

And therein lies the tension between the Jew, Christian, Hindu, and Muslim. They each have their own vision of paradise on earth. And I don't mind that fact, just don't expect me to 'toe' your particular religious line.

The atheist's have no moral high ground here, mainly because they have no moral compass. The majority of them are like starving cows that stampede from a bale of hay labeled, "Boycott Wall St.", to BLM, to Unisex bathrooms, to antifa. Same cows, and if the truth be told, it's the same bale of hay. Like cats to a laser pointer.

Ishmael


One of the better notions of our founding fathers was the separation of church and state, not to be confused with the abjuration of religion altogether.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

Is there any other situation in which we believe that the majority shouldn't rule?

asking for a friend

 

[Ishmael]

Is there any other situation in which we believe that the majority should rule?

asking for a friend

Majority=Consensus. There is no homogeneous majority.

Ishmael