Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by Nemesis., Aug 21, 2019.
It's why we are a representative republic, and not a mob-rule democracy.
Try selling that truth to some of the frothing groups.
The protections created by the founders of our republic apparently keep getting in the way of all the zealots (socialists, ultra-progressives, etc) who think we need to "fix" our nation and get rid of some parts of the Constitution and BoR.
THIS JUST IN:
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that republicans and conservatives cannot serve as electors.
Film at eleven.
Citizen's Initiatives on the ballots were the first violation of this principle. My father used to rail about this when I was growing up. He said these were not in the spirit of the Republic. We voted for representatives who were to make these decisions, not to put things on the ballot for popular vote, and that this was a way for elected officials to be "off the hook" for spending decisions - which is what most of the early initiatives were all about.
Mob rule rarely makes good choices.
It's not bad juju, it's exactly what the Constitution says should happen. The founders never intended a popular vote for President.
I was referring to the decision, in light of the current soft coup, Never Trumpers, Interstate Compact, etc. I should have been more clear in my original post.
I remember reading something about this 2015. An elector must travel to Washington to cast the vote; an elector threatened to not cast a vote as per his selection; the Governor of the elector's state said something about the elector never would be able to return to their home state.
This makes my head hurt........
We can take comfort in knowing that Soros will direct one of his many organizations to give the electors whatever they want in order to ensure that they vote the "correct" way.
Original intent for states to control the election.
Up held by this one court.
Well, considering that state initiatives are a state thing, and not a whole Republic, thing, I'm not so sure the founders would've cared. Not so long as nobody tried to do it at the federal level. The early states did "their thing" differently, in many respects.
Yes, this is the concern.
What if Trump wins the majority of the states with enough electoral potential, but then the electors don't vote for him?
People, loons, crazies, tried to persuade the electors not to vote for Trump in 2016. There's youtube videoes of them being disruptive, protesting, begging, bullying, threatening, then coming completely unhinged when the electors obeyed the state's voters and voted for Trump.
2020 will be all of this and more. Even in Trump wins in a landslide, the left will not cooperate at all. It will make the Russiagate claims and attempted coup look tame.
For some reason this is what I always expected it to be. I think it may have been a high school teacher that taught it was a fail-safe plus the founder's were a bit elitist.
Honestly, I thought the last presidential election would have been a good reason to have used it. Another Republican could have been selected. In hindsight, I am glad it didn't happen. Yes, Trump is an embarrassment but thankfully our country is still plugging along. Fortunately those around him are loyal to the country and not him.
I do not even want to imagine what the fallout would have been. It was bad enough what the Democrats did to Bernie.
We vote and then the electoral college selects our President. It is nice when the President gets the popular vote too.
It provides a bit more legitimacy. I really would have been concerned if Trump would have won the popular vote though.
I expected Clinton to win but would have been surprised if she would have won by more than 1.5 million votes against another candidate. That's if she would have even won.
For the Texas Democratic party, they are in/selected at the local level before the primary. Then they are selected again at the state convention for "proper" distribution to the national convention.
At least that's what I understood from a friend was selected as Sanders at the county level.
Are you talking about POTUS?
He seems to want to do away with the 1st, 4th and 14th amendments. Some think the 2nd as well. Regardless he will be supported by his base.
Logic (and the Constitution) would seem to make any ruling by a state that all their electoral votes go to the winner of the national popular vote unconstitutional. I think this ruling actually affirms that. Probably at some point the Supreme Court will be involved.
Your TDS is showing. Trump wants nothing of the sort, and only your delusion and the delusion of the far left believes differently.
My next question was so why do I vote for president?
Here is MSN/NBC's take on it