Want to abolish the EC? Please read this

Big deal that you are using fraudulent numbers to push your narrative? I bet you support trump — ends justify the means right? Corruption, lying, voter disenfranchisement, electoral fraud, gerrymandering, cheating to win — definitely seems to tie together.

 

Am I supposed to care? I like Wyoming. I hate New York City. When global warming has inundated New York, perhaps the people will have the common sense to move to Wyoming.

 

I don't really give a **** if you care or not.

So do I. I was at seven j outfitters in 2017, and I'm going back again in august of this year. Great state and beautiful country.

None of this addressed anything I said however.

 

- What was the "basic premise" of the EC? Cite and quote support for your answer.
- What reforms will "take it back" to that premise?

 

The popular vote determining the Congressional Districts produced Nancy Pelosi as one leader. The House has accomplished nothing.
The Senate balances the House with a more mature approach not prone to uncontrollable urges we see in Pelosi's habits.

The states should choose the uniting element. Whether it is state legislatures or the popular votes in each state. I'm predicting a Trump popular vote win over the cheats and I believe he will run the table in the EC, forcimg the cheats to abandon their Cheating Compact.

Remember, without those blank areas, residents in the population centers don't eat. Hell, those geniuses want to ban motor vehicles, setting farming and transportation back 150 years.

 

• The EC was supposed to elect both the president and the vice-president. The candidate with the highest percentage of votes would become president and the second highest would become the vice-president
• The electors were never meant to be partisan (the founders feared political parties in general)
• Lastly, the number of votes each state has is unconstitutional, The Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 severely reduced the votes of the people and instead gave it to much smaller states.

There are other smaller tweaks but those are the main three issues in my opinion.

The first would require a constitutional amendment, there isn’t much we can do about the second but the third could be corrected by a simple vote in congress.

 

And where the majority of Americans commit murder, collect food stamps, sell illegal drugs, exonerate MS13 gang members, receive welfare, are homeless, commit violent crimes, spread disease and concoct phony accusations against our president.

 

The number varies depending on how they are tallied up, did you read it?

 

Yes, I read your little image factoid that uses lies to promote a false narrative.

I bet if you count illiterate areas of the country as the primary metric trump won by an even larger margin.

 

Yes, human things happen where humans are.

 

Then what’s even the point of the Constitution if we’re just going back to the Articles of Confederation?

We’ve been through this already and it was determined the US was stronger unified than separated. There are tons of problems in separating the states; say one state reduces environmental regulations, and they start polluting rivers, those rivers run through multiple states, now another state has to clean up the mess they caused, or pay for the health services from resulting illness. Then there is all the problems that could arise in trade between states.

The culture war is nonsense, total manufactured outrage. It’s all based on straw men and sensationalism to send money to the pockets of grifters and propaganda merchants. Working to keep do nothing politicians in office based off of fear of differing opinions. People have different opinions, that’s life, but we can’t hide behind caricatures forever. I’ve lived in the city and the middle of nowhere, people aren’t so different, after all we are all Americans. Just turn off the damn TV and talk to people like human beings.

 

Why would politically independent states necessarily require the union to split? Interstate conflicts can be resolved via lawsuits with a disempowered (but not unempowered) FedGov arbiter. As just one option. I think you're discounting a lot of possibilities between the black and white of what we have now and totally annulling the Union...

 

Urban voters are vastly under-represented by constitutional design in this country due to the existence and structure of the Senate.

The numbers in this post are a bit out of date, and #1 is off by a factor of 10x for HC's counties.

The numbers in this link are also a bit off, but if you find this kinda stuff interesting as many of us here obviously do, check out the three counties that won Trump the election according to the Cook Report:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170715170550/http://cookpolitical.com/story/10201

 

Our founding fathers lived in an era of all communication transmitted by a guy on horseback, taking many days if not months to reach people, if they ever received news??Trying to equate what was acceptable in that era to our current world of instant news and communication is ludicrous.

 

Leaving the original argument from the OP aside then, I instinctively feel each vote should count equally. Representation under the strict definition of the word, I feel should take place in a representative body. For example, the House of Representatives or the Senate. These are supposedly representative bodies (hence the proper noun Representative). But of course this falls on its face in both the bodies and the national election for POTUS.

For the POTUS election, how well is the Kansas guy who voted for the losing candidate represented? How well is the urban dweller represented when they likewise vote the losing candidate?

For the House and Senate, how well is the Republican represented who lives in California? How well is the Democrat represented who lives in Louisiana? How well is the Libertarian, or the Green Party member represented in either body?

If you are going down the road of looking for equal representation, I would submit to you that is something our system fails miserably at, EC or no.

 

Well, with nearly 5 million people I live in the 4th most populated county in the country and with the best weather in the nation on top of that yet our homelessness is no where near that of any liberal run county.
There are 6,614 people experiencing homelessness in Maricopa County. Here's how to help
JESSICA BOEHM | THE REPUBLIC | AZCENTRAL.COM
Updated 11:34 a.m. MST Dec. 24, 2019

LA County has only twice the population yet 10 times the amount of homelessness.
The map draws on data from the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority’s January 2019 Point in Time Count, which reported nearly 59,000 people experiencing homelessness across Los Angeles County—more than 44,000 of them unsheltered.

 

I find it useful to take an idea to its limits to find the issues that arise. Lawsuits between states can get ugly, if a decision is made that bankrupts one state to another; how is that going to go over? Could start a domestic war.

I want to hear you out. What type of things is the federal government too abusive over state rights about?

 

What "problems" do you think these would fix, and how?

 

Having the President and Vice President be elected via the same method would revamp how elections are done and could potentially alter the level of discourse in the executive branch. It would help lessen the disaster that is FPTP voting.

Restoring the intended representation in the house would give citizens a much stronger voice but it would hurt Republican electability so they would fight this tooth and nail (but it only needs majorities in congress to pass so it is possible eventually). Right now people in smaller states are overrepresented in both chambers of congress which was not the intention of the founders or the constitution — and it altered by congress without following the constitutional process. Bush 2 would have never been elected if this process was how the founders wanted it.

I am sure neither of these are issues to you because it is “team” over America.
Sad

 

Healthcare, labor, gun, and drug laws should all be 100% under the purvue of State (or smaller) authority. Immigration as well to a large extent, though some federal involvement makes sense in matters of national security. Additionally States should be far more financially independent from eachother (this isn't necessarily a Federal fault, but an important dynamic regardless).

 

So, this would only make things "different" and not in any way necessarily solve any particular problem you currently see.
What would be "different" about the Trump administration, if Hillary were the VP?
I mean, before he unexpectedly and inexplicably commits suicide.

What was the "intended" representation in the house?

 

We don't live in a democracy. Democracy is by definition mob rule. The USA is a Representative Republic.

Just thought I'd clear that up for you since you obviously slept thru civics class. No need to thank me.

 

We insist on it, just as the US Constitution says it shall be until it is amended, and will not answer further.

 

I have already stated what it would change, it would bring a counterweight to the presidency as well as allow the voice of the people to be heard.

To be representative of the people of the United States — not the states.

 

The VP has only the power to break ties in the Senate, and do what the President asks him to do - how does this "counterweight" the President in any way?
What would be "different" about the Trump administration, if Hillary were the VP?
I mean, before he unexpectedly and inexplicably commits suicide.

Ah - so, you cannot cite a particular number of people each member of the house was "intended" to represent.
How then do you know whatever number you decide upon would provide the representation "intended " by the people who wrote the constitution?