The Overton Window is an approach to identifying the ideas that define the spectrum of acceptability of governmental policies. Politicians can only act within the acceptable range. Shifting the Overton Window involves proponents of policies outside the window persuading the public to expand the window. Wikipedia › wiki › Overton_window Overton window - Wikipedia
No worries, Trump will not be convicted, he will win re-election, and liberty and prosperity will continue its downward spiral into tyranny and deprivation.
Just wow. You realize that the Electoral Colleges of today is NOT what the framers intended. You know that every state CHANGED the electoral college to be “winner take all” which was NOT what the framers intended....but do continue with your right wing talking points
No its not. States can change their own rules regarding their EC votes. 15 states and the District of Columbia have already done so. These rules are to combat the “winner take all” methodology of the EC. That,and they also take away the “super delegate” from both parties. There is already a huge push to change The EC to better reflect the popular vote. The biggest reason is population concentration in a few states that could swing the election. California for example has 55 EC votes, and Hillary won it with 61% of the vote. But in that scenario, Donald Trump LOST 25+ EC votes because of the states “winner take all” rules. Changing the EC to follow the popular vote is a good thing. It better reflects the real vote of the people.
Which will go to court immediately when enough states sign on for making an end run around the constitution and disenfranchising their own state voters by basing the state votes on other states votes.
So for starters you're not a states rights guy then right ? What "end run around the constitution". Its LITERALLY written in the constitution that the sates decide how their electoral votes are cast. Are you serious ?
Based on state votes represented by electors. Not based on other states voters. Surprised you are incapable of understanding this.
How about the people who said Clinton should skate on perjury, obstruction of justice, subornation of perjury and witness tampering?
The end run around the prohibition on state compacts unless approved by the Congress. The end run around the Constitutional principle that the States elect the President not a national popular vote.
hahahahahahaha What interstate compact do they have ? You guys are getting laughable. Fox News talking points are getting ridiculous It is literally in the constitution in very clear language that they can do this
Keeping in mind that, prior to the civil war, several states did not hold any election whatsoever to select their participants in the Electoral College, what system of choosing electors did the framers intend? Support your response.
You must be talking about the National Popular Vote Compact - if not, please correct me. https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation The NPVC where states with a aggregate total of 270 electoral votes enter an agreement - a compact - to allocate their electors based on the national popular vote, thereby guaranteeing the person with the most popular votes will win the election. Absent consent of Congress, this is a prima facie violation of Article 1 Sec 10:3 of the Constitution, which prohibits states from entering into any agreement or compact with another state- and thus, will fail in court. Further, the compact will collapse the moment California and New York are forced to give the electors to a Republican. Further yet, the NPVC states the electoral votes will go to the person with the "most" votes, rather than a majority of the vote, leading to a situation where, historically, someone with as little as 41% of the vote would be declared with winner - clearly violating the premise upon which the idea was created.
their are 15 states that already do this and have donce 2015....their is no "compact". States are just saying they will make THEIR state use the popular vote, no other state is required for them to do that.
The framers intended the Sate Legislature of each state. It's clearly stated in the article. It was part of the 3/5's compromise that apportioned representation.
That means she is a bad person.. Anti electoral college makes you a totalitarian end of story. Armed resistance or sucession would ne fully justified. Yes! This is a civil war worthy issue.
