MASS to circumvent the electoral college - Page 2 - Politics and War Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Thursday, August 05, 2010 11:55 AM on j-body.org
True Conservative wrote:

what you miss is the representative republic does not mean that the popular vote is what matters. what matters is the sum of the voted on a state by state basis.
The thing that makes it a Republic has NOTHING to do with the states vs the people voting for the president. It has everything to do with the fact that we have elected representatives to make decisions for the people to live under. If the people select the president directly - it is still a Republic. All that means is that the president is chosen the same way Congressmen and Senators are. BTW those Senators where originally chosen by the states rather than by the people - does that bother you?

bk3k
But the Congressmen and Senators are elected only by the people of the state to represent only that state. You have an issue that the man elected to represent the entire nation as a whole be elected by the people of the entire nation as a whole? What about that does not make sense to you?
what makes sense is it was determined to be that way to give the people the power. the *elected representatives* did not ask for permission to do this and do not represent the will of the people. If these states wanted to do so so bad, why not do it the real way and propose an amendment to teh states constitution? That is the proper answer

True Conservative wrote:

it goes back to state rights versus federal rights. The states created the federal government, not the other way around.
Funny you should mention that. The Constitution was made to replace an existing form of Government in the US. It replaced the Articles of Confederation. Our forefather did this, realizing that a system of Government - where states have too much power under a weak Federal Government - was almost unworkable and could not stand the test of time. While people look to the Constitution in order to preserve state rights, they apparently don't realize exactly what the Constitution is, or why it came into being. Its very ratification is the biggest erosion of states' rights that this nation has ever experienced.

bk3k
INFIDEL - in your sig is a quote from a man steadfastly opposed the passage of the very Constitution that you always look upon with such reverence. He opposed its passage(in favor of retaining the Articles of Confederation) for the same reasons I mentioned here. He was a prolific Anti-Federalist. Although that quote is wise, I still find it ironic that you would use it considering this fact.

Another small point to make here - people always talk about "the will of the forefathers" and such. Well as brilliant as those men where, they where still much like politicians today - they did NOT agree on everything. They in fact fought like cats and dogs all the time. The Constitution itself, is a compromise document(which in a way made it stronger). People who think they spoke with one voice simple do not understand history.
this quote only extends the desires for a very very limited federal government. The constitution as put together in teh right way, if interpreted with insight into the founders thoughts you would see why there are so many erroneous

True Conservative wrote:

This means a popular vote is not the decider, it is the input from each independent state.
bk3k
The President is elected by the Electoral College, who derives their power from the states. The states - as with all levels of government - derive their just powers from the consent of the governed(aka the people). This is the very foundation of how our government has always worked. The president being elected by the people directly - only cuts out the middlemen(or dare I say - cuts out 2 layers of bureaucracy).

Honestly, I cannot understand the hangup some people have with State's rights. I think their should be proper distribution of power, yes. But what really matters is not Federal Government power VS State power. What matters to me is the power retained by the people VS ALL LEVELS of Government. Does it really matter just which level of Government deprives you of liberty? Is not your liberty deprived just as much if the state government has taken it rather than the Federal Government? if you do not understand the issue with states rights then you may not understand teh situation that created the revolution. If you need more information on this i can recommend some good reading. the "states" were 13 independent colonies and their rights to act in differing ways was a crucial factor. You need to realize the distance from government is a main issue. who are you most likely to get a call back from your mayor or teh president? your congressman or your city councilman? these middle men or layers are there for a reason. the federal government is not supposed to be what it is now. Our national debt and many of the problems come from the federal government overstepping their bounds and stretching the constitution for their own means. It is a limited view when you do not understand teh real purpose of different and independent levels of government. You say you want power reserved to teh people. how would getting rid of states rights help you in that conquest? you would have no voice in government.

Take Chicago and their (recently struck down) gun law. People where deprived of their rights to own hand guns for self defense. But it was neither by Federal nor even State Government that they where deprived. It was by their local government. Does it really matter? All that did matter was that their liberty was deprived of them. Ironically, it was a branch of The Federal Government who came to the rescue to restore the rights of the people taken by local government. Think about that one.
Thought about it. Chicago is an abberation. Liberals have owned that city for 30 years, look what it got you. that is a problem that does not apply to this post, feel free to discuss in anotehr thread though.

It is not the state's rights that we must safeguard, but the rights of the people that we must hold sacred. We do not exist for the sake of the Government, rather the Government exists for our sake. All the State Governments are the same as the Federal Government in one thing - they ALWAYS seek more power. The fact is that the State Governments are at odds with The Federal Government because both want that same power. They always want more, never less. But never forget that this power they argue over is power derived from the people.
small government is the idea for sure. you need more power taken away from teh federal government because that is how it was designed. they realized the people had more voice the closer government was to them.
The cause of "state's rights" is nothing more than a straw man to distract you from the fact that all levels of Government are too powerful and growing still. So you take sides with the State over the Federal... what good does that do you?! Would you side with one thief over another? Think about it.
see my above post. which do you have more control over.

No, I'm not an anarchist anymore than I am a totalitarian-ist. The best answer to this question (as with most questions) is a proper balance between these extremes. I think we are currently in more danger of the latter than the former.
true, but it has to stop somewhere and this is an important part

True Conservative wrote:

The Constitution was written this way for a reason.
That reason being that in a world where communication was carried by horse, electing one figure from the votes of every person across the nation would be utterly unworkable. That is no longer the case in a world of instant communication.
bk3k
People act like there is some divine providence written into every word. The Constitution IS IMPORTANT - as well as brilliant - but still it is not perfect either. It has needed adjusted from time to time. Or do you believe that no Constitutional Amendment should have ever been passed? Even the Bill of Rights was NOT in the original Constitution as ratified by the states. That is why they are referred to as the first 10 AMENDMENTS aka the first 10 changes to The Constitution.
would you change the foundation of a building 230 years after is was built not because it did not work, but because you liked this one better? the changes made in the constitution were put there to guarantee certain things that they did not have time to debate and settle back then. but look back at the amendments, can you honestly tell me that they all were needed? take out obvious ones like women voting, blacks etc, those were issues that could not be handled till later on in the republics history. Think about this would obama, pelosi woodrow wilson fdr etc etc have more enlightened thoughts on how to build a country or are they people who damaged teh fabric of this country. The document needs to remain the way it is because there is not a governing document in existence that has created more prosperity and positive change in the world. the current administration and most of the people in federal government the last 100 years have been trying to dissolve it.
On topic this change makes more of a difference than you may realize. especially when you think about why they are now trying to do it. they are trying to make puerto rico a state without the input of the people who live there mattering, they are trying to keep illegals and get them voting democrat. They have an agenda and it is not in this countries best interests.






Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Thursday, August 05, 2010 1:46 PM on j-body.org
bk3k wrote:

People act like there is some divine providence written into every word. The Constitution IS IMPORTANT - as well as brilliant - but still it is not perfect either. It has needed adjusted from time to time. Or do you believe that no Constitutional Amendment should have ever been passed? Even the Bill of Rights was NOT in the original Constitution as ratified by the states. That is why they are referred to as the first 10 AMENDMENTS aka the first 10 changes to The Constitution.

Perhaps the single most intelligent statement I have seen in this forum ever...certainly this year anyway.

Thank you, bk3k, for helping show that centrism and a moderate, open-minded viewpoint can exist in this forum. Extremism limits so much thought and possible progress in this fine nation, and your voice does indeed matter...and can ultimately make a real difference.







Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Thursday, August 05, 2010 7:14 PM on j-body.org
i think the who in the modified the constitution makes a difference here. centrism and moderate you can say but the points made are quite valid and in context of this issue, the amendment was not the issue raised because there is no amendment given. please look at the whole context and you will see what I mean



Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Friday, August 06, 2010 9:03 PM on j-body.org
So bill, Honestly,



you would have us draft a new Constitution wouldn't ya?



ya know, "for the TIMES'

To You your own self be true Bill...


And bk3k,


That quote was a 'little' before the Constitution...
Hell, before the first shot was Fired on the Lexington Green...

ya know?
Its about standing up and fighting for what you believe in...

But you new that, right?

Alas, it gets worse though.
IT WAS IN A CHURCH! THE DAMN FOUNDERS BELIEVED IN GOD! AND CHRIST!

so much nicer to have a hojie in office.


Chris




"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."

Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry


Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Friday, August 06, 2010 9:36 PM on j-body.org
sigh.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Saturday, August 07, 2010 6:54 AM



Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Saturday, August 07, 2010 2:20 PM on j-body.org
INFIDEL wrote:

So bill, Honestly,



you would have us draft a new Constitution wouldn't ya?



ya know, "for the TIMES'

To You your own self be true Bill...


And bk3k,


That quote was a 'little' before the Constitution...
Hell, before the first shot was Fired on the Lexington Green...

ya know?
Its about standing up and fighting for what you believe in...

But you new that, right?

Alas, it gets worse though.
IT WAS IN A CHURCH! THE DAMN FOUNDERS BELIEVED IN GOD! AND CHRIST!

so much nicer to have a hojie in office.


Chris


not helping anyones case here chris...



Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:36 AM on j-body.org
Actually, he is. He's helping most of us dismiss anything he's said, or will say in the future. That's VERY helpful.




Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Sunday, August 08, 2010 8:54 AM on j-body.org
Some of the points, placed in proper form were very good points. The problem is method of delivery. Trust me you and I are on different sides of this debate, but there is a right and wrong way to put forward your reasoning.



Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Sunday, August 08, 2010 10:46 AM on j-body.org
When the American GI's returned home from the Pacific theater, do you think they had very high opinions of their enemies? F-in japs.

While liberating death camps in Europe, do you think they held the Germans in high esteem? F-in krauts.


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Monday, August 09, 2010 6:27 AM on j-body.org
Precisely why some combat veterans are not particularly good bellwethers of public policy or opinion. As you so aptly note, some can be extremists, irretrievably scarred by what they've experienced.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Monday, August 09, 2010 9:36 AM



Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Monday, August 09, 2010 3:35 PM on j-body.org
See how he try's to look all omniscient, yet still is his condescending self?

So, ya going to answer the question bill?

Quote:

So bill, Honestly,



you would have us draft a new Constitution wouldn't ya?


Chris




"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."

Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry



Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Monday, August 09, 2010 3:40 PM on j-body.org
Sorry, Chris. You and I cannot converse. To me, you're too far gone down a path of hatred and inflexibility. I am no longer willing to attempt to retrieve you, or to help you understand other points of view.

I wish you well, and hope that you find inner peace.





Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Monday, August 09, 2010 6:27 PM on j-body.org
Alas, the omniscient comes through.



So that was a NO....?


Chris


"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."

Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry


Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:40 AM on j-body.org
Take Back the Republican Party wrote:

Sorry, Chris. You and I cannot converse.
Take Back the Republican Party wrote:

Pure, unadulterated, supremely arrogant Bill.
Hypocrite. That is all.






Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:49 AM on j-body.org
Only you could ATTEMPT to take someone courteously standing down and portray it as something nasty, Quik. All I did was tell him I'm not continuing, and why.

You might try making a gentlemanly exit some time...it could do wonders for your socialization skills, if not only assist in how others perceive you.





Re: MASS to reform the electoral college
Saturday, August 14, 2010 4:41 PM on j-body.org
And hope it does not come through as arrogance...


But I see your point, and yes, there are two sides to every coin.


Chris




"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."

Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry


Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search