Posted on 05/01/2018 9:48:24 AM PDT by yesthatjallen
If we had lost the EC and won the popular vote was my point. I don’t think that has ever happened.
George Washington hated political parties.
Note that the Democrats aren’t calling for electoral districts that only count citizens. How is it democratic for foreigners to be included in district allies? Isn’t that an incentive for local pols to encourage illegal immigration, in order to enlarge the amount of clout their district has in both the statehouse and DC? While simultaneously reducing the rightful power of other districts populated mostly by citizens? If we only counted citizens, local pols would be far less inclined to defend illegal aliens, as the amount of money they get from the state and federal authorities would be greatly reduced.
We would have to control the borders, expel illegal aliens, and have a foolproof voter ID system. California (and other blue states) want open borders. They are declaring themselves sanctuary states. California automatically registers people to vote when they get drivers licenses, and they give drivers licenses to illegals. California alone will import enough illegal aliens to ensure that the Democrats never lose another popular vote for president. Heck, at the rate Cali is going, it will be opening voter registration offices across Mexico.
He supported everything Federalist and usurped the power of the states at every turn.
Be Careful, Be Very Careful when suggesting the elimination of the US Senate. Dems just might begin to babble on about the unfairness of the US Senate.
Precisely. The ultimate goal of progressive radicals.
Low-information voters have evidently never been taught that the federal government has no constitutional authority to establish the domestic spending programs and civil rights protections that corrupt, post-17th Amendment (17A) ratification federal politicians promise to give the people to get themselves expected and reelected.
In other words, voters don’t understand that federal politicians are tricking voters to abuse their voting power by electing corrupt politicians that unconstitutionally expand the already unconstitutionally big federal government’s powers.
In fact, consider that most federal domestic spending programs and civil rights rights protections are based on stolen state powers and uniquely associated stolen state revenues, such revenues stolen by means of unconstitutional federal taxes.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"… the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Federal Constitution, is in the States, and not in the Federal Government [emphasis added]." —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe (See middle of third column.)
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
"The smart crooks long ago figured out that getting themselves elected to federal office to make unconstitutional tax laws to fill their pockets is a much easier way to make a living than robbing banks." —me
"Federal career lawmakers probably laugh all the way to the bank to deposit bribes for putting loopholes for the rich and corporations in tax appropriations laws, Congress actually not having the express constitutional authority to make most appropriations laws where domestic policy is concerned. Such laws are based on stolen state powers and uniquely associated stolen state revenues." —me
The remedy for unconstitutionally big federal government …
Patriots need to finish the job that they started when they elected Trump president.
More specifically, patriots now need to be making sure that there are plenty of Trump-supporting patriot candidates on the 2018 primary ballots, candidates who will be willing to make Trump's vision for MAGA last for many generations by supporting him to lead the states to repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments.
Patriots must then pink-slip career lawmakers by sending patriot candidate lawmakers to DC on election day.
And until the states wake up and repeal 17A, as evidenced by concerns about the integrity of the outcome of Alabama's and Pennsylvania's special elections, patriot candidates need to win elections by a large enough margin to compensate for possible deep state ballot box fraud, associated MSM scare tactics, and interference from people like Soros.
Hacking Democracy - The Hack
I don’t think it would be exactly opposite. Too many understand it on the conservative side and aren’t morally bankrupt enough to engage in the pretzel logic needed to call for the end of the electoral college.
Leftists have no such constraint, or even shame.
Or, especially not shame...
Part of a movement that for over 100 years has been trying to overthrow the greatest political experiment ever attempted by man.
Good points.
Power corrupts; period.
I’d like to think so, but I don’t.
No one has any shame when it comes to getting, keeping or losing political power.
If you want NY and CA picking the president every 4 years then get rid of the electoral college.
I think we can disagree...at some point, we are likely to find out!
Without a doubt; but much more than that, and seldom mentioned :
1. They were all well educated or autodidacts.
2. They were all positive contributors to their society.
3. They were all political history savvy, old and contemporary.
4. It wasn't a quickie process; it took 13 years of analyses, discussions, debates arguments and fights to arrive at the final form. Emotion was NOT the most important common denominator.
RedStateRocker wrote:
Personally, I think if the results were the opposite that Democrats and Republicans would be saying the exact opposite things.
Well, a cursory search has found that it’s happened 5 times.
1824 - John Q. Adams wins POTUS, not with popular vote, or the electoral college, but by a vote in the House of Representatives as neither he nor Andrew Jackson got the necessary 131 electoral college votes.
1876 - Hayes won the POTUS by 1 electoral vote, but lost the popular vote by 250,000.
1888 - Harrison won over Cleveland in the EC votes (233 to 168), but lost the popular vote by 90,000.
2000 - Bush wins the EC vote, and POTUS (271 to 266), but lost the popular vote to Gore by 540,000 votes.
2016 - Trump wins the EC vote over Clinton (304 to 227), but loses the popular vote by nearly 3,000,000 votes.
Sacajaweau wrote:
We were a one party system when they wrote the Constitution
Yes, we were the AMERICAN party. PRO-America.
American Party....All Federalists.
Yep.
1824 has to have been one of the most interesting elections ever.
My point is that if Trump had won the popular vote, and Hillary the EC, the Democrats and libs would be trumpeting the EC as a bastion of democracy and savior of the country. And some people here on FR would be pissed and making noises about getting rid of it, that’s all.
Just as there is a saying that was old a century ago “It’s ‘Gerrymandering’ when *THEY* do it” :-)
Donald Trump - The Echo of Our Framers' Uncorrupted President.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.