Yeah, if we permitted conservative state legislatures to elect senators we would probably end up with a C rated weak sister posing as a real conservative from one of the safest, most conservative states in the union who likes to get into bed with Ted Kennedy and sellout conservatism wherever he thought he could get away with it.
We would never get any real change in America that way, better to stick with what we are doing because it is working so well.
You’d agree Texas has a “Conservative” state legislature, right ? They’d have handily elected liberal RINO David Dewhurst had they the right to elect a Senator (over Ted Cruz). This fantasy that repeal of the 17th would result in better Senators continues to amaze.
As I've told you and you ilk maybe 500 times over the past few years, TEXAS would have elected DEWHURST over CRUZ. DEWHURST (big boss of the State Senate) was endorsed by almost every Republican in the legislature. You see that works, General? The corrupt boss gets himself elected to the Senate. The PEOPLE chose Ted Cruz.
UTAH, ostensibly our most conservative state, would have reelected BENNETT over the more conservative LEE. The Republican convention saw fit to relegate BENNETT (someone who UNLIKE ROBERTS AND ENZI actually WAS a "weak sister" who needed to be defeated) to THIRD PLACE!!!
You see your scheme would have had the exact OPPOSITE effect that you want. Put Mark Levin's book down.
People > Politicians
The 17th was passed for VERY good reasons, and ratified BY THE LEGISLATURES after the public demanded an end to the fetid corruption that infected the process. Thank God the founders, in their wisdom, saw fit to make the constitution amendable.
