She lost count. There were four, Bill Clinton in ‘92 and ‘96, George W. Bush in 2000, and now Donald J. Trump. So what.
Undemocratic? You mean, every aspect of the Constitution is supposed to be Democratic? OK. Let’s have democratically elected federal judges, too. Will the elections be for the geographic area over which the judge has jurisdiction, or a national election for every judge? And assuming you say national, let’s say the District Judge for the Southern District of New York is wildly popular in California, but thoroughly hated in New York? Does California have the right to impose him on New York? Or let’s say you say a local election, involving only the Southern District of New York, i.e., Brooklyn. The judge will be a federal judge, determining matters of federal law, including diversity of citizenship cases, and his rulings will be precedents that can be adopted by higher courts on appeal, ultimately reaching SCOTUS. What right does this New York pipsqueak have to alter the law for the entire nation, when he was only elected in Brooklyn?
Same goes with POTUS elections. A chief executive for the United States has to ask for the consent of all the states, if he is to be elevated over all of them. The Electoral College is the best balance that can be hoped for between federal and local spheres of power.
Boxer, read the Federalist Papers. Read Alexis deTocqueville. Read the Constitution. If you don’t have a copy, you can borrow mine.
That face has been pulled so tight, from so many facelifts, she has 270 degree peripheral vision.
2/3 senate, 2/3 house, 2/3 popular vote.......ain’t EVER going to happen, and she knows it.
Let’s have a popular vote gay marriage transgender bathrooms and abortion legality. That would not need a constitutional amendment, and all are wildly unpopular with the general public.
First of all Babs, it is a Representative republic with 50 sovereign states. Secondly, the EC exists so everyone's votes has equal weight and cities do not have the ability to have more of a say in the the election then a small tow in Iowa.
She is just throwing red meat to her idiot base. She can see that bus coming.
She’s gotta be smart enough to know this will not get very far, as she’ll never get a 2/3d’s vote out of a Republican House & Senate.
I think she’s just politicking to impress the mindless she represents.
She and the rest of the "elite" in California are convinced they should run the whole country, not just the once great State they're driving over a cliff.
Communist dork that wants one party, urban tyranny.
Go away you feckless, hateful weirdo.
A 2-watt bulb in a 60-watt world.
Barbara Boxer Shorts has been hit in the head too many times to understand reality. I’ll sum it up in a few simple words, so simple that even a simpleton like her can understand them.
“YOU LOST YOU STUPID MARXIST BITCH. NOW SHUT UP AND CRAWL BACK INTO YOUR CESSPOOL”.
As Bill O’Reilly would say, I’m just a simple man and speak in simple words.
Barbara, you ignorant slut.
Dear Babs:
I’ll paraphrase your Dear Leader for you: We won. You lost.
Deal with it, twit. Have a great next four years.
Does that mean they are OK with the elected political party to start enforcing Federal Marijuana laws?
And in your lifetime you have never seen a Presidential candidate that ran trying to win the "popular vote", which doesn't actually exist. Hillary wasn't trying to win the "popular vote", either. She was trying to win the election...and failed.
I forgot about Babs. I thought she had croaked.
“...Uphold the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic”. She’s not well.
Don’t any of these democrats realize that if there wasn’t an electoral college, that Trump’s election strategy would have changed, and that he would have won anyway?
You can’t change the rules after you lose.
How about voter photo ID, annual voter roll purges, paper ballots, purple thumbprints and two parties counting, for a start? Babs? Ensure clean votes first. Babs?