Posted on 06/12/2024 3:22:32 AM PDT by cotton1706
Let’s not beat around the bush. It is more likely than not that Donald Trump will return to the White House next year. Right now, polling averages show Trump with a slight popular vote lead over incumbent President Joe Biden. And, even if Biden overcomes this small deficit, the Electoral College system effectively makes Trump votes count more than Biden votes.
Although there may be signs that the Republican Party’s advantage in the Electoral College is fading, that advantage was substantial in the last two presidential elections. Democrat Hillary Clinton beat Trump in 2016 by more than two points in the popular vote, but still lost the Electoral College. Biden beat Trump by more than four points, but would have lost if a small number of votes had flipped to Trump in a handful of states.
That means that, if Justices Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan remain on the Supreme Court past this year, they risk allowing their seat to be filled by a convicted felon who tried to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States of America, inciting an insurrection at the United States Capitol in the process.
The full picture for liberals on the Supreme Court is even grimmer. It is still possible that Biden will prevail this November — polls fairly consistently suggest that the most engaged voters prefer the incumbent — but Democrats need a miracle to keep their majority in the malapportioned United States Senate.
Senate malapportionment is such a liability for Democrats that Republicans would not have controlled the Senate at all since the late 1990s if Senate seats were distributed fairly based on population.
(Excerpt) Read more at vox.com ...
Wow. What an ignoramus. People make mistakes. But to write an article like that.
“It is better to be thought an idiot...”
To the ever-political Dems, USSC appointments have a new expiration date: the summer before it looks possible that their appointing party might lose a presidential election.
In the original plan, the Senate, appointed by state legislators rather than directly, were supposed to guard against federal government expansion beyond Constitutional boundaries.
They should be. When the states ratified the US Constitution, they all thought they could secede. Nobody at the time said they couldn't. But 70 years later by the time some states wanted to secede other states saw that they would lose a lot of money if those states left - so they started a war to stop them from leaving. After the war was over then the Supreme Court said states couldn't secede *you wouldn't really expect the Supreme Court to say anything different right after the war did you?
Wasn`t that what the Civil War was about?
Essentially, yes.
If the states can`t do that the whole federation thing seems to be more of theoretical concept. In that case you might as well end it and acknowledge that you are one state, even if that`s maybe not how you started out.
The Supreme Court has admitted several times that the states are sovereign. They did not delegate all of their powers to the federal government when they ratified the US Constitution. The structure of the federal government with each state having 2 Senators and the president being elected by electoral votes cast by the states (not individuals), still reflects the fact that the US Constitution is a treaty between sovereign states - again, not individuals.
It is somewhat the opposite of Germany in that respect. Yes, there were separate kingdoms, duchies, free cities, etc. Yes, the Bundeslaender are based on these historical separate kingdoms. BUT by the time the Grundgesetz was written, there was the country of Germany and the question was how to structure it. The country came first then the Bundeslaender were created (based on history) as the best way to administer it. A central government should exist, now what powers should the Bundeslaender have? zb. Von Oben nach Unten.
In the US the states came first. They were recognized as sovereign. The federal government did not exist. They then created the federal government with the US Constitution which was a treaty between them. The question was what powers should the federal government have. zb. Von Unten nach Oben. Naturally, the states kept more power for themselves.
We were! Currently, the country is not united.
It is to laugh.
No kidding.
Far left author: “That means that, if Justices Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan remain on the Supreme Court past this year, they risk allowing their seat to be filled by a convicted felon who tried to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States of America, inciting an insurrection at the United States Capitol in the process.
The full picture for liberals on the Supreme Court is even grimmer. It is still possible that Biden will prevail this November — polls fairly consistently suggest that the most engaged voters prefer the incumbent — but Democrats need a miracle to keep their majority in the malapportioned United States Senate.
Senate malapportionment is such a liability for Democrats that Republicans would not have controlled the Senate at all since the late 1990s if Senate seats were distributed fairly based on population.
I agree!
They are very worried about loosing another seat.
Exactly. It is called federalism. The Dems want the states to be mere administrative units and not equals. The 10th Amendment obtains. There would have been no United States without each state having an equal say in the Senate.
The Constitution is a magnificent document inspired by Providence. We are not a democracy, but rather, a constitutional Republic that has endured for almost 250 years.
why should they retire? neither seem I’ll, or old. I’m confused as to the why.
These two judges should resign IN DISGRACE on February 1, 2025...after apologizing to US Citizens and to President Trump.
We are a house divided ideologically, and it is long past time to part company.
United works when there are common goals. Otherwise, one side is always kicking and screaming about how the other is destroying their way of life.
While there seems to be a self realignment between red and blue states, the overreaching federal government ensures nearly half will always be upset.
“Wasn`t that what the Civil War was about?”
Our Civil War was about robbery, slavery was the motive.
One of the many reasons the left hates the Constitution.
I know the *wise* Latina has health issues.
Is Kagan ill?
The stupid is burning with the author of this opinion piece.
they will be shocked when DJT wins the popular vote as well, and all those pantywaste states that said their electoral votes will go to the winner of the popular vote will move to repeal those laws.
they are spinning down the toilet of history.
Focusing on the national popular vote is akin to saying the Yankees won the 1960 World Series because they outscored the Pirates 55 runs to 27.
While that’s true, the the Pirates won the World Series because they beat the Yankees four times out of seven games.
Total runs is an interesting statistic, and factors into winning, but that’s not THE metric for determining the winner.
Same with Presidential Elections.
He is writing to an attentive audience. What he’s saying is quite purposeful. What’s madness to you is music to their ears!
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.