Another smoking gun — this is now embarrassing (STOLEN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION)...

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

A "majority" will not do it. It would take 2/3s of the Senate and House to change the rule. And that won't happen because no Republican would vote for it.

Why would they? Many republicans represent far less populous areas, while democrats represent overcrowded shitholes. A Republican who would agree to drop the EC would be muzzling the voices of their constituents.

[royamcr]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Killing the messenger again? Talk about missing. Why not go to the source material and do the research? This has been alleged for over a year now. What new evidence or testimony has been discovered? That is where the mystery lies. Not in your bitter rants Roy.

Garbage info, I don't rot my brain with it. Show me a middle of the road source that is saying this stuff?

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Why would they? Many republicans represent far less populous areas, while democrats represent overcrowded shitholes. A Republican who would agree to drop the EC would be muzzling the voices of their constituents.

Republicans have lost the popular vote in every presidential election since 1992 except for 2004. Had Gore beaten Bush in 2000 in the Electoral College there is a good chance it would be 1988. The reason Republicans don't want to support a popular vote for the presidency is that they might not win the position in a very long time.

[1blackman1]

Which should tell you something. Republicans/conservatives are a minority because fewer and fewer people agree with their views. Yet they refuse to accept that they are a minority of voters. Hence their incessant need to attempt to further limit voting. It’s got nothing to do with any fraud but they see the writing on the wall that without suppressing the vote, they can’t win.

[Jacuzzme]

Really? Oklahomans would disagree. You guys don’t seem to have a firm grasp on the whole United States of America thing.

[Yssup Rider]

When Oklahomans comprise the majority of America, they can call all the shots.

No, sir, it is you who don’t have a firm grasp on the whole USA thing.

[Jacuzzme]

Tell me you failed civics without telling me you failed civics.

[nevergaveitathought]

a popular vote for the election of the president, or for that matter for anything federally, is anti-constitutional and therefore anti-american

in america, those who accept and follow the constitution are at the center of the country

any fall off- left or right - from the constitution, is an extreme

the highest offices held in the United states, for which a popular vote is given, are governors of the various states

it is because we have a system of federalism. which is meant to limit the power of the central government. the provision is to keep the states as individual entities with power. and that the states themselves through representation determined by the citizens of each state, elect the president.

all meant to protect individual freedom and liberty from the designs of men wishing powers over others as much as possible

but i do understand and know leftists want to grab the power and control every aspect of every citizen of every state with national laws

dimocrats take their oaths of office, to protect and defend the constitution, but seldom seem to mean it

and there is a constitutional process to amend the constitution, which has occurred, but until then....

a popular vote and calling constitutionalists anti-democratic, as dimocrats and their news media constantly do when they exclaim that the following of the constitution, and the rule of law that flows from it, makes them in fear for "their democracy", is an extremist, and dare i say, an anti-american, position

[1blackman1]

Electing the president by popular vote has no effect on federalism. Your diatribe is nonsense. Congress is elected at the state level. That’s. What should matter. If congress actually worked the president couldn’t govern by fiat.

[nevergaveitathought]

the congress can work,and many times does, by not doing anything

its doing the will of the people then, just as much as if it passed some idiocy

many times its more the will of the people when they dont pass anything than when they do

and the president has no business acting unconstitutionally then

and if you think many states arent harmed by instituting a popluar vote for the presidency, thus harming federalism, you are even less of a lawyer than even i have surmised to date

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

A "majority" will not do it. It would take 2/3s of the Senate and House to change the rule. You are right, I got lazy and didn't want to look it up to see if it was 2/3 or 3/4, my bad. And that won't happen because no Republican would vote for it.

You seem to be saying that Republicans then on the issue of abortion, are the super majority and not Democrats?



Doesn't seem to line up with Democrats saying the overwhelming majority of Americans are for abortion on demand. If Republicans don't represent the super majority, why can't Democrats pass this?

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

You seem to be saying that Republicans then on the issue of abortion, are the super majority and not Democrats?

Doesn't seem to line up with Democrats saying the overwhelming majority of Americans are for abortion on demand. If Republicans don't represent the super majority, why can't Democrats pass this?

The majority of the people in this country support some level of abortion. Right now, it seems that each state has been allowed to determine abortion rights within their state.