Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your post from beginning to end is fill with inaccuracies, but the main part I will focus on is your bold face lie regarding why the EC was created.
Needless to say knowledgeable people know better, but many leftists hope the ignorance of the people about their own history will allow them to accept the false narrative you are pushing.
They can watch this video to educate themselves as to why the EC was created, and why it protects states rights;
Only in such a free country do you have people clamoring to give up their individual freedom and rights.
`
Instead of watching a stupid YouTube to find out why the EC was established, why not ask Alexander Hamilton (Federalist Papers No. 68):
"It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations."
In other words, the Founders didn't trust the People to make a wise choice.
Trump lost the popular vote by 2.8 million. While the constitution has been followed by giving him the electoral college and the White House, the will of the people has been thwarted. Many on the right have been talking about states rights since the civil rights era. Where the states choose to place their electoral votes may just be a state rights issue. If it is not a right denied them by the constitution or the US Code, each state may have the right to decide how their electoral votes are cast.
It is lawful in some states to apportion their electoral votes based on the popular vote. These choices by the states may be beyond challenge.
So he says "let the people elect the President" and you call him a leftist fascist? Which is hilarious anyway, since a fascist is by definition right-wing.
I am not sure who you were responding to, but rest assured fascism is not exclusively from the right, and comes from the left as well. Frankly it originated with,,,,,,,,,,
Well heck, don't take my word for it, just watch this video about how evil Republicans are and a section in there explains how all Republicans are fascist and racist;
If it's not an interstate compact, why have none of the individual state's laws gone into effect immediately?
Just because it looks like collusion, doesn't mean it is, right? I mean, think of all the signs involving Russia and the Trump campaign. No collusion, right? No compact, right?
Just because it looks like collusion, doesn't mean it is, right? I mean, think of all the signs involving Russia and the Trump campaign. No collusion, right? No compact, right?
Nah, I just read Illinois' bill... it is a compact.
If there were no formal compact, one would expect these state bills to go into effect immediately... not wait until their new "super" state accumulates 270 electoral votes.
It clearly is a compact, if it is dependent on action by others to trigger even "informal" effect. The SCOTUS would see it that way.
If the US wants a democracy by strictly popular vote rather than a republic then get to it through the proper way established in the Constitution. Propose an amendment and go through the process rather than this end run around because you got an outcome you didn't like.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.