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.
"The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."
Correct, but what is that "executive power" that power is defined in Section 2. Section 3 defines the Presidents duties.
"The POTUS only leads the military during a time of declared war"
You forgot the "when called into the actual Service of the United States". Who can call the Militia into service? Congress, once this happens the the President assumes the role of Commander in Chief.
And you DON'T THINK appointing judges does NOT "directly affect the lives of the people"?
The President doesn't appoint judges, the President nominates people to be appointed by the advice and consent of the Senate. The only judges that the President appoints are those allowed by Congress.
I'm saying that according to the Constitution the President powers are very limited, it has only been in the last 100 years that we have allowed the government to run itself, which is a dangerous proposition for the freedom and liberty of this country. WE the People, are the bulwark of our liberty, and must keep an ever vigilant eye on our government.
"The President doesn't appoint judges, the President nominates people to be appointed by the advice and consent of the Senate. The only judges that the President appoints are those allowed by Congress."
Your correct, I ued the wrong word . Thank you for the resurrection.
"You forgot the "when called into the actual Service of the United States".
I did NOT forget, this part follows a COMMA AFTER the "Commander in Chief" part.
"I'm saying that according to the Constitution the President powers are very limited"
Up until the 1980s, all Democrats voted for a Republican some of the time, and some Democrats voted for a Democrat all of the time, and vice versa. Not anymore. As exacerbated by our polarizing president, and as demonstrated by the 2018 election results, voters now define themselves by who and what they're against. Parties have no meaning, and represent no coherent philosophy.
Everybody who was anti-Trump voted for every Democrat, and everybody who was pro-Trump voted for every Republican. And the so-called "independents," comprising 20 to 30 percent of the electorate and who broke slightly for Trump in key states in 2016, are now just as pro- and anti- as everybody else.
As shown by the Nov. 6 outcome, well over 40 states are in a lockout mode and have become solidly pro- or anti-Trump. A few, such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Virginia and Nevada are in a Republican meltdown, trending decisively anti-Trump, and Wisconsin, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and Arizona are on the cusp. This has major implications for 2020, as Trump won the 2016 electoral vote 306-232. Take away PA, MI, FL, AZ and/or WI (the Trump states in 2016 with 86 electoral votes) and the president loses big in 2020.
Up until the 1980s, all Democrats voted for a Republican some of the time, and some Democrats voted for a Democrat all of the time, and vice versa. Not anymore. As exacerbated by our polarizing president, and as demonstrated by the 2018 election results, voters now define themselves by who and what they're against. Parties have no meaning, and represent no coherent philosophy.
Everybody who was anti-Trump voted for every Democrat, and everybody who was pro-Trump voted for every Republican. And the so-called "independents," comprising 20 to 30 percent of the electorate and who broke slightly for Trump in key states in 2016, are now just as pro- and anti- as everybody else.
As shown by the Nov. 6 outcome, well over 40 states are in a lockout mode and have become solidly pro- or anti-Trump. A few, such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Virginia and Nevada are in a Republican meltdown, trending decisively anti-Trump, and Wisconsin, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and Arizona are on the cusp. This has major implications for 2020, as Trump won the 2016 electoral vote 306-232. Take away PA, MI, FL, AZ and/or WI (the Trump states in 2016 with 86 electoral votes) and the president loses big in 2020.
The question is whether or not the (D)'s want to run someone that the people of those states can support or continue to run someone the corporations support.
The Electoral College was created as an awkward compromise due to SLAVERY. James Madison said so, as recorded in the Federalist Papers.
Southern states feared the popular vote because slaves outnumbered whites, and slaves couldn't vote. So a northerner would always win the popular vote. A compromise was hammered out where slaves were counted as three-fifths of a person in the census and used to apportion the electors in the E.C.
The Electoral College is antiquated, slavery is long gone. The Electoral College should be abolished. One person, one vote.
The electoral college is required because illegal immigrants in LA shouldn't be making laws for actual citizens who live in Wyoming. The federal government affects the entire country, so no, we are not going to let left wing loons in LA and NYC decide the laws for everyone else.
The Electoral College was created as an awkward compromise due to SLAVERY. James Madison said so, as recorded in the Federalist Papers.
Southern states feared the popular vote because slaves outnumbered whites, and slaves couldn't vote. So a northerner would always win the popular vote. A compromise was hammered out where slaves were counted as three-fifths of a person in the census and used to apportion the electors in the E.C.
The Electoral College is antiquated, slavery is long gone. The Electoral College should be abolished. One person, one vote.
Of course this appeals to totalitarian minded liberals who want to impose their wills and laws on states and people who would never vote for their ridiculous agenda.
The Electoral College was created as an awkward compromise due to SLAVERY. James Madison said so, as recorded in the Federalist Papers.
Southern states feared the popular vote because slaves outnumbered whites, and slaves couldn't vote. So a northerner would always win the popular vote. A compromise was hammered out where slaves were counted as three-fifths of a person in the census and used to apportion the electors in the E.C.
The Electoral College is antiquated, slavery is long gone. The Electoral College should be abolished. One person, one vote.
I don't know where you got your education but the electoral college has nothing to do with slavery. You repeat nonsense. The framers of the Constitution didn’t trust direct democracy.
The reason that the Constitution calls for this extra layer, rather than just providing for the direct election of the president, is that most of the nation’s founders were actually rather afraid of democracy. James Madison worried about what he called “factions,” which he defined as groups of citizens who have a common interest in some proposal that would either violate the rights of other citizens or would harm the nation as a whole. Madison’s fear which Alexis de Tocqueville later dubbed “the tyranny of the majority” was that a faction could grow to encompass more than 50 percent of the population, at which point it could “sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.” Madison has a solution for tyranny of the majority: “A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.”
As Alexander Hamilton wrote “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “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.”
The Electoral College does make it possible for a candidate to win the popular vote and still not become president. But that is less a product of the Electoral College and more a product of the way states apportion electors. In every state but Maine and Nebraska, electors are awarded on a winner-take-all basis. So if a candidate wins a state by even a narrow margin, he or she wins all of the state’s electoral votes. The winner-take-all system is not federally mandated; states are free to allocate their electoral votes as they wish.
I don't know where you got your education but the electoral college has nothing to do with slavery. You repeat nonsense.
Cherry picking history to support your revisionist views?
"At the Philadelphia convention, the visionary Pennsylvanian James Wilson proposed direct national election of the president. But the savvy Virginian James Madison responded that such a system would prove unacceptable to the South: “The right of suffrage [voting] was much more diffusive [i.e., extensive] in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.” In other words, in a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves (more than half a million in all) of course could not vote. But the Electoral College—a prototype of which Madison proposed in this same speech—instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count." Source: Time Magazine
Ask any 8th grader about the "three-fifths compromise." They'll tell you.
The Electoral College was created as an awkward compromise due to SLAVERY. James Madison said so, as recorded in the Federalist Papers.
Southern states feared the popular vote because slaves outnumbered whites, and slaves couldn't vote. So a northerner would always win the popular vote. A compromise was hammered out where slaves were counted as three-fifths of a person in the census and used to apportion the electors in the E.C.
The Electoral College is antiquated, slavery is long gone. The Electoral College should be abolished. One person, one vote.
Get busy finding 38 states to amend the constitution.
The Electoral College was created as an awkward compromise due to SLAVERY. James Madison said so, as recorded in the Federalist Papers.
Southern states feared the popular vote because slaves outnumbered whites, and slaves couldn't vote. So a northerner would always win the popular vote. A compromise was hammered out where slaves were counted as three-fifths of a person in the census and used to apportion the electors in the E.C.
The Electoral College is antiquated, slavery is long gone. The Electoral College should be abolished. One person, one vote.
Then abolish the House because it was based in the same compromise. Or even better leave it all alone. Nominate better candidates. Anyone with a pulse would have beaten Trump, except HRC.
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.
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.
