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.
You know what a democracy is? A democracy is four wolves and a sheep voting for what's for dinner which is just fine as long as you aren't a sheep.
Nowhere in the constitution can you find the evil words democratic or democracy, we were founded as a republic which was done for a very good, and not antiquated, reason. In a democracy it is the people who rule but in a republic it is the individual man who is supreme and not the peoples.
In case you think I am in bad company I agree with James Madison when he wrote:
"Democracy is the most vile form of government. ... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as the have been violent in their deaths."
— James Madison (1751-1836) Father of the Constitution, 4th President of the U. S.
“We are a Republic. Real Liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy.”
— Alexander Hamilton (1755-1804) Lawyer, Secretary of the Treasury & Secretary of State
“Let the American youth never forget that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils and sufferings and blood of their ancestors, and capable, if wisely improved and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to the latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence. The structure has been erected by architects of consummate skill and fidelity; its foundations are solid, its compartments are beautiful as well as useful, its arrangements are full of wisdom and order, and its defenses are impregnable from without. It has been reared for immortality, if the work of men may justly aspire to such a title. It may nevertheless perish in an hour by the folly, or corruption, or negligence of its only keepers, the People. Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall when the wise are banished from the public councils because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded because they flatter the people in order to betray them.”
— Joseph Story (1779-1845) Lawyer, Supreme Court Justice & influential commentators on the U.S. Constitution
The beginning of the ruination of a fine constitutional form of government! Inequality in representation of smaller populated states. This is sure to bring on the cries for greater representation in the senate, such as is now found in the house. Marxism marches into Washington without a shot being fired.
This move will give highly populated states, usually Democratic, the say in presidential elections. It has happened in a number of states and we the people of Colorado never had a say in it. Stacking the deck for the Dems. Your state's are doing this to you.
Nikita Kruchev must be laughing his a$$ off!
Because Texas took 2 of their reps when everyone left New York for greener pastures in Texas.
The electoral college is antiquated. Anything that moves towards replacing the system with a true democratic popular vote is a good thing. I don't want to vote for a select group electors to go vote for the president. I want to vote for the president.
This. We just need to get rid of or transform the electoral college completely.
I feel like every argument from the right in this thread has been an appeal to authority. A founder said "x", therefore it MUST be "x". The Founders are far from Gods or Demi-Gods. They were flawed human beings unrepresentative of the population they governed.
I also find it utterly amusing that so many worship Madison. He wrote, "Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."
The idea was to ensure that the privileged remained privileged. The tyranny of the majority he feared was the majority of all the people who (to paraphrase Jimmy Stewart from It's a Wonderful Life) did all of the working and living and dying in America. The minority of the opulent were, by his reasoning and by the reasoning of conservatives today, deserving of their exalted and powerful place. Anything to prevent an egalitarian government, whether in voting or economic terms, was fair. Easy for a man of extreme privilege like Madison to say.
Finally, for those who say "just amend the Constitution", there are two things to say.
First, states can band together to overcome the anti-Democratic framework of the Constitution if they want to. It's a curious thing for conservatives to criticize states' rights on this issue.
Second, the U.S. Constitution is the hardest to amend Constitution in the developed world. This is quite cruel, considering it is also the oldest of the Constitutions in place and the one developed with the least input from those who ended up being governed by it. It simply means that the deader the dead, the more distant the founders, the more power they have. I'll admit I find that intolerable, because blanket appeals to authority and the deification of the founders holds no succor for me. Again, I (as a woman) would have had no say nor vote in the founding principles of this nation. Nor would blacks, Native Americans, slaves, etc... Why should I then hold the Constitution in such exalted and blameless accord? Why should anyone who proclaims a belief in liberty or self-governance do so?
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,552 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6039
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero
repealing the electorial college would take away any say of the smaller rural states
look at chicago...ok the population of chicago (A CITY) is 2.7 million..the entire STATE of nebraska is 1.8 million
should a city negate a whole state???
You are valuing land over people,as if owning 40 acres makes your vote meaning more.
Quote:
should a urban jungle of 2.6 million out weigh and entire state (of 1.8 million) of rural farms producung all the food for the urban jungle...should those 1.8 million not count just because the city of 2.6 million is more welfare babies
New York city(the city not the state) has a bigger population than over 10 other states COMBINED
nyc population 8.3 million
wyoming 544k
vermont 621k
n. dakota 640k
alaska 690k
s. dakota 821k
delaware 885k
montana 974k
rhode island 1.01 million
hawaii 1.2 million
maine 1.3 million
total 7.8 million
10 states combined less than the population of NY CITY
repealing the electorial college would take away any say of the smaller rural states
look at chicago...ok the population of chicago (A CITY) is 2.7 million..the entire STATE of nebraska is 1.8 million
should a city negate a whole state???
should a urban jungle of 2.6 million out weigh and entire state (of 1.8 million) of rural farms producung all the food for the urban jungle...should those 1.8 million not count just because the city of 2.6 million is more welfare babies
the electorial college is there for a reason...
When establishing our federal government, smaller States like Rhode Island had feared they would have no voice, and therefore no protection, against the more populous States like New York or Massachusetts. Similarly, the sparsely populated agricultural regions feared an inability to protect their interests against the fishing and shipping industries dominant in the more populous coastal States. These concerns on how to preserve individual State voices and diverse regional interests caused the framers to establish a bi-cameral rather than a uni-cameral legislative system.
In that wise plan, one body preserved the will of the majority as determined by population and the other preserved the will of the majority as determined by the States. As Constitution signer James Madison confirmed:
The Constitution is nicely balanced with the federative and popular principles; the Senate are the guardians of the former, and the House of Representatives of the latter; and any attempts to destroy this balance, under whatever specious names or pretences they may be presented, should be watched with a jealous eye.
The Founding Fathers considered all forms of government; thoughtfully, intellectually, historically and they debated and agonized and then they compromised, agreed and then pledged their lives their fortunes and their sacred honor to establish, protect and enable the government they had created. The education, the intellect and the faith of those men can not be underestimated. We can only bring poverty and unrest if we deign to ignore their wisdom and replace our Constitutional Republic, the rule of law, with a Democracy, rule by the mob.
The point is, undermining or ditching the Electoral Collage is a part of the plan to convert America to neo-Marxist mob rule with top-down control by the national (and global) ruling class....the simple fact is the national vote SCHEME is just that a scheme from soros and the fascist liberals looking to bring some hybred of marxism to the USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251
You are valuing land over people,as if owning 40 acres makes your vote meaning more.
What ? Wow, you people have no integrity.
No we are not, we are valuing liberty of the tyranny of the majority.
Coming from the same people who
Compare American Gun Owners to the Taliban,
Who fund benefits to Illegal Immigrates rather then the pension funds of the Veterans
Who say it is greedy to want to keep most of what you earn but not greedy to take most of what others earn..
Use the endangers species act as a political weapon to place entire areas off limit to Oil/Gas production
Who claims anyone who favor Constitutional, limit government, sound money and monetary polices, a secure border, and State and Civil Rights uninfringed by laws that violate the Constitution is some how a racist, or hate Hispanics and Blacks.
How think US Soldiers should not be allowed to carry a sidearm on US Military bases in the United States.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,552 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6039
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
No we are not, we are valuing liberty of the tyranny of the majority.
Coming from the same people who
Compare American Gun Owners to the Taliban,
Who fund benefits to Illegal Immigrates rather then the pension funds of the Veterans
Who say it is greedy to want to keep most of what you earn but not greedy to take most of what others earn..
Use the endangers species act as a political weapon to place entire areas off limit to Oil/Gas production
Who claims anyone who favor Constitutional, limit government, sound money and monetary polices, a secure border, and State and Civil Rights uninfringed by laws that violate the Constitution is some how a racist, or hate Hispanics and Blacks.
How think US Soldiers should not be allowed to carry a sidearm on US Military bases in the United States.
We can not hold a candle to you..
Stop with the hyperbole. My post history is search able, quote me where i ever compared gun owners to the taliban.
show me where i favored(or our government has) benefits to illegals over pension funds to our veterans.
Show me where i said it was greedy to keep what you earned ?
I dont even know where this One came from.
Please, post a quote from me where I said anyone was racist for favoring the Constitution. You love to speak in hyperbole, but the fact is when you do that, you cant back it up because you are doing the exact same thing you are accusing others of doing.
Stop with the hyperbole. My post history is search able, quote me where i ever compared gun owners to the taliban.
show me where i favored(or our government has) benefits to illegals over pension funds to our veterans.
Show me where i said it was greedy to keep what you earned ?
I dont even know where this One came from.
Please, post a quote from me where I said anyone was racist for favoring the Constitution. You love to speak in hyperbole, but the fact is when you do that, you cant back it up because you are doing the exact same thing you are accusing others of doing.
You personally jsiia251? none, the American Left? Has and does so all the time
Please, post a quote from me where I said anyone was racist for favoring the Constitution. You love to speak in hyperbole, but the fact is when you do that, you cant back it up because you are doing the exact same thing you are accusing others of doing.
Once again you? Personally? None, The collective "you" IE leftist have made your views abundantly clear.
I have links to the claims I have just said...
You personal are pretty in the middle of the road and some what logical of for someone who leans to the left...
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.
