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.
I guess this is the new strategy by republicans, claiming "Mob Rule", Grassley, Trump, Graham, McConnell all on the new message. Since when are protests mob rule, was the Tea Party protests back in 2010 mob rule, how about Vietnam protestors or Charlottesville.
They should be worried, there is momentum to these protests.
It's a curious choice of words, because the audiences at Trump's rallies are basically howling mobs.
Republicans have good reason to worry, since there are numerically more Democrats. That's why Republicans so despicably work at voter suppression and gerrymandering, in unethically trying to have the upper hand.
Never hear of those Trump "mobs" attacking anyone. That's like calling anyone that goes to a concert a "mob".
Pretty hypocritical in the face of the videos of our fantastic northwestern youth deciding to destroy cars in the streets, just because.
What antifa, BLM or whoever it is causing all this distress is (I really don't care)... IT IS terrorism.
Not a world most of us want to live in.
I'll take peaceful protest over riots, anger, and destruction any day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyRider
Why is "mob rule" in quotations? What do you call screaming lunatics banging on your door trying to break in?
They're worried about majority rule, not mob rule. The electoral college was designed to protect the minority from being completely ruled by the majority, now it's being used (along with in-state gerrymandering) to impose the will of the minority on the majority. Republicans don't want fair elections or the country's majority to have a true say over what happens in political policy.
Wait, what? You do know that what you just said is the polar opposite of reality, right?
The left want mob rule, so they want to get rid of the EC. So, they actually want to have the mob rule. They want the majority to roll over the minority.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,600,682 times
Reputation: 5697
Quote:
Originally Posted by don1945
Yep, how often did we see Trump inciting violence at his rallies ? His mob at those rallies was akin to a professional wrestling match, pure craziness.
They're worried about majority rule, not mob rule. The electoral college was designed to protect the minority from being completely ruled by the majority, now it's being used (along with in-state gerrymandering) to impose the will of the minority on the majority. Republicans don't want fair elections or the country's majority to have a true say over what happens in political policy.
Here we go again... Think!
The electoral college was designed to give everyone across the country a voice. It protects the minority from the majority. A democratic gov't should not function as a majority subjugating a minority to its will.
The House, with representation proportional to each state’s population, was to be the people’s house. The Senate was to represent the states, with two senators from each state. The president was intended to be a combination of both. The people vote for president through electors. The number of electors was proportional to the state’s population. It safeguards against tyranny.
The need to protect the minority is needed when one sees the angry mob, reflecting the will of the majority as evidenced by the “popular” vote. You need only look at the past several years of violence perpetrated by these mobs to imagine them guided over the next several years by their same re-elected leaders, wreaking hell on certain groups in this country.
Think about it. If we didn't have the electoral college the cities would benefit while the rest of the country suffered. This would cause a major influx of people moving to the cities. One result would be that the cost of housing and rents in cities would sky rocket as demand increased, people's standard of living would dramatically decrease and on and on.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,600,682 times
Reputation: 5697
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751
Here we go again... Think!
The electoral college was designed to give everyone across the country a voice. It protects the minority from the majority. A democratic gov't should not function as a majority subjugating a minority to its will.
The House, with representation proportional to each state’s population, was to be the people’s house. The Senate was to represent the states, with two senators from each state. The president was intended to be a combination of both. The people vote for president through electors. The number of electors was proportional to the state’s population. It safeguards against tyranny
The need to protect the minority is needed when one sees the angry mob, reflecting the will of the majority as evidenced by the “popular” vote. You need only look at the past several years of violence perpetrated by these mobs to imagine them guided over the next several years by their same re-elected leaders, wreaking hell on certain groups in this country.
Think about it. If we didn't have the electoral college the cities would benefit while the rest of the country suffered. This would cause a major influx of people moving to the cities.
Every other economically advanced democracy / representative republic (take your pick) does fine without an electoral college. Also, people are moving to cities anyway due to economic opportunities, not because they think "Hmm, if I move here, then I can better influence the outcome of the election).
I guess this is the new strategy by republicans, claiming "Mob Rule", Grassley, Trump, Graham, McConnell all on the new message. Since when are protests mob rule, was the Tea Party protests back in 2010 mob rule, how about Vietnam protestors or Charlottesville.
They should be worried, there is momentum to these protests.
Every other economically advanced democracy / representative republic (take your pick) does fine without an electoral college. Also, people are moving to cities anyway due to economic opportunities, not because they think "Hmm, if I move here, then I can better influence the outcome of the election).
And of course those countries are not as populated or as rich as the U.S.
Democrats are so thick. They can't think past the rhetoric.
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.
