The electoral college violates the constitution

F

FUCK THE POLICE

911 EVERY DAY
The 14th amendment, which guarantees every American "equal protection" under the law, effectively repealed the electoral college, which is a system that arbitrarily gives some Americans a privileged vote compared to others. Hillary Clinton is the true and legitimate president, Donald Trump is a dictator who has taken power in contradiction to the will of the people and the 14th amendment of the constitution.
 
Good god, have you even googled electoral college and how/why it came about??? My generation learned this in junior high, what did yours learn in college?
 
Martin McGuinness said:
The 14th amendment, which guarantees every American "equal protection" under the law, effectively repealed the electoral college, which is a system that arbitrarily gives some Americans a privileged vote compared to others. Hillary Clinton is the true and legitimate president, Donald Trump is a dictator who has taken power in contradiction to the will of the people and the 14th amendment of the constitution.
Click to expand...



then so do senators


why does cali only have two and maine also gets two
 
At least to Watermark's "point," the Constitution forbids denying states their senators. It is one of the items listed in the Constitution which cannot be changed via amendment.
 
Well it's circular reasoning to be sure. The electoral college does not live comfortably with equal protection of law.
 
Is not the (electoral) College spelled out in the Constitution?

are you actually arguing the TEXT of the Constitution itself is un-Constitutional??? :rolleyes:
 
anatta said:
Is not the (electoral) College spelled out in the Constitution?

are you actually arguing the TEXT of the Constitution itself is un-Constitutional??? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Not really. He's arguing that the text pertaining to the electoral college should be considered amended text by the ratification of the 14th Amendment, the way the text pertaining to the 3/5 Clause is considered amended by the ratification of the 13th Amendment, the way the text pertaining to taxation is considered amended by the passage of the 16th Amendment, and by the way the text pertaining to the election of US senators is considered amended by the ratification of the retarded 17th Amendment.
 
Chlorate said:
Not really. He's arguing that the text pertaining to the electoral college should be considered amended text by the ratification of the 14th Amendment, the way the text pertaining to the 3/5 Clause is considered amended by the ratification of the 13th Amendment, the way the text pertaining to taxation is considered amended by the passage of the 16th Amendment, and by the way the text pertaining to the election of US senators is considered amended by the ratification of the retarded 17th Amendment.
Click to expand...
fair enough-but the EC amending by the 12th didn't change anything regarding the intent ( much as I hate that word) of the original text.
 
anatta said:
fair enough-but the EC amending by the 12th didn't change anything regarding the intent ( much as I hate that word) of the original text.
Click to expand...

True. I was perusing the Wiki entry on Article V, and it said that Madison wanted the amendments to be written into the existing relevant text of the Constitution, rather than to be crafted as standalone appendixes, but that the 1st Congress chose to do it differently, and thus set the precedent that we adhere to today. It would be interesting to see, had Madison gotten his way, just how the 14th Amendment would have looked. My guess is that every amendment that had no previously relevant text would simply be buried under Article V as subsets.
 
Micawber said:
Well it's circular reasoning to be sure. The electoral college does not live comfortably with equal protection of law.
Click to expand...

Sure it does. Electoral votes representing House members are based on the one person, one vote ruling from Westbury v. Sanders (1964). Each Congressional district gets one electoral vote. Each congressional district, with the accepted exceptions for those states having only one House member because of a small population, is, as much as can be done, an equal population. With the electoral votes representing Senators, each states gets the equal number of 2.
 
CFM said:
Sure it does. Electoral votes representing House members are based on the one person, one vote ruling from Westbury v. Sanders (1964). Each Congressional district gets one electoral vote. Each congressional district, with the accepted exceptions for those states having only one House member because of a small population, is, as much as can be done, an equal population. With the electoral votes representing Senators, each states gets the equal number of 2.
Click to expand...

Every election system that departs from one person one equal valued vote is susceptible to a strong argument of denial of equal protection of the laws, and I care not what mental gymnastic jurisprudence has been perfected to undermine it. End of story.
 
The argument is asinine; because it was implemented so that more populated States had no more say so then less populated States.

After witnessing what was and had been occurring in Europe they did not want a Democratic Government, similar to a lot of the European countries; because a true democracy are 3 wolves and 2 sheep voting for what supper is going to be.
 
Last edited:
LOL @ rightists who are mad because it's a pretty damn good argument.

This wouldn't effect the senate because the composition of the senate is specially protected from amendment, but an amendment absolutely could abolish the electoral college. The courts have already ruled that malapportion is unconstitutional under the 14th, and the EC is malapportion. The 14th amendment repealed the part of the constitution dealing with the electoral college, and requires popular vote, i.e. everyone being equally protected under the law, to certify the election of the president. No more rural special snowflakes demanding special treatment, you're just like every other American now, suck it up bitch.
 
You lose. And will lose, because the smaller states will never amend and everyone is treated equally under the law. No on is treated different.

Stop being butt hurt and move on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top