The need to reconsider the Electoral College (and it has nothing to do with Trump)

[blackascoal]

Yes, I know. That's why we have Trump as president. Because leftist loons like you "don't give a fuck" what country bumpkins like me think.


Please quote Jefferson, in his own words, saying such.

How exactly do you "rewrite the Constitution? What mechanism, exactly? Please be specific.

You shouldn't, and I hope you and your ilk continue to act like the entitled petulant children that you are.

Ever had a history class dummy?

Letter to James Madison

Thomas Jefferson
Paris
September 06, 1789

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/l...es-madison-17/

“Each generation” should have the “solemn opportunity” to update the constitution “every nineteen or twenty years,” thus allowing it to “be handed on, with periodical repairs, from generation to generation, to the end of time.” -- Thomas Jefferson

Got anything else dummy?

[blackascoal]

Are you gonna play word games with me when you know perfectly well what I was saying.....
Every intell. agency....including the UK, France, Germany, Italy, etc....
Its obvious that every peon in the world is not what I meant....its not you to bullshit with parsing every word...

Hows that for clarification ?[/SIZE]

How about you clarify "EVERYBODY" .. which is patently FALSE .. and that includes intelligence agencies.

Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction
Did “Everyone” Agree?
https://www.americanprogress.org/iss...s-destruction/

Anything else you need clarified?

[evince]

like 70% of Americans believed the Bush lies

not all of us

[Thumper]

Really, I have a FACT for you ..

CIA final report; No WMD found in Iraq
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7634313/ns.../#.WiV4nUqnGCo

AND, EVERYONE was NOT saying that Iraq had WMD. EVERYONE did not believe that bullshit.

Do you need quotes, or do you already know that everyone was not saying it?

See. This is what happens when you don't actually read the news.

That report was from 05. It was written in early 04.

From 04 to 11 we found more than five thousand chemical weapons in Iraq.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.yah...135347507.html

The problem is because so much of his stuff was sent to Syria it can't be proven that anything we found was produced by him after the sanctions. But given it has been proven that we found the 500+ munitions that were unaccounted for by UN inspectors after the Gulf War. The ones he said were destroyed and the UN said were not. Coupled with the thousand and some odd convoys we saw go from Iraq into Syria and the biological production vehicles we found (with the absence of autoclaves like I said in my earlier post) it is understandable why every intelligence agency thought he had started his weapons programs up again.

But as a guy that isn't the type to get into other countries business I still say we shouldn't have gone there.

Oh yeah. I forgot to mention. I did Counter Proleferation for a time while I was in the Corps.

[Phantasmal]

See. This is what happens when you don't actually read the news.

That report was from 05. It was written in early 04.

From 04 to 11 we found more than five thousand chemical weapons in Iraq.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.yah...135347507.html

The problem is because so much of his stuff was sent to Syria it can't be proven that anything we found was produced by him after the sanctions. But given it has been proven that we found the 500+ munitions that were unaccounted for by UN inspectors after the Gulf War. The ones he said were destroyed and the UN said were not. Coupled with the thousand and some odd convoys we saw go from Iraq into Syria and the biological production vehicles we found (with the absence of autoclaves like I said in my earlier post) it is understandable why every intelligence agency thought he had started his weapons programs up again.

But as a guy that isn't the type to get into other countries business I still say we shouldn't have gone there.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...070104217.html

[TTQ64]

Ending the Electoral College could be done legally and without a constitutional amendment.

The racist right has lied and continues to lie about EVERYTHING.

Americans need to question EVERYTHING they do and say.

[countryboy]

Ever had a history class dummy?

Letter to James Madison

Thomas Jefferson
Paris
September 06, 1789

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/l...es-madison-17/

“Each generation” should have the “solemn opportunity” to update the constitution “every nineteen or twenty years,” thus allowing it to “be handed on, with periodical repairs, from generation to generation, to the end of time.” -- Thomas Jefferson

Got anything else dummy?

Where does it say "rewrite" in that supposed quote by Jefferson? You do realize Jefferson wasn't the only founding father, right? You realize that alleged sentiment of his wasn't incorporated into the Constitution, right? You see, the founders realized that even country bumpkins should have a voice, unlike leftist loons such as yourself, dummy.

Of course, you didn't even bother answering my question about how exactly we would go about "rewriting" the Constitution. Care to take a stab at it?

[NOVA]

How about you clarify "EVERYBODY" .. which is patently FALSE .. and that includes intelligence agencies.

Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction
Did “Everyone” Agree?
https://www.americanprogress.org/iss...s-destruction/

Anything else you need clarified?

Of course disagreements existed in the intelligence community. thats the nature of intelligence....thats been the case since the creation of
intelligence agency's...theres never been a time that 100% agree on everything..in the end, it always comes down to the probability of their assessments.....

Bill Clinton's quote says it all.....he believed it, Bush believed it, and numerous others believed it....48 different country's joined the
coalition ..
Still playing your parsing games.....? You're getting as bad as Thingy and Christiefan....

[blackascoal]

See. This is what happens when you don't actually read the news.

That report was from 05. It was written in early 04.

From 04 to 11 we found more than five thousand chemical weapons in Iraq.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.yah...135347507.html

The problem is because so much of his stuff was sent to Syria it can't be proven that anything we found was produced by him after the sanctions. But given it has been proven that we found the 500+ munitions that were unaccounted for by UN inspectors after the Gulf War. The ones he said were destroyed and the UN said were not. Coupled with the thousand and some odd convoys we saw go from Iraq into Syria and the biological production vehicles we found (with the absence of autoclaves like I said in my earlier post) it is understandable why every intelligence agency thought he had started his weapons programs up again.

But as a guy that isn't the type to get into other countries business I still say we shouldn't have gone there.

Oh yeah. I forgot to mention. I did Counter Proleferation for a time while I was in the Corps.

No disrespect intended, but NO WMD was found in Iraq other than long ago useless chemical weapons that might make you sick if you drink them, but hardly qualified as weapons of mass destruction. Moving WMD is not like moving furniture, it leaves a chemical trail, and had there been massive movement of WMD, it would have been traced.

No disrespect to your service brother, but soldiers on the ground do not know, or are they told everything. My daughter is an E8 .. and believes the less she knows about the politics, they better she can do her job. Soldiers and politics are like oil and water.

[blackascoal]

Of course disagreements existed in the intelligence community. thats the nature of intelligence....thats been the case since the creation of
intelligence agency's...theres never been a time that 100% agree on everything..in the end, it always comes down to the probability of their assessments.....

Bill Clinton's quote says it all.....he believed it, Bush believed it, and numerous others believed it....48 different country's joined the
coalition ..
Still playing your parsing games.....? You're getting as bad as Thingy and Christiefan....

So you're blaming me for your misuse of words.

Everybody was not on board with the assessment that Iraq had WMD .. not by a long shot.

Can we now agree?

[Thumper]

No disrespect intended, but NO WMD was found in Iraq other than long ago useless chemical weapons that might make you sick if you drink them, but hardly qualified as weapons of mass destruction. Moving WMD is not like moving furniture, it leaves a chemical trail, and had there been massive movement of WMD, it would have been traced.

No disrespect to your service brother, but soldiers on the ground do not know, or are they told everything. My daughter is an E8 .. and believes the less she knows about the politics, they better she can do her job. Soldiers and politics are like oil and water.

Political naritive.

I did CP for the Corps and then later FID once that was taken out of our core tasks cause DEVGRU was butt hurt that they weren't the only ones doing it anymore.

Oh. And even improperly sealed munitions can't be traced the way you suggest. You've been watching too many movies.
The news that hit the stands only talks about the rusty old stuff with speculation about why it wasn't released sooner. It doesn't talk about the other 2k that was found and had only degraded after being improperly stored after we were ready to go in.

[Thumper]

Political naritive.

I did CP for the Corps and then later FID once that was taken out of our core tasks cause DEVGRU was butt hurt that they weren't the only ones doing it anymore.

The news that hit the stands only talks about the rusty old stuff with speculation about why it wasn't released sooner. It doesn't talk about the other 2k that was found and had only degraded after being improperly stored after we were ready to go in.

As an aside. The lethality of things like mustard is greatly overstated in movies and understated in the media. There are islands that were hit during WWI that are still grossly contaminated.

Problem is that most of the population doesn't understand how these things work.

[Celticguy]

"Demographic trends also are straining the American model. Because of the way the Electoral College works, two of the past three presidents first won office while losing the popular vote. And David Birdsell, dean of the school of public and international affairs at Baruch College, notes that by 2040, about 70% of Americans are expected to live in the 15 largest states. They will have only 30 senators representing them, while the remaining 30% of Americans will have 70 senators representing them."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-var...acy-1511193763

Currently, the State of Wyoming has more say in electing a President then the Buffalo, New York metro area which is twice the size of Wyoming in population

Down the road it appears we will not be the representative democracy that the Founding Fathers has imagined

That's exactly the representative democracy they envisioned.

[blackascoal]

Where does it say "rewrite" in that supposed quote by Jefferson? You do realize Jefferson wasn't the only founding father, right? You realize that alleged sentiment of his wasn't incorporated into the Constitution, right? You see, the founders realized that even country bumpkins should have a voice, unlike leftist loons such as yourself, dummy.

Of course, you didn't even bother answering my question about how exactly we would go about "rewriting" the Constitution. Care to take a stab at it?

Not at all interested in educating a clown.

You asked where Jefferson said it .. I provided that .. you still don't get it. Your stupid ass obviously never had a history class .. but I should teach you?????

Run away dummy .. class over.

[toto]

That's exactly the representative democracy they envisioned.

The Founders created the Electoral College, but 48 states eventually enacted state winner-take-all laws.

Unable to agree on any particular method for selecting presidential electors, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method exclusively to the states in Article II, Section 1
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors….”
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive."

Neither of the two most important features of the current system of electing the President (namely, universal suffrage, and the 48 state-by-state winner-take-all method) are in the U.S. Constitution. Neither was the choice of the Founders when they went back to their states to organize the nation's first presidential election.

In 1789, in the nation's first election, a majority of the states appointed their presidential electors by appointment by the legislature or by the governor and his cabinet, the people had no vote for President in most states, and in states where there was a popular vote, only men who owned a substantial amount of property could vote, and only three states used the state-by-state winner-take-all method to award electoral votes.

The current winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes is not in the U.S. Constitution. It was not debated at the Constitutional Convention. It is not mentioned in the Federalist Papers. It was not the Founders’ choice. It was used by only three states in 1789, and all three of them repealed it by 1800. It is not entitled to any special deference based on history or the historical meaning of the words in the U.S. Constitution. The actions taken by the Founding Fathers make it clear that they never gave their imprimatur to the winner-take-all method. The winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes became dominant only in the 1830s, when most of the Founders had been dead for decades, after the states adopted it, one-by-one, in order to maximize the power of the party in power in each state.

The constitutional wording does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for awarding a state's electoral votes.

States have the responsibility and constitutional power to make all of their voters relevant in every presidential election and beyond. Now, 38 states, of all sizes, and their voters, because they vote predictably, are politically irrelevant in presidential elections.