justoffal
Senator
All of you here would be fans of the EC instead of trying to forget that this is the UNITED STATES composed of 50 states and not just one big landmass with no local government in place.
Now I'm not saying that there wouldn't be some noise on the right that mirrors the utter nonsense coming from the left right now but I am certain that the temper tantrums would be absent and the self ignitions with gas and match would be non existent.
Lefty has some kind of real mental illness when it comes to not getting everything his way all the time...every time right down to the last pebble. Oh...that's right...it's called absolutism and it is the earmark of every major dictatorship in the past two hundred years.
Here's an interesting piece of falderal from Lawrence " Less-Brains " Lessing
A guy who I have read regularly as a whining, condescending liberal hack who absolutely swims in an entire ocean of "IT'S DIFFERENT ". Hooboy this guy is sick.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-constitution-lets-the-electoral-college-choose-the-winner-they-should-choose-clinton/2016/11/24/0f431828-b0f7-11e6-8616-52b15787add0_story.html?utm_term=.7faa08f27888
Conventional wisdom tells us that the electoral college requires that the person who lost the popular vote this year must nonetheless become our president. That view is an insult to our framers. It is compelled by nothing in our Constitution. It should be rejected by anyone with any understanding of our democratic traditions — most important, the electors themselves.
The framers believed, as Alexander Hamilton put it, that “the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the [president].” But no nation had ever tried that idea before. So the framers created a safety valve on the people’s choice. Like a judge reviewing a jury verdict, where the people voted, the electoral college was intended to confirm — or not — the people’s choice. Electors were to apply, in Hamilton’s words, “a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice” — and then decide. The Constitution says nothing about “winner take all.” It says nothing to suggest that electors’ freedom should be constrained in any way. Instead, their wisdom — about whether to overrule “the people” or not — was to be free of political control yet guided by democratic values. They were to be citizens exercising judgment, not cogs turning a wheel. ( Au contraire; the citizens in a POTUS election are indeed cogs turning a wheel.... fifty cogs...wake up and go back to history class Larry! )
I love this guy...he is one of the best liars I have ever read in print...first he makes the case that the Electoral college is a major constituent of the foundation and then he infers that it is a way to ignore the will of the people at the same time ...and what kills me is that he makes it sound good. But a Birthday cake made out of multicolored shixt...is still a pile of shixt and so is this article. As if to say that the individual states have no standing whatsoever. Of course if the results were reversed he would be saying the exact opposite...that the EC was the voice of the people! Count on it.
I also notice that he conveniently does not talk about the reason the EC was set up in the first place...to stop overpopulated areas from dominating underpopulated ones. Of course Lefty is always selective in his recall of convenient history facts. Without some way to balance the powers between the large states and the small ones ( population wise ) the United states could not exist..plain and simple.
SEE PART TWO BELOW
Now I'm not saying that there wouldn't be some noise on the right that mirrors the utter nonsense coming from the left right now but I am certain that the temper tantrums would be absent and the self ignitions with gas and match would be non existent.
Lefty has some kind of real mental illness when it comes to not getting everything his way all the time...every time right down to the last pebble. Oh...that's right...it's called absolutism and it is the earmark of every major dictatorship in the past two hundred years.
Here's an interesting piece of falderal from Lawrence " Less-Brains " Lessing
A guy who I have read regularly as a whining, condescending liberal hack who absolutely swims in an entire ocean of "IT'S DIFFERENT ". Hooboy this guy is sick.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-constitution-lets-the-electoral-college-choose-the-winner-they-should-choose-clinton/2016/11/24/0f431828-b0f7-11e6-8616-52b15787add0_story.html?utm_term=.7faa08f27888
Conventional wisdom tells us that the electoral college requires that the person who lost the popular vote this year must nonetheless become our president. That view is an insult to our framers. It is compelled by nothing in our Constitution. It should be rejected by anyone with any understanding of our democratic traditions — most important, the electors themselves.
The framers believed, as Alexander Hamilton put it, that “the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the [president].” But no nation had ever tried that idea before. So the framers created a safety valve on the people’s choice. Like a judge reviewing a jury verdict, where the people voted, the electoral college was intended to confirm — or not — the people’s choice. Electors were to apply, in Hamilton’s words, “a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice” — and then decide. The Constitution says nothing about “winner take all.” It says nothing to suggest that electors’ freedom should be constrained in any way. Instead, their wisdom — about whether to overrule “the people” or not — was to be free of political control yet guided by democratic values. They were to be citizens exercising judgment, not cogs turning a wheel. ( Au contraire; the citizens in a POTUS election are indeed cogs turning a wheel.... fifty cogs...wake up and go back to history class Larry! )
I love this guy...he is one of the best liars I have ever read in print...first he makes the case that the Electoral college is a major constituent of the foundation and then he infers that it is a way to ignore the will of the people at the same time ...and what kills me is that he makes it sound good. But a Birthday cake made out of multicolored shixt...is still a pile of shixt and so is this article. As if to say that the individual states have no standing whatsoever. Of course if the results were reversed he would be saying the exact opposite...that the EC was the voice of the people! Count on it.
I also notice that he conveniently does not talk about the reason the EC was set up in the first place...to stop overpopulated areas from dominating underpopulated ones. Of course Lefty is always selective in his recall of convenient history facts. Without some way to balance the powers between the large states and the small ones ( population wise ) the United states could not exist..plain and simple.
SEE PART TWO BELOW
Last edited: