Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The EC prevented a maj based on sectionalism. It was not about bigger v. smaller, as the South had the biggest and fifth biggest. But most states were not in the South. Maybe weIn a republic made up of 13 States, where the majority of the county was rural farmers in small communities, it made sense to have a Federal Government slow as molasses. The EC was useful because we didn't have instantaneous communication 24/7/365. Times have changed. Time to upgrade not just the EC but the whole process. Quit the continual campaign season and lets have a legislative season where we try to create solutions and not just try to stab each other in the back so we'll win next year.
Move to a nation that fits your needs then.Violates one man, one vote
Some votes count more than others
Never heard of a Constitutional amendment?
You, me, maybe a few others here understand The Constitution is a 'living' document that the Founders desired to have flexibility over time.
The conservative shitheads here however HATE The Constitution, they hate the potential for lawful amendments, thus these shitheads HATE The Constitution.
You would never get an Amendment passed dissolving the electoral college.
No way did our FF's want a straight up democracy.....they liked the democratic republic.....and for good reason
that goes way above your pay grade, apparently.
The entire country voting on one position will not throw the country in to straight up, tyrannical democracy.
Ya, giving slave states more Congressmen to rule the nation is anti slavery.The 3/5th’s clause was anti-slavery, no wonder you hate it, shitforbrains.You, me, maybe a few others here understand The Constitution is a 'living' document that the Founders desired to have flexibility over time.
The conservative shitheads here however HATE The Constitution, they hate the potential for lawful amendments, thus these shitheads HATE The Constitution.
You would never get an Amendment passed dissolving the electoral college.
No way did our FF's want a straight up democracy.....they liked the democratic republic.....and for good reason
that goes way above your pay grade, apparently.
Oh right; those same folks (FFs) also gave US The 3/5ths Compromise. I suppose you still desire slavery?
Pay grade? LOL, you are a dumb ass that does not believe in progress.
You & your kind would rather be stuck in some goddamn cave, back in time, never evolving .........
Amusing, but no.
Moron.
The EC prevented a maj based on sectionalism. It was not about bigger v. smaller, as the South had the biggest and fifth biggest. But most states were not in the South. Maybe weIn a republic made up of 13 States, where the majority of the county was rural farmers in small communities, it made sense to have a Federal Government slow as molasses. The EC was useful because we didn't have instantaneous communication 24/7/365. Times have changed. Time to upgrade not just the EC but the whole process. Quit the continual campaign season and lets have a legislative season where we try to create solutions and not just try to stab each other in the back so we'll win next year.
Move to a nation that fits your needs then.
Never heard of a Constitutional amendment?
You, me, maybe a few others here understand The Constitution is a 'living' document that the Founders desired to have flexibility over time.
The conservative shitheads here however HATE The Constitution, they hate the potential for lawful amendments, thus these shitheads HATE The Constitution.
You would never get an Amendment passed dissolving the electoral college.
No way did our FF's want a straight up democracy.....they liked the democratic republic.....and for good reason
that goes way above your pay grade, apparently.
The entire country voting on one position will not throw the country in to straight up, tyrannical democracy.
We're not going to amend it. We may get 270 to agree to just vote the winner. And that might get every state to agree to just apportion their EV's by the pop vote in each state
Dude, did that hurt when you twisted it out of your ass like that? it is not anti-Slavery in the least. It is a Pro Slave State compromise. It gave the Slave States more power to continue their pro-slavery agenda.
Move to a nation that fits your needs then.Violates one man, one vote
Some votes count more than others
Never heard of a Constitutional amendment?
You, me, maybe a few others here understand The Constitution is a 'living' document that the Founders desired to have flexibility over time.
The conservative shitheads here however HATE The Constitution, they hate the potential for lawful amendments, thus these shitheads HATE The Constitution.
You would never get an Amendment passed dissolving the electoral college.
No way did our FF's want a straight up democracy.....they liked the democratic republic.....and for good reason
that goes way above your pay grade, apparently.
The entire country voting on one position will not throw the country in to straight up, tyrannical democracy.
The world’s first democracy was ancient Athens, which allowed around 30,000 free adult male citizens to choose their leaders. They made up less than 15 percent of the population, but it was the most egalitarian political innovation to date.
It didn’t take long for the system to implode amid rampant corruption, an economic downturn, immigration headaches and unpopular foreign wars. (Sound familiar?) The plan of “one man, one vote” devolved into a kind of mob rule, the populace veering with wild swings of opinion. Voters overthrew leaders, exiled the unpopular, and executed generals and politicians – even Socrates himself.
As the saying goes, democracy is four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. The Founders looked to Athens less as a political model than an object lesson in what not to do.
James Madison said that democracies are “incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”
Therefore, America was set up as a republic, filled with countless checks and balances to avoid one group gaining power and using it to punish or exclude everyone they didn’t like.
The Electoral College is undemocratic? Of course. That's why it works
This push to gut our Constitution is the fruits of the Left controlling the education system and dumbing down the younger generations.
Courts will shoot down the end around of the Constitution
Ultimately, the biggest challenge to the National Popular Vote agreement may be a legal one. Election-law expert Rick Hasen at the University of California, Irvine School of Law told FiveThirtyEight he expected there would be serious legal challenges to the compact if it crosses the 270-elector threshold.
Doesn’t matter in a popular voteAmerican citizens would be picking the president regardless of where they voteOnly a moron wants Los Angeles and New Yorkers picking the President every 4 years. Look what they’ve done to their own shitholes.A president does not represent the states. That is what Congress is forYou, me, maybe a few others here understand The Constitution is a 'living' document that the Founders desired to have flexibility over time.
The conservative shitheads here however HATE The Constitution, they hate the potential for lawful amendments, thus these shitheads HATE The Constitution.
You would never get an Amendment passed dissolving the electoral college.
No way did our FF's want a straight up democracy.....they liked the democratic republic.....and for good reason
that goes way above your pay grade, apparently.
A president represents the people and should be popularly elected
Why should the vote of someone in Wyoming count four times that of someone in California?
You’re only assuming that because Cali is firmly entrenched as blue. If Cali were purple then a Cali vote would be worth considerably more than Wyoming
Dude, did that hurt when you twisted it out of your ass like that? it is not anti-Slavery in the least. It is a Pro Slave State compromise. It gave the Slave States more power to continue their pro-slavery agenda.
I haven't read a lot of the Federalist papers on the topic but I think the 3/5 rule was instituted in order to deprive the Slave States of over-representation in the House of Representatives.
Otherwise, the Slave States would have had many, many more Representatives than they did.
Blacks couldn't vote but The Constitution doesn't distinguish between who can vote and who can't when comes to apportionment for the House, which is determined by the Census.
Women couldn't vote but they were counted toward apportionment.
In fact, in those days, they didn't even define what a 'Citizen' was. And not everybody could vote. For quite a time, you had to be a Property Owner to vote but non-property owners still counted in the Census
No, the 3/5 rule was to deny Federal House Representatives to the Slave States.
I don't know where you people get your information from but you need to stop.
seriously
Move to a nation that fits your needs then.
Never heard of a Constitutional amendment?
You, me, maybe a few others here understand The Constitution is a 'living' document that the Founders desired to have flexibility over time.
The conservative shitheads here however HATE The Constitution, they hate the potential for lawful amendments, thus these shitheads HATE The Constitution.
You would never get an Amendment passed dissolving the electoral college.
No way did our FF's want a straight up democracy.....they liked the democratic republic.....and for good reason
that goes way above your pay grade, apparently.
The entire country voting on one position will not throw the country in to straight up, tyrannical democracy.
Of course it will, The blue city's and states are indoctrinated.
The position of the Free states was that the Slaves should only count for taxation purposes but not for representation. Of course the Slave states wanted no slave to be counted for taxation purposed and all the slaves to be counted for representation. The compromise gave the Slave states more representation than the free states wanted but less than the Slave states wanted. It is not anti-slavery by any stretch of the imagination. The 13th Amendment is Anti-Slavery!
The world’s first democracy was ancient Athens, which allowed around 30,000 free adult male citizens to choose their leaders. They made up less than 15 percent of the population, but it was the most egalitarian political innovation to date.
It didn’t take long for the system to implode amid rampant corruption, an economic downturn, immigration headaches and unpopular foreign wars. (Sound familiar?) The plan of “one man, one vote” devolved into a kind of mob rule, the populace veering with wild swings of opinion. Voters overthrew leaders, exiled the unpopular, and executed generals and politicians – even Socrates himself.
As the saying goes, democracy is four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. The Founders looked to Athens less as a political model than an object lesson in what not to do.
James Madison said that democracies are “incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”
Therefore, America was set up as a republic, filled with countless checks and balances to avoid one group gaining power and using it to punish or exclude everyone they didn’t like.
The Electoral College is undemocratic? Of course. That's why it works
This push to gut our Constitution is the fruits of the Left controlling the education system and dumbing down the younger generations.
Of course Leftards want New Yorkers and Los Angelinos to determine who’s President. Then campaigning would be merely promising those two cities freebies for everything.Never heard of a Constitutional amendment?
You, me, maybe a few others here understand The Constitution is a 'living' document that the Founders desired to have flexibility over time.
The conservative shitheads here however HATE The Constitution, they hate the potential for lawful amendments, thus these shitheads HATE The Constitution.
You would never get an Amendment passed dissolving the electoral college.
No way did our FF's want a straight up democracy.....they liked the democratic republic.....and for good reason
that goes way above your pay grade, apparently.
The entire country voting on one position will not throw the country in to straight up, tyrannical democracy.
Of course it will, The blue city's and states are indoctrinated.
As Trumpybear has found out, the US Presidency is not a dictatorship. Electing the President by a National vote wouldn't change that.
You need to learn to read.The world’s first democracy was ancient Athens, which allowed around 30,000 free adult male citizens to choose their leaders. They made up less than 15 percent of the population, but it was the most egalitarian political innovation to date.
It didn’t take long for the system to implode amid rampant corruption, an economic downturn, immigration headaches and unpopular foreign wars. (Sound familiar?) The plan of “one man, one vote” devolved into a kind of mob rule, the populace veering with wild swings of opinion. Voters overthrew leaders, exiled the unpopular, and executed generals and politicians – even Socrates himself.
As the saying goes, democracy is four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. The Founders looked to Athens less as a political model than an object lesson in what not to do.
James Madison said that democracies are “incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”
Therefore, America was set up as a republic, filled with countless checks and balances to avoid one group gaining power and using it to punish or exclude everyone they didn’t like.
The Electoral College is undemocratic? Of course. That's why it works
This push to gut our Constitution is the fruits of the Left controlling the education system and dumbing down the younger generations.
It's good to bear in mind that we do NOT live in a democracy but a representative republic. That way you won't look so foolish in future. Trust me on this or else read your constitution. I trust you can read.
Which will die in SCOTUS.A constitutional amendment ending the electoral college will never pass
The only option is for states to pledge their electoral votes to whoever wins the nationwide popular vote
Never heard of a Constitutional amendment?
You, me, maybe a few others here understand The Constitution is a 'living' document that the Founders desired to have flexibility over time.
The conservative shitheads here however HATE The Constitution, they hate the potential for lawful amendments, thus these shitheads HATE The Constitution.
You would never get an Amendment passed dissolving the electoral college.
No way did our FF's want a straight up democracy.....they liked the democratic republic.....and for good reason
that goes way above your pay grade, apparently.
The entire country voting on one position will not throw the country in to straight up, tyrannical democracy.
Of course it will, The blue city's and states are indoctrinated.
As Trumpybear has found out, the US Presidency is not a dictatorship. Electing the President by a National vote wouldn't change that.
The position of the Free states was that the Slaves should only count for taxation purposes but not for representation. Of course the Slave states wanted no slave to be counted for taxation purposed and all the slaves to be counted for representation. The compromise gave the Slave states more representation than the free states wanted but less than the Slave states wanted. It is not anti-slavery by any stretch of the imagination. The 13th Amendment is Anti-Slavery!
Jesus Jumping Christ on a fucking Pogo stick.
You're conflating the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution.........
Three-Fifths Compromise - Wikipedia
The proposed ratio was, however, a ready solution to the impasse that arose during the Constitutional Convention. In that situation, the alignment of the contending forces was the reverse of what had been obtained under the Articles of Confederation in 1783. In amending the Articles, the North wanted slaves to count for more than the South did because the objective was to determine taxes paid by the states to the federal government. In the Constitutional Convention, the more important issue was representation in Congress, so the South wanted slaves to count for more than the North did
