Ohio Joins The Attempt To Shit on The Constitution and Eliminate The Electoral College

[martybegan]

I can understand that sentiment, but when it comes from the left, I know it's purely about power.

Here is a map of last election by county. Keep in mind that Trump didn't sweep the country by any stretch of the imagination. He simply had more electoral votes.

Left up to the popular vote, those small blue sections would have power over the entire country red or blue.

View attachment 254516

Vacant land does not vote
People vote

Those blue areas are where the people are

The blue areas are big city people and the red areas are rural folk. Try eating a Gucci handbag rather than Cornbread.

The blue areas support the red areas

Always have

Tell that to the Red areas that grow your food, the red areas that supply your drinking water, the red areas where resources are mined or extracted.

You equate overhead and organization (corporate management, economic tasks, and government) for support.

The actual items that fuel the two main "industries" of blue states (finance and entertainment" are fueled by the resources of the blue areas.

Again, there's no such thing as "red" and "blue" states. All states are comprised of people. "Red" and "blue" are artificial bullshit concepts that exist only in the confining confines of the artificial bullshit system of WTA. Declaring a given state is a "red" or "blue" state just insults everybody in it.

I was talking about areas more than States. Rural vs Urban.

 

[Pogo]

[
Keep in mind. The Electoral College was part of a system of the original 13 colonies.
Also keep in mind that women could not vote until 1921.

Not so. Women were able to vote as early as 1869.

History Revisionists depend on a disdain for the concept of "linear time". That, and their own illiteracy.

>> On Nov. 5, 1872, nearly 50 years before the 19th Amendment granted women in the United States the right to vote, Susan B. Anthony and a small group of women cast their ballots for president in Rochester, N.Y., days after she had persuaded election inspectors to register them.

The move, which resulted in arrests and a trial — in which Anthony was found guilty — was an act of defiance and audacity that helped propel the long, slow march to women’s suffrage. << --- NYT

​

 

[Pogo]

Vacant land does not vote
People vote

Those blue areas are where the people are

The blue areas are big city people and the red areas are rural folk. Try eating a Gucci handbag rather than Cornbread.

The blue areas support the red areas

Always have

Tell that to the Red areas that grow your food, the red areas that supply your drinking water, the red areas where resources are mined or extracted.

You equate overhead and organization (corporate management, economic tasks, and government) for support.

The actual items that fuel the two main "industries" of blue states (finance and entertainment" are fueled by the resources of the blue areas.

Again, there's no such thing as "red" and "blue" states. All states are comprised of people. "Red" and "blue" are artificial bullshit concepts that exist only in the confining confines of the artificial bullshit system of WTA. Declaring a given state is a "red" or "blue" state just insults everybody in it.

I was talking about areas more than States. Rural vs Urban.

A distinction without a difference. Composition Fallacy by definition insults the components of said composition.

Do you live in a "red" household of a "blue" neighborhood of a "red" county of a "blue" state in a "red" region ---------- or do you simply assess the choices and make your own selection? Are you an individual with free will, or a pawn?

This is one of the glaring faults of the WTA system. Not only does it immediately toss all non-"red" votes or non-"blue" votes immediately into the shitcan, which means they never had a chance, it also hangs these bullshit labels on the people so labeled for no reason whatsoever. It creates a False Dichotomy and in so doing ensures the perpetuality of Duopoly.

 

[martybegan]

The blue areas are big city people and the red areas are rural folk. Try eating a Gucci handbag rather than Cornbread.

The blue areas support the red areas

Always have

Tell that to the Red areas that grow your food, the red areas that supply your drinking water, the red areas where resources are mined or extracted.

You equate overhead and organization (corporate management, economic tasks, and government) for support.

The actual items that fuel the two main "industries" of blue states (finance and entertainment" are fueled by the resources of the blue areas.

Again, there's no such thing as "red" and "blue" states. All states are comprised of people. "Red" and "blue" are artificial bullshit concepts that exist only in the confining confines of the artificial bullshit system of WTA. Declaring a given state is a "red" or "blue" state just insults everybody in it.

I was talking about areas more than States. Rural vs Urban.

A distinction without a difference. Composition Fallacy by definition insults the components of said composition.

Stop trying to use phrases bigger than your intellect to dodge the discussion.

Righwingmoron made the whole "Blue supports Red" point, i countered that the issue of support masks the true relationship between urban and rural, red and blue, and the overhead economy vs the producing economy.

But if you want to start sprouting things about fallacies and other bullshit, go ahead.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is not an amendment.

It is illegal legislation designed to steal EC votes and throw them to a candidate that did not win that state!

Ohioans might vote to ditch Electoral College. Who's behind the effort? That's a mystery

DemNazis...

If you cannot win fair, you need to change The Rules so you can cheat!

We are in a Civil War.

And The Dems are Invading this country from The Southern Border and attacking our Constitution in our courts and legislatures.

Calm down Skippy.

The constitution was written to be amended from time to time.

Strange how you guys are for State's rights....until you're not.

Strange how you guys hate states' rights . . . until you want to misuse them.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is not an amendment.

It is illegal legislation designed to steal EC votes and throw them to a candidate that did not win that state!

Ohioans might vote to ditch Electoral College. Who's behind the effort? That's a mystery

DemNazis...

If you cannot win fair, you need to change The Rules so you can cheat!

We are in a Civil War.

And The Dems are Invading this country from The Southern Border and attacking our Constitution in our courts and legislatures.

Calm down Skippy.

The constitution was written to be amended from time to time.

Strange how you guys are for State's rights....until you're not.

How is it state’s rights for one state to take away the vote of other states?

Words have no meaning to leftists. They're just sounds they can twist and pervert to get their own way, which is the only thing that DOES have meaning to them.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is not an amendment.

It is illegal legislation designed to steal EC votes and throw them to a candidate that did not win that state!

Ohioans might vote to ditch Electoral College. Who's behind the effort? That's a mystery

DemNazis...

If you cannot win fair, you need to change The Rules so you can cheat!

We are in a Civil War.

And The Dems are Invading this country from The Southern Border and attacking our Constitution in our courts and legislatures.

Calm down Skippy.

The constitution was written to be amended from time to time.

Strange how you guys are for State's rights....until you're not.

How is it state’s rights for one state to take away the vote of other states?

Voter in the smaller states actually count more than voters in other states. How is that fair?

Because they only "count more" by an election process we don't actually have. In the election process we actually use, it's a different matter.

 

[candycorn]

This is not an amendment.

It is illegal legislation designed to steal EC votes and throw them to a candidate that did not win that state!

Ohioans might vote to ditch Electoral College. Who's behind the effort? That's a mystery

DemNazis...

If you cannot win fair, you need to change The Rules so you can cheat!

We are in a Civil War.

And The Dems are Invading this country from The Southern Border and attacking our Constitution in our courts and legislatures.

Calm down Skippy.

The constitution was written to be amended from time to time.

Strange how you guys are for State's rights....until you're not.

Strange how you guys hate states' rights . . . until you want to misuse them.

You still pissed about the civil war, you dreadful bitch?

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is not an amendment.

It is illegal legislation designed to steal EC votes and throw them to a candidate that did not win that state!

Ohioans might vote to ditch Electoral College. Who's behind the effort? That's a mystery

DemNazis...

If you cannot win fair, you need to change The Rules so you can cheat!

We are in a Civil War.

And The Dems are Invading this country from The Southern Border and attacking our Constitution in our courts and legislatures.

Calm down Skippy.

The constitution was written to be amended from time to time.

Only in America can the candidate who wins fewer votes can get elected.

Doesn't that seem like a bad way to run a democratic republic?

Yes! It prevents New York and California from deciding every presidential election.

By diluting individual votes. Where every vote is scared and must weigh equally.

In other words, you're saying that because votes don't seem "equal" to you when you look at them in the non-existent popular vote, that means we should switch to the popular vote.

Congratulations on surpassing yourself as an illogical dumbass.

 

[Pogo]

So you think California New York, Washington State, Louisiana, and Illinois should throw out the Votes of the other 44 States?

Why should a few populous cities dictate Fascist Ideologies to the other 83% of the country?

Do you know Hillary Von Cankles only won 17 states?

President Trump won 33. Why should The 33 states he won be given to Clinton in direct violation of The Will Of The People?

I call it Violation because it is Literally a Rape Of Democracy and Lady Liberty to deny those people in those States their voice!

You know who doesn’t have an Electoral College?

Russia!

Let's see the republicans give up their shameless gerrymandering and voter suppression and then they can complain about cheating.

Progs have gotten most of the stuff they ever wanted and it is never enough. You rule many cities but have a problem with smaller ones. There are many Dems who are not totally Progs in those smaller ones and you lost that vote in 2016. You have legalized people chitting in the middle of center city streets in a large city!

I have lived in the south all my life and my vote has only ever counted once. One time since the 80s. I'm about tired of it. My vote gets thrown in the trash while my Republican neighbor's count. It's not right and it has to end.

You know who else doesn't have an electoral college? MOST OF THE FUCKING WORLD. Although I believe Pakistan does.

You know who won those thirteen states I listed in post 28? NOBODY. Including Rump's states of Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and my own.

You know how to use the fucking quote function?

GO LEARN IT.

Do you know how to get the votes dipshit? Go get them or quit whining.

I'm not running for an office, Illiterati. Go lurn two reed.

 

[Pogo]

Doubtful. The Constitution also says you’re supposed to be in a militia to own firearms.

This is a lie.

No. It’s in the amendment

Quote it!
You couldn't find your ass with both hands, much less anything in the Constitution! You flushed your copy long ago!

The word militia is in the amendment.

Where does the constitution say you’re supposed to be in a militia to own firearms?
Oh - it doesn't?
Why did you lie?

Interesting point, albeit totally off topic ---- where does any part of the Bill or Rights, or any Amendment at all, find a need to justify itself with an introductory subordinate clause implying a qualification for what follows?

Oh it doesn't?

Exactly.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Except for Article I Section 10:1, sure.

You're unaware of the fact that states can apportion their EC votes as they see fit?

Add that to the list

They cannot base their votes on results outside of their state. That is not a republican form of government. It is an abortion.

Is anyone else amused that the leftists are trying to cloak their evil in righteousness by claiming they're "trying to protect the sacredness of every vote", when what they're suggesting actually makes large numbers of votes invalid entirely?

There's some 1984 Newspeak bullshit for you right there.

 

[Pogo]

There is a democrat representative in Ohio who also threw his hat in the ring to run for Prez in 2020. Getting rid of the EC is his idea and not the majority of Ohioans. DeWine is the new GOP governor of Ohio and Ohio remains solid GOP.

Maybe, but DeWine is also a RINO. I'm sure he wouldn't approve of this, but he's hardly what I would call a conservatives conservative.

You can deposit the term "RINO" into the same Bullshit Bin with the "red states" and "blue states". The job of a Governor is to govern a state; the job of a Congresscritter is to represent constituents. NONE of them have the job of representing a damn political party.

Still yet more Dichotomy Disease. Fer fuxsake open your damn mind.

(/offtopic)

 

[Pogo]

Ohioans might vote to ditch Electoral College. Who's behind the effort? That's a mystery

DemNazis...

If you cannot win fair, you need to change The Rules so you can cheat!

We are in a Civil War.

And The Dems are Invading this country from The Southern Border and attacking our Constitution in our courts and legislatures.

They have a long way to go in this process. Its far from clear that Ohio will actually do this. The state has long been a swing state and benefits from being one. All that goes away if the NPVIC gets enough approval in various states to reach 270 EC votes At the current time, this would not benefit Ohio. Far better for Ohio to continue its role is a potential King maker.

The assessment is correct, but the flaw in this argument is the assumption that being Kingmaker is somehow a positive thing.

That's what led to this WTA morass in the first place. Time to move ON from that mentality.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is not an amendment.

It is illegal legislation designed to steal EC votes and throw them to a candidate that did not win that state!

Only in America can the candidate who wins fewer votes can get elected.

Doesn't that seem like a bad way to run a democratic republic?

Yes! It prevents New York and California from deciding every presidential election.

By diluting individual votes. Where every vote is scared and must weigh equally.

It does not do that. The number of electoral votes is determined by the number of representatives in Congress. That is not specified in the Constitution and can be changed by a simple act of Congress signed by the President.

The population of Wyoming with one congressional district is roughly 586,000 while in the Brooklyn, NY 1st congressional district alone there are more than 684.000. 101,000 votes diluted by the EC

. . . In a popular vote, which we don't currently have, so I for one don't find a compelling argument in "If we count the votes this special way that isn't actually the law, it doesn't look fair!!!"

Votes are not counted nationally, except by asswipe leftists trying to look for leverage, so comparing Wyoming to NY is as valid as comparing it to New Zealand. Who gives a fuck whether or not something is "fair" under a system that exists nowhere but in leftists' drug-addled imaginations?

In the ACTUAL election, under the ACTUAL laws of the United States, votes are cast and counted in states. A vote in Wyoming is worth exactly as much as any other vote in Wyoming, which is what matters. And Wyoming has fewer EC votes than NY, which is correct since it's a less-populous state, without being deprived of all representation, which you might remember was kinda important to our Founding Fathers, what with them fighting a revolution over that idea.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yes! It prevents New York and California from deciding every presidential election.

By diluting individual votes. Where every vote is scared and must weigh equally.

It does not do that. The number of electoral votes is determined by the number of representatives in Congress. That is not specified in the Constitution and can be changed by a simple act of Congress signed by the President.

The population of Wyoming with one congressional district is roughly 586,000 while in the Brooklyn, NY 1st congressional district alone there are more than 684.000. 101,000 votes diluted by the EC

Listen up, dumbass!

The Electoral College is based on the number of Representatives, Senators and 3 electoral votes from DC based on the 23rd Amendment. There are 435 Reps, 100 Senators and three votes for DC, for a total of 538 electoral votes. That is why you need 270 to win, and 269 to tie.

The Electoral College does not say that Wyoming gets 1 vote for every 586.000 people. The Constitution says it gets ONE Representative and TWO Senators. The number of Representatives in NY that causes them to have fewer reps is the cap on 435 Representatives which is NOT in the Constitution! It is merely a public law changed numerous times throughout our nation's history.

The Electoral College hasn't got a damn thing to do with anything you are talking about. Perhaps if I had taught your government class you might have learned something! You were obviously taught by a liberal shithead or slept through that lecture!

The point is Wyoming could stand to gain another 100,000 people before it gets a second congressional district.

You're right. One elector per congressman and senator from each state. But when, in Wyoming's case, as well as West Virginia, with only 1 congressional district, the lower populations of these state have more electoral power per capital than elsewhere

Which would be a valid point, if a strict representation of population had ever been intended. But it wasn't, so you're getting your panties into a ruffle over an inability to achieve something that was never a goal to start with.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Trump isn't popular, can't get the popular vote. Sad!

Leftists aren't popular outside of their own communes, can't figure out how to win without cheating. SAD!

 

[Pogo]

That is absolutely NOT TRUE. You have no understanding of this republic

The last sentence from him is correct.

In the state i live in, 2.1 million people vote for Trump and 209,000 voted for Johnson. Both voters had the same impact on the election, both groups of voters accounted for the exact same number of electrical votes...zero

In Texas 3.8 million people voted for Hillary and 283,000 voted for Johnson. Both voters had the same impact on the election, both groups of voters accounted for the exact same number of electrical votes...zero

This is an inherent weakness with the EC but more with the winner take all system that we have.

Keep in mind. The Electoral College was part of a system of the original 13 colonies.

Also keep in mind that women could not vote until 1921.

The EC does not fit in 2019, with 50 states, and 325 million people, in which the population centers that make up for 3/4 of the entire GDP of a $20 trillion economy.

No historical, or Constitutional argument can be made that continues to support the Electoral College. This is no longer an ideological debate.

Sure there is, your opinion just happens to be the wrong one. Don't like the system, amend the Constitution and good luck with that one. Until that time, the electoral college is here to stay be it 13 states or 57.

But is there anything in the constitution that a state cannot have its electors vote for whomever wins the popular vote?

I havent seen that. In fact I believe the Constitution says it's up to the state to choose their electors. And like with Maine and Nebraska they can choose how their electors vote.

You can't vote by disenfranchising everybody in the state.

In the last election, Ohio voted for Trump. Hillary got the popular vote. If this law were in place last election, that would have meant all our electoral votes would have went to Hillary in spite of Ohio voting for Trump. How can you think that's constitutional?

Article II Section 1, second paragraph, that's how. "in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct" leaves no qualifications or requirements.

AGAIN --- Ohio ---- or any state ---- can, if it so chooses, mix the letters in a Scrabble game and pick letters until they select a candidate. It can call a random name in the phone book and ask the party to pick one. It can cast its votes for Pete Rose. The Constitution doesn't care. It doesn't have to hold an election at all.

And as far as your 'disenfranchisement', every Ohioan, in this or any other election, who voted for a candy other than the one that got the massive dump of unanimity, ALREADY got disenfranchised.

And guess what ---- that too was Constitutional. Fucked-up idea but Constitutional.

So much for the "Constitutional" argument eh?

Now if an elector votes against the states choice, that's an issue that can be addressed. But if there is a law that states electors must vote with the country instead of the people of that state, it would be violating the right to choose a representative of choice.

In many states (don't know whether Ohio is one) there are so-called "faithless elector" laws that already dick-tate how the Elector must vote, which, by taking the power of discretion away from said Elector, stick a finger in the eye of the entire concept of the EC. What's the point of having Electors if their votes are going to be dick-tated? Would you participate in a state election where you were required to vote for Candidate X? THERE is your anti-Constitutionality, isn't it.

So when you join me in calling out Faithless Elector laws as unConstitutional, we'll move on from that point.

It's like I posted earlier. This is as un-constitutinoal as passing a law that says no matter who wins an election, all EC votes must go to a Republican, even if we clearly voted for the Democrat candidate.

And as I told you at that time, that too would be Constitutional.

Or to put it another way, wake up and smell the Constitutional.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is not an amendment.

It is illegal legislation designed to steal EC votes and throw them to a candidate that did not win that state!

Only in America can the candidate who wins fewer votes can get elected.

Doesn't that seem like a bad way to run a democratic republic?

Yes! It prevents New York and California from deciding every presidential election.

By diluting individual votes. Where every vote is scared and must weigh equally.

Why are votes scared, dumbass?

Historically voters have been scared. Currently voters are being unlawfully purged from rolls, disenfranchised due to ID laws, repressed by eliminating polling stations and absurdly marginalized by gerrymandering.

Currently, leftists are making up a bunch of lies and BS to justify cheating and screwing the voters far worse than they claim the voters are being screwed now.

You'll excuse me if I continue to believe that there is no ill existing now that could possibly be worse than turning control over to dishonest dimwits like you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There is a democrat representative in Ohio who also threw his hat in the ring to run for Prez in 2020. Getting rid of the EC is his idea and not the majority of Ohioans. DeWine is the new GOP governor of Ohio and Ohio remains solid GOP.

Maybe, but DeWine is also a RINO. I'm sure he wouldn't approve of this, but he's hardly what I would call a conservatives conservative.

You can deposit the term "RINO" into the same Bullshit Bin with the "red states" and "blue states". The job of a Governor is to govern a state; the job of a Congresscritter is to represent constituents. NONE of them have the job of representing a damn political party.

Still yet more Dichotomy Disease. Fer fuxsake open your damn mind.

(/offtopic)

You really live in your own little make up world, don’t cha?


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com