It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Constitution lets the electoral college choose the winner. They should choose Clinton.

page: 19
21
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: everyone
a reply to: spiritualzombie

Looks like the OP lacks knowledge about the working and intention of the electoral college. This OP would have looked a lot more educated if the thread looked like this "Remove the electoral college" because that would effectivly be the result of his suggestions and how he thinks it is intended to work.


LOL. Exactly what I'm talking about. You don't have a clue...




posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: links234

originally posted by: RazorV66
Illegal aliens in this country are not US citizens, the Constitution does not protect them.


Yes it does.

Anyone within the jurisdiction of the United States has US constitutional rights, illegal or otherwise.


Anyone 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States. To become subject to US jurisdiction, they must be documented by the US government.

Oh, wait.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

I'm still waiting for your breakdown of popular vote by states and how the states aren't being represented by the popular vote SpiritualZ.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 06:59 PM
link   
And ignore the will of the people living in all these red area's, do you want a civil war?




posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

The purpose of the Electoral College, per the founding fathers, was to ensure a mechanism was in place if the people elected a person who had no business being the President. The definition of being unfit was not based on how popular a person is.

The intent was not to override the will of the people simply based on not liking the person who won.

As for my comment about the popular vote that was directed at the other name I responded to at the start of my post.

The states have laws regarding how their electoral delegates must vote. Each party also has requirements on how their delegates can vote and in both cases they are to vote the same as the popular vote in the state they represent. Violating that is usually a fine and an inability to ever be a delegate again.

A civil war over the popular vote is without legal foundation. We do not base our presidential election on the popular vote. There have been 5 times in our history where a person won the electoral college and lost the popular vote. All republicans.

The fact they won the electoral college is the end of the debate. Thats the system we have, for better or worse. A popular vote would concentrate power in a few states, negating the will of the people outside those states.
edit on 28-11-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Lets be honest, the Jill Stein recount is payout for the Green Party in order to be the recount surrogate to inoculate Hillary from looking like the sore loser she is. The extra money is going straight to the Green Party. And the money donated came from some rich source that used a bot to make regular timed payments into Jill Steins online recount fundraising site. Soros is the likely source, but its not been disclosed, so that is a guess. But, 6 million was raised on the Jill Stein website in a few days vs. Jill Stein raising only 3 million for her entire time of her campaign. So I suspect some deep pockets player like Soros must be funding this.

Hillary’s RECOUNT Scheme: Stein’s Dirty Money & The Evil Cabal’s Real Plan




Stein has raised over $6 million in 48 hours for her recount while, during her entire 2016 presidential campaign, she only raised $3 million. So, who is funding Jill Stein’s recount effort? George Soros’s evil fingerprints are all over this recount plan.


The Real Reason For Hillary’s Recount Is Much More Sinister Than We Thought




If the Democrats are able to fabricate voter fraud in the key swing states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, then Trump would lose these vital electoral votes and, thus, the presidency.

While this is a complete possibility at this point and frightening enough, another highly disturbing theory has just come to light, showing just how shady and conniving the slime-balls on the left truly are.

In order for Trump to be declared as the finalized winner of the presidential race, all electoral votes must be validated by the states by the December 19 deadline. However, if these states are having to recount the millions of votes by hand, which is the stated plan, then these states could easily miss the deadline, which would then nullify the electoral votes.


Hillary just can't let go of it and understand she lost. if she goes through with this, I hope the intel agencies come out with the dirt on her to get her impeached.

She really is the female Dr Evil.


edit on 28-11-2016 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: thepixelpusher

Except MI already certified their election results so her effort is now a moot point. Secondly if no candidates receive 270 electoral votes The US House of Reps decide and not the electoral college.
edit on 28-11-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
To help people out.... here are some valid rebuttals to my thread--- You might argue it would cause a Civil War for Electors to side with the Popular Vote. You might say, even if Electors also pointed out the lack of qualifications and impulse control issues and conflict of interest issues with Trump--- The un-American policy proposals; racial profiling, torture, murder, mass deportation force, market instability, national security concerns---- Let's say the Electors cited ALL of that against Trump, AND the fact Trump LOST the Popular Vote---- the only real rebuttal you can have is.... It could start Civil Unrest, possibly Civil War, or other destabilizing concerns and whether those concerns outweigh the concerns of destabilization and unrest under a Trump presidency.


Here's the valid rebuttal:

The United States is set up as a Constitutional Republic of many individual States.

The majority of individual States decided that Trump is a better choice that Clinton as President, *by Popular Vote* within those individual States.

A handful of concentrated population centers in a minority of those individual States thought otherwise.

The Electors of their States understand that they represent their State's interests, not the interests of those concentrated population centers (unless those populations are in *their* States, of course.) In a Constitutional Republic it is encouraged to only be concerned by one's own States issues. Other individual States are allowed to deal with their own issues as they see fit, and the Federal government is to deal with its own issues without involving the States.

The Electors of the individual States are under no obligation to worry about such fear mongering as "Civil Unrest, possibly Civil War, or other destabilizing concerns and whether those concerns outweigh the concerns of destabilization and unrest under a Trump presidency."

In other words, the 30 States that voted for Trump are not concerned with how California, New York and Illinois(Chicago) are handling their problem, nor with how they are reacting to the outcome of the National Popular Vote. It is not their problem.
edit on 28-11-2016 by Teikiatsu because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




The US House of Reps decide and not the electoral college.


Watch the snowflakes call on these House of Representatives with death threats like they did with the electoral college people.





edit on 28-11-2016 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: spiritualzombie

The purpose of the Electoral College, per the founding fathers, was to ensure a mechanism was in place if the people elected a person who had no business being the President.


Exactly. We are in agreement pretty much across the board. I simply have the opinion stated in the OP. And that opinion is based on that criteria you just stated, which I have repeated, and the fact that Hillary won the popular vote by over 2 million votes, a few close-call states should be picking her to give her the win. You don't have to agree.

I'm anti-tyranny, so forgive me. Not a fan of white supremacists, racist policy, torture, and violent war crimes, or banning Muslims. Also not a fan of reducing women's rights, taking away people's healthcare, and destroying families by mass deportation. Also not inspired by a guy who has no impulse control and a clinical case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. And who doesn't understand the big deal about nukes, and thinks Climate Change is a hoax. BASICALLY I don't consider that much unprecedented 'stupid' and 'crazy' as having any business being President of the United States.

So, yeah, I think the EC has a case here to vote in the best interest of the United States by not electing an authoritarian, mentally-unfit self-destructor to the White House. I say to the Electors... maybe that's not a good way to go--- regardless of what your state thinks.




posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Yeah, pretty much false across the board.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 07:23 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

SI SI Senõra Clinton es mui buena...



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

Lol its ok and we dont agree. Our election is based on the electoral college and not the popular vote. The EC not voting for trump simply because people dont like him is also not a valid reason. A LOT of people couldnt stand Obama but because he won the Electoral College he became President.

Let me emphasize - He became president because he won the electoral college. The popular vote had nothing to do with it. The same holds for Trump.

As for your comments do research on your own and stop parroting the democratic talking points the msm pushed as fact but were anything but.
edit on 28-11-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: spiritualzombie

Lol its ok and we dont agree. Our election is based on the electoral college and not the popular vote. The EC not voting for trump simply because people dont like him is also not a valid reason. A LOT of people couldnt stand Obama but because he won the Electoral College he became President.

Let me emphasize - He became president because he won the electoral college. The popular vote had nothing to do with it. The same holds for Trump.

As for your comments do research on your own and stop parroting the democratic talking points the msm pushed as fact but were anything but.


I think the comparison to Obama or Clinton would be if either of them said "Vote for me and I WILL abolish the 2nd Amendment. We'll take all the guns. And we're going to open ALL the borders. And these white people... Are racists and murderers... hurting the country... and SOME of them, I assume, are good people." And Obama supporters saw Republicans freaking out, and we said "Don't worry-- he's not going to actually do that." And then Obama appoints Rev Jeremiah Wright as Chief Strategist, and when asked if he is trying to wage a race war, he says, "I think we have to be very tough on racists... Very very tough."

THAT'S pretty much the only way you get an equal comparison to Clinton or Obama. You have to invent the total insane overtly evil version. And then it matches Trump.


edit on 28-11-2016 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 08:40 PM
link   
spam removed by staff
edit on 11/28/2016 by kosmicjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 08:40 PM
link   
So, lets summarize the facts.

Hillary won the "popular vote" of the National Elections.

Donald won the "electoral college pledge" of the National Elections.

Nobody won the "electoral college vote" as of yet, since they meet in January 2017, which hasn't come yet.

Jill Stein didn't win anything, but is calling for recounts in 3 states to stir things up, because the "exit polls" disagree with the reported actual election results, and she thinks that looks suspicious. Nobody has a good explanation why the "exit polls" are so far off from the reported results. It's just so. The largest deviation in history. Also, Hilary did alot worse in districts where voting was by machine, and did much better in districts where voting was by paper ballot. Another strange anomaly, since it should not matter whether the vote was cast by machine or paper ballot.

In the history of recounts, no recounts have ever produced a difference great enough to turn around any of these votes in any of the 3 states. So, provided that there were only normal statistical miscounts involved, the recounts will not change anything. Donald still gets the EC pledge, and Hillary still gets the popular vote.

In order for the recounts to change the winner in any of these 3 states, there must have been massive fraud involved.

Nobody has found any indication of massive fraud, so far.

Jill Stein says that there's no way to determine fraud without doing a "manual recount", since just running things through the same machines will likely not reveal the fraud, hack, rigging, that may be underlying the results.

Wisconsin agreed to do the recounts last friday 25th Nov.

Hillary decided to join in the effort to ensure everybody (meaning her) wouldn't lose even more votes in a recount, for the record, she insists on being there overseeing what is being done. But, she isn't putting up money to join, just manpower.

Donald is upset, that people are questioning his win. He doesn't see any value in doing audits or checks on the voting system to verify things are working as they should. As long as he wins, all effort should end, and be directed elsewhere.

Donald's supporters are annoyed that people are looking for ways to possibly derail their candidate from entering the White House.

So, Today, Monday 28th, the very day that Pennsylvania is to decide on agreeing to recount, we get a strange event.

A crazy Muslim goes rampant and attacks a bunch of people, reminding everybody that "Donald" is the only one with a solution to the "Muslim Problem".

Pennsylvania and Wisconsin respond immediately by denying the recounts. Wisconsin will do machine recounts only now, no "manual recounts".

Nobody wants to upset the one guy, The Donald, who's proposing a solution to the terror problem.

Mysteriously, just when the recounts looked like they were going somewhere, we get the misdirection thrown in, and people shifting their positions.

Dark forces at work.

Who is the Grand Master of the Dark Powers?

There is a conspiracy there. There must be. Too many coincidences.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Ackshenjackson

Explain....
What a very educated , intellectual , learned post..
NOT



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

Is not conspiracies, I predicted that from the 3 states one may do the recounting, this is base in the fact that Stein nor Hillary has not produced any prove of voters fraud.

Is simple logic.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Yeah, pretty much false across the board.



Rubber and glue.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: seagull


He absolutely got elected by acting like a Troll. And look how it has energized his troll base. The more of a Troll he became, the more they loved him.



that fact alone says more about his opponent not being able to beat this "troll" and how fed up with clinton and her base the american people truly were. they never gave trump a chance, mocked him and made fun of his base kinda like you are doing here and when she couldn't beat him honestly we are left with threads like these going against the way we do things in this country and trying to get the queen in by any means possible.Never in my life have i seen people who can't accept defeat and don't care what they have to do to get what they want.







 
21
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join