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.

 

If we kill the Electoral College

page: 2
34
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2019 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman

Getting rid of the ec would be a mistake.

The dems would get a ton of fast wins because there are more of them.

But seeing so many stripped of their voice will only cause a further divide.

If this happens I think we will all regret it in the end.




posted on May, 26 2019 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman

The ec is a power that the states equally have over each other.
It brings balance.



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman

Who is More Vital to the Strength of the United States of America , the Leftist Useless Eaters from California and New York , or the Hard Working American Farmers in the Midwest who Grow the Food that Keeps them All Alive ? .Hmm.......



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Zeropinion

What they don't seem to understand is that in 50 years the politics of the majority could be changed to republican or who knows what. Putting them at the bottom with no voice.

Same argument that we have about obama and trump using eos to go around congress.

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

The ec keeps the majority in check. We need it just as much as we need checks and balances in the government.



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Isn't that their point/goal?




DBC you've mad some awesome points in this thread.

It IS EXACTLY the majority of electorates (counties in the USA) within a State that determines that State's electoral voting, and the amalgamation of those electors, nationwide, to select a President.

For a STATE to make law contrary to this process violates Article IV Section 4 and Article VI Section 2 of the Constitution as it: 1) negates the de facto definition of a Republican form of government (not a democracy of the mob); and 2) is unlawful on its' face under Article VI as not "made in Pursuance" of the Constitution.

ganjoa

edit on Sun May 26 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: fixed tags



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Its simple.... this is why we are a REPUBLIC...not a democracy.. the founding fathers did their best to protect the rights of all citizens by giving us the constitution and the bill of rights. they did that so 51% of the people couldn't rule over 49% of the people.... GUYS... if we GIVE AWAY our republic. its our fault. They chip away our freedoms every day.. until one day we will find ourselves without choices. The REPUBLICANS AND THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE SAME PEOPLE... Our "representatives" only represent themselves. We don't control them anymore. They control us more and more every day while selling our future and FLEEECING our nation. MANY civil servants have been "serving" for too long becoming LEGACY MONEY MILLIONAIRES while making $100K a year. Voting for their own golden parachutes, and participating in completely different rules and policies than they bring down upon us. ITS NOT TRUMPS JOB to clear the swamp. Hes barely able to keep his head up and hes one of the FEW that are genuinely fighting for our republic. Take the money out. Place term limits. Make rules that regulate family members from getting the kickbacks, foundations to launder the money, etc.. PULL OUR HEADS OUT!!! if we give it away...its all of our faults.... There are 3 kinds of people.
1. those that make it happen
2. those that watch it happen
3. those that stand around wondering what just happened.

edit on 26-5-2019 by daboxfan because: grammar



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Justoneman

Getting rid of the ec would be a mistake.

The dems would get a ton of fast wins because there are more of them.

But seeing so many stripped of their voice will only cause a further divide.

If this happens I think we will all regret it in the end.


Another reason not to go this route is that rural voters tend to have more stake in America due to actual land ownership and independence. They have space to think for themselves. They recognize the populous cities are a resource for their commerce.

The populous cities are packed in on top of each other and are controlled by corporate elites via rentals or associations or tightly packed neighborhoods housing. They are dependents not independents. Every thing they want is provided. They often think of rural areas as simply vacation or tourist spots rather than their necessary suppliers.

Obviously, with such imbalance of logic, doing away with the electoral college would be disastrous for our nation as we know it.



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   
I find it pretty sad and telling that leftist can't see what a dumb idea this is...



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 12:13 PM
link   
The electoral college is necessary to keep big highly populated areas from taking over. Five big cities could dictate everyone if we did not have this. New York, California, and Illinois have a real lot of people and they are Democratic strongholds. The Democrats want to get rid of the electoral college because they want their people to rule the country.

I think that the way we have it set up now is the proper way to have it, this way a broader spectrum of people get represented.



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
I find it pretty sad and telling that leftist can't see what a dumb idea this is...


The flock who is born to be herded and cared for within fencing completely trusts in the shepherd. They notice no difference until too late...as they are corralled and directed down the gated path to the slaughterhouse. Those that notice and try to break out or raise a call of alarm get caught up in the crowded entrapment and are soon silenced with all of the rest.



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Walks you through the math on why the Democrats are pushing this...




posted on May, 26 2019 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: DBCowboy

Al Gore would have won the 2000 presidential election and Hilary would have won 2016 if majority ruled.


It is with out logic to make that argument. Neither of those individuals where in a race where the popular vote was the metric. We have no idea what the outcome would have been for either race had popular vote been the metric. Both races would have been run very differently.
edit on 26-5-2019 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Yes, a look at any election vote by county does show that the divisions in America. They are not based on state, class, nor racial lines or ideology. They are based more on differing perspectives of rural vs city dwellers.

Being we have had Presidents who have won both electorally and the popularity majority votes in the past, it is obvious that the electoral college system is the most fair and balanced system of choice.

Logically, the private parties are the ones who need to make changes in providing more balanced candidates that will win voters across all counties. Extremism is a minority view and gets represented well within the legislative house of representatives.



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: conspiracytheoristIAM

originally posted by: Justoneman
Rural people will become Serfs is what the USAToday printed a few days back.

www.usatoday.com...

Rural people will be Serfs if not for the Electoral College. A place where some balance is given to what is needed for each citizen to be treated fairly as possible. That is why George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, Ben Franklin, John Adams and so many others risked their lives. To setup a place all people, especially Rural people get a fighting chance against tyrannical government. The power grabbers have circumvented the COTUS to achieve control of our resources and maintain their power.

Is it right for two or three states to control what the rural part of the US needs without their representation having equal standing in our Congress and Executive branches?

To kill the EC would be to kill the goose that lays a golden egg. Our enemies have tried everything to bring us to our knees because you can be free to get rich here and you can tell us all to go to hell and not go to jail for it.

A good question to ask yourselves:

How many people are flooding our borders to move out of the US?











How will the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact , consisting of 14 blue states and the District of Columbia, be stopped ? Could we be facing some sort of judicial or legislative road-block to the election in 2020 ?


This won't pass SCOTUS review because it disenfranchises other states to violate the COTUS. 66% of the states or 33 of them will have to overturn it.



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman

Without the electoral college one can look for examples in the following cities and states:

Chicago, Illinois
New York City, New York
Los Angeles, Sandiego, San Jose, SanFransico, CA

I'm sure there are others, but these come to the top of my mind. These are the cities that pretty much dictate the entire state's politics and policies for the entire state.

If we were to be rid of the electoral college, these same # hole mega cities across the country would dictate policies for the entire nation. No thank you...



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: scraedtosleep

Someone being stripped of their voice implies they had a voice in the first place. What difference would it make for the individual voter?



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: daboxfanthey did that so 51% of the people couldn't rule over 49% of the people....


But is it any better if 49% rule over 51%. That's barely a difference, two percent.



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk




Which is exactly what the globalist democrats want!


What exactly is a 'globalist democrat" ? if you dont mind me asking



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts




The flock who is born to be herded and cared for within fencing completely trusts in the shepherd. They notice no difference until too late...as they are corralled and directed down the gated path to the slaughterhouse. Those that notice and try to break out or raise a call of alarm get caught up in the crowded entrapment and are soon silenced with all of the rest.


Which side are you speaking too?



posted on May, 26 2019 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: DBCowboy

Al Gore would have won the 2000 presidential election and Hilary would have won 2016 if majority ruled.


Need I repeat myself?

The majority was represented, the majority of all 50 states.

Probably not if voter I’d was required.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join