2020 Primaries

[Sandman 423]

Somehow this fact gets forgotten when certain minority groups seek shelter.

since there is around 20 million or so of them shouldn't we just annex their country and fix it for them?

 

[McDad]

Constitutional mandate.

Rifleman is correct, though. The Constitution makes no mention of judicial review. However either way you consider, it seems we either have:
A) the same Constitution avoiding popular vote for Presidential elections and establishing a branch to protect against trampling of individual liberties by popular vote in a regional matters. Seems to me the same thought process is guiding both.
Or,
B) a popular vote where voters excercise their rights to self govern being overruled by Justices who are not elected by voters using power not explicitly granted in the constitution. If equal votes equates to equitable governance, seems to me this would be problematic for your position.

 

[Rifleman]

Constitutional mandate.

Where is the power of Judicial review in the Constitution, exactly?


Hint: it isn't in there but no one questions it because the SCOTUS wouldn't be a co-equal branch without it.

 

[Rifleman]

Rifleman is correct, though. The Constitution makes no mention of judicial review. However either way you consider, it seems we either have:
A) the same Constitution avoiding popular vote for Presidential elections and establishing a branch to protect against trampling of individual liberties by popular vote in a regional matters. Seems to me the same thought process is guiding both.
Or,
B) a popular vote where voters excercise their rights to self govern being overruled by Justices who are not elected by voters using power not explicitly granted in the constitution. If equal votes equates to equitable governance, seems to me this would be problematic for your position.

My work on this earth is done. Thank you McDad. {Ascends strumming harp.}

 

[OHvol40]

Where is the power of Judicial review in the Constitution, exactly?


Hint: it isn't in there but no one questions it because the SCOTUS wouldn't be a co-equal branch without it.

Right, this is an implied power. I think people who understand the structure of government understand this implied power.

 

[McDad]

My work on this earth is done. Thank you McDad. {Ascends strumming harp.}

Lol. You must be married.

 

[Weezer]

Slaves don’t exist anymore, that’s why the EC’s intended purpose is irrelevant. Why is the current “conversation” irrelevant? Because you don’t want to talk about it?

Slavery wasn't the reason for the EC. Slaves weren't allowed to vote. The relevance of slavery and the EC comes from using the population to determine the number of electors for a state.

 

[Septic]

Like leaving shelter on a whim to seek it somewhere else out of convenience but to burden others?

"Burden others" smells a lot like code for "it hurts my feelings."

 

[Weezer]

If it helps, think of the EC as a check and balance in voting to prevent any one state from gaining too much power.

 

[Weezer]

"Burden others" smells a lot like code for "it hurts my feelings."

If they immigrate legally, no one's feelings get hurt.

 

[RikidyBones]

They are already in combat job so being draft eligible isn’t far away. But no cares because there won’t be a another draft.

I agree there wont be another draft.

 

[Septic]

Another Septical mysticism - who knows for sure what he was talking about.

It means what it means, I've heard a bunch of folks in these very forums bellyache about having to recognize minority status groups like blacks, gays, atheists, trannys etc. or how their agenda is being crammed down their throats through libtard legislation and judicial activism. I just find it ironic that suddenly when it comes to the EC, the same people who grouse about the former are likely thumping the Constitution as the source of protection of the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

 

[Septic]

If they immigrate legally, no one's feelings get hurt.

I'm not sure what immigration (legal or otherwise) has to do with my comment.

 

[Weezer]

I'm not sure what immigration (legal or otherwise) has to do with my comment.

I'm never sure what your comments have to do with anything. Does that make us equal?

 

[McDad]

I'm never sure what your comments have to do with anything. Does that make us equal?

Only if you both vote for president.

 

[Weezer]

Only if you both vote for president.

If I had a good choice, I would.

 

[C-south]

"Burden others" smells a lot like code for "it hurts my feelings."

Seeing freeloaders, especially illegal ones, mooch off the government does hurt my feelings.

 

[Septic]

Seeing freeloaders, especially illegal ones, mooch off the government does hurt my feelings.

Again, what does my comment have to do with illegals? is this the argument you think you have the best chance of knocking over?

 

[C-south]

Again, what does my comment have to do with illegals? is this the argument you think you have the best chance of knocking over?

Who knows what it has to do with?

 

[vols40]

I don’t have the ability to critically think through a thoughtful position and I don’t like what you’re saying, so I’ll just tell you to get over it or move. Great strategy there hoss.

Also, we are born with certain "inalienable" natural rights. That is, rights that are God-given and can never be taken or even given away. They aren’t granted by the constitution, I think you’re confused.

The "unalienable" right to the popular vote is not a commandment.

 

[hog88]

I don’t care about a state’s population, I care about what Americans want.

If enough Americans wanted the EC gone it would be gone. Apparently you have gotten false information.

 

[vols40]

You’re right, they shouldn’t. The citizens of the country should decide their leaders by majority.

We do. Majority of delagates

 

[hog88]

Do you feel the same when the people of a state vote to disallow abortion, gay marriage, legalize recreational drugs, vote for open carry of firearms, (or any hot button issue) only to have that vote overturned by the state judiciary or the politicians in charge of the state?

Ohhhhh

 

[OHvol40]

Slavery wasn't the reason for the EC. Slaves weren't allowed to vote. The relevance of slavery and the EC comes from using the population to determine the number of electors for a state.

Exactly. Slave states had a low population, most of which consisted of slaves. Ergo they pushed for the EC and the 3/5th compromise. It was all ratified because of the economic influence these states wielded.

 

[OHvol40]

The "unalienable" right to the popular vote is not a commandment.

The statement I was responding to was that the constitution granted us our rights. I was simply correcting that idea.