Nancy that has to hurt

Discussion of current events
Post Reply
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Nancy that has to hurt

Post by Doc » Mon Feb 10, 2020 4:10 am

Indeed demanding Facebook and Twitter take down the video says it does.




Perhaps Nancy should have saved this act for the Academy Awards.

Though I have to wonder if Nancy is going to get into trouble with the Federal Elections Commission for giving Trump a in kind donation to his campaign.
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

Jim the Moron
Posts: 1783
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: Nancy that has to hurt

Post by Jim the Moron » Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:29 am

Doc wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 4:10 am
Indeed demanding Facebook and Twitter take down the video says it does.




Perhaps Nancy should have saved this act for the Academy Awards.

Though I have to wonder if Nancy is going to get into trouble with the Federal Elections Commission for giving Trump a in kind donation to his campaign.

A case study on the pros and cons of having an electoral college . . . Imagine, if you will, a general election without electors. And having folks such as those supporting Pelosi deciding who will become POTIS . . .

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Nancy that has to hurt

Post by Doc » Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:54 am

Jim the Moron wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:29 am
Doc wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 4:10 am
Indeed demanding Facebook and Twitter take down the video says it does.




Perhaps Nancy should have saved this act for the Academy Awards.

Though I have to wonder if Nancy is going to get into trouble with the Federal Elections Commission for giving Trump a in kind donation to his campaign.

A case study on the pros and cons of having an electoral college . . . Imagine, if you will, a general election without electors. And having folks such as those supporting Pelosi deciding who will become POTIS . . .
The electoral college is meant to protect geographic diverse minority rights. To protect them from the lynch mob. That is what the left wants to shred.

Given the left Apparently has a brain chemical release addiction. IE They get a brain high whenever they can express their hate. They are the last people that should decide who is POTUS. The Democrats have encouraged the hate The MSM has encouraged the hate.

Even among themselves.

Just look at their most recent debate

“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 3280
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Nancy that has to hurt

Post by Sertorio » Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:20 am

One feels like going back to Hamlet:

"There is something rotten in..."

Trouble is that it increasingly looks as if "something" should be replaced by "everything"...

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Nancy that has to hurt

Post by Doc » Tue Feb 11, 2020 11:15 am

Sertorio wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:20 am
One feels like going back to Hamlet:

"There is something rotten in..."

Trouble is that it increasingly looks as if "something" should be replaced by "everything"...
If Shakespeare were alive today he would being saying something like "Kill the politicians"
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

neverfail
Posts: 4800
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Nancy that has to hurt

Post by neverfail » Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:26 pm

Doc wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:54 am


The electoral college is meant to protect geographic diverse minority rights. To protect them from the lynch mob. That is what the left wants to shred.
ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT DOC! Trace back its origins and you find that in 1789 the electoral college system was incorporated into your American constitution as a consequence of a filthy political compromise demanded by the slave states as the price the northern, non-slave owning states had to pay to entice the former to join the (then) proposed US federation of "states" (i.e. former colonies).
https://time.com/4558510/electoral-coll ... y-slavery/

Standard civics-class accounts of the Electoral College rarely mention the real demon dooming direct national election in 1787 and 1803: slavery.

At the Philadelphia convention, the visionary Pennsylvanian James Wilson proposed direct national election of the president. But the savvy Virginian James Madison responded that such a system would prove unacceptable to the South: “The right of suffrage was much more diffusive [i.e., extensive] in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.” In other words, in a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves (more than half a million in all) of course could not vote. But the Electoral College—a prototype of which Madison proposed in this same speech—instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count.
A big permanent gerrymander loaded to serve southern interests.

The capitulation of the northern delegates to the blackmail of the slave states (led by the State of Virginia) effectively handed political power over the new Federal Republic to the southern slave-owning aristocracy until civil war in the 1860's finally broke the impasse. It broke the maldistribution of power without ridding the US of the source of that warping.
.................................................................................................................................
Other countries quite successfully elect their governments without needing to use this convoluted electoral college system. In all 50 of your component states political executives (State governors) are directly elected without any electoral college :
https://time.com/4558510/electoral-coll ... y-slavery/

After all, state governors in all 50 states are elected by popular vote; why not do the same for the governor of all states, a.k.a. the president?
Good point!

There is no excuse for the electoral college system of selecting presidents to continue at federal level.

Doc, considering that the electoral college system vested power in the hands of the exploiters and oppressors of your own ancestors: that you can support this system now illustrates just how far you (and a lot of other Americans) have been duped by an official lie.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Nancy that has to hurt

Post by Doc » Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:18 pm

neverfail wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:26 pm
Doc wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:54 am


The electoral college is meant to protect geographic diverse minority rights. To protect them from the lynch mob. That is what the left wants to shred.
ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT DOC! Trace back its origins and you find that in 1789 the electoral college system was incorporated into your American constitution as a consequence of a filthy political compromise demanded by the slave states as the price the northern, non-slave owning states had to pay to entice the former to join the (then) proposed US federation of "states" (i.e. former colonies).
https://time.com/4558510/electoral-coll ... y-slavery/

Standard civics-class accounts of the Electoral College rarely mention the real demon dooming direct national election in 1787 and 1803: slavery.

At the Philadelphia convention, the visionary Pennsylvanian James Wilson proposed direct national election of the president. But the savvy Virginian James Madison responded that such a system would prove unacceptable to the South: “The right of suffrage was much more diffusive [i.e., extensive] in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.” In other words, in a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves (more than half a million in all) of course could not vote. But the Electoral College—a prototype of which Madison proposed in this same speech—instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count.
A big permanent gerrymander loaded to serve southern interests.

The capitulation of the northern delegates to the blackmail of the slave states (led by the State of Virginia) effectively handed political power over the new Federal Republic to the southern slave-owning aristocracy until civil war in the 1860's finally broke the impasse. It broke the maldistribution of power without ridding the US of the source of that warping.
.................................................................................................................................
Other countries quite successfully elect their governments without needing to use this convoluted electoral college system. In all 50 of your component states political executives (State governors) are directly elected without any electoral college :
https://time.com/4558510/electoral-coll ... y-slavery/

After all, state governors in all 50 states are elected by popular vote; why not do the same for the governor of all states, a.k.a. the president?
Good point!

There is no excuse for the electoral college system of selecting presidents to continue at federal level.

Doc, considering that the electoral college system vested power in the hands of the exploiters and oppressors of your own ancestors: that you can support this system now illustrates just how far you (and a lot of other Americans) have been duped by an official lie.
I am from a state that was cut out from another state. A part that got almost nothing from the State Government. West Virginia. AS there were mountains separating the two sides of the state of Virginia were the ridges of the Appalachian mountains. It would take days to travel to the state capital from "Western Virginia" Taxes were collected however none of the money was returned.

The time magazine article is spoon fed political propaganda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ge#History
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 3726
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Nancy that has to hurt

Post by cassowary » Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:43 pm

neverfail wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:26 pm
Doc wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:54 am


The electoral college is meant to protect geographic diverse minority rights. To protect them from the lynch mob. That is what the left wants to shred.
ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT DOC! Trace back its origins and you find that in 1789 the electoral college system was incorporated into your American constitution as a consequence of a filthy political compromise demanded by the slave states as the price the northern, non-slave owning states had to pay to entice the former to join the (then) proposed US federation of "states" (i.e. former colonies).
https://time.com/4558510/electoral-coll ... y-slavery/

Standard civics-class accounts of the Electoral College rarely mention the real demon dooming direct national election in 1787 and 1803: slavery.

At the Philadelphia convention, the visionary Pennsylvanian James Wilson proposed direct national election of the president. But the savvy Virginian James Madison responded that such a system would prove unacceptable to the South: “The right of suffrage was much more diffusive [i.e., extensive] in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.” In other words, in a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves (more than half a million in all) of course could not vote. But the Electoral College—a prototype of which Madison proposed in this same speech—instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count.
A big permanent gerrymander loaded to serve southern interests.

The capitulation of the northern delegates to the blackmail of the slave states (led by the State of Virginia) effectively handed political power over the new Federal Republic to the southern slave-owning aristocracy until civil war in the 1860's finally broke the impasse. It broke the maldistribution of power without ridding the US of the source of that warping.
.................................................................................................................................
Other countries quite successfully elect their governments without needing to use this convoluted electoral college system. In all 50 of your component states political executives (State governors) are directly elected without any electoral college :
https://time.com/4558510/electoral-coll ... y-slavery/

After all, state governors in all 50 states are elected by popular vote; why not do the same for the governor of all states, a.k.a. the president?
Good point!

There is no excuse for the electoral college system of selecting presidents to continue at federal level.

Doc, considering that the electoral college system vested power in the hands of the exploiters and oppressors of your own ancestors: that you can support this system now illustrates just how far you (and a lot of other Americans) have been duped by an official lie.
Neverfail,

I think the reason for the electoral college was not because of slavery. It was because of the distrust of democracy by the majority of the Founding Fathers. There were some who advocated that the President be elected by popular vote. But the majority thought it was a bad idea, for good reasons.

This was 1789. At that time, no country had universal suffrage to elect the chief executive by popular vote. So choosing the chief executive by popular vote was considered as a radical idea. Even today, Australia does not elect its PM by popular vote. What some of the Founding Fathers wanted was for the Congressmen from the House of Reps to elect the President because the people were not well informed of the potential candidates. This is somewhat similar to the British Parliamentary system where MPs determine who the PM is going to be.

Most of American population was rural at that time. There were not internet, no TV, no radio and few newspapers. Even if they had access to newspapers, the majority was illiterate. It did not make sense to vote for the President by popular vote. So a compromise between the "radical Democrats" who wanted to elect the President by popular vote and the realists who distrusted the "mob" to vote wisely was agreed upon. This was the electoral college.

The idea was that the people vote for trusted individuals, called electors, deemed intelligent enough to go to Washington and vote wisely after scrutinizing the candidates. This was a compromise between those who wanted the popular vote and letting Congressmen to vote for them. At least the people were involved in the choice of the President which gives him more legitimacy.

It should also be noted the context. Besides the lack of modern communications (TV, Radio etc), there is one more factor to consider. There were no political parties in 1789. So the Founding Fathers fully expected that these electors will be making their choices individually. Since there were no parties, they expected many candidates and none is likely to win a majority of the electors. In this circumstance, the Constitution allows for the House of Reps to decide.

That's what the Founding Fathers expected to happen, making it the same as the British Parliamentary system in the end. But it did not work out that way. The US quickly became a two party system and each elector pledged beforehand who he is going to vote for President. This rendered the Electoral College redundant. Only two elections were settled by the House of Representatives. The last time this happened was in 1824.

So the electoral college was not set up to entice the slave owning states by giving it some advantage. I can't see what advantage. What did entice the Southern slave owning states was the number of Representatives. The Northern states wanted to base the number of Reps on the white population since slaves could not vote. The South wanted to include their slave population so that they will get more representatives in the House or Representatives. In the end, they compromised. Each slave would be counted as 3/5 of a white person.
The Imp :D

neverfail
Posts: 4800
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Nancy that has to hurt

Post by neverfail » Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:29 pm

cassowary wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:43 pm
----
Neverfail,

I think the reason for the electoral college was not because of slavery. It was because of the distrust of democracy by the majority of the Founding Fathers.
A significant number of whom, including Jefferson, Madison and Washington, were slave owners from Virginia. Enough said!

(That type would have viewed even non-property owning free white working class people as only one jump above slaves and well beneath themselves in social status.)

cassowary wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:43 pm
The South wanted to include their slave population so that they will get more representatives in the House or Representatives. In the end, they compromised. Each slave would be counted as 3/5 of a white person.
No they did NOT want to include them in the voting process (if this is what you are suggesting)! The slaves were not allowed to vote (as you correctly point out) and had no say in how their "votes" were used. Instead the slave owners got to vote in the name of their slaves - which meant that they voted for whoever they wanted, not the way their slaves might have wanted them to vote.

It meant if a slave owner in Virginia or South Carolina (for instance) owned 5 slaves he got to cast 3 additional votes on election day in addition to the vote he was entitled to cast as a white property owner. A total of 4 votes. By contrast a non-slave owning freeman in New York state or New England if he qualified as a voter was only entitled to cast but one vote.

If you cannot by now see how this was a gigantic gerrymander to favour the southern states (and in particular their elites of slave owning wealthy planters) then you must be utterly devoid of imagination.

(...and yes Cassowary, I am aware that there was not a single country on earth in those days that chose government via a voting mandate of universal adult suffrage. That did not make the 1789 US electoral college set-up as anything less than a gerrymander designed to vest political power in the hands of one particular select group of people. )

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Nancy that has to hurt

Post by Doc » Tue Feb 11, 2020 10:11 pm

Doc wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:18 pm
neverfail wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:26 pm
Doc wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:54 am


The electoral college is meant to protect geographic diverse minority rights. To protect them from the lynch mob. That is what the left wants to shred.
ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT DOC! Trace back its origins and you find that in 1789 the electoral college system was incorporated into your American constitution as a consequence of a filthy political compromise demanded by the slave states as the price the northern, non-slave owning states had to pay to entice the former to join the (then) proposed US federation of "states" (i.e. former colonies).
https://time.com/4558510/electoral-coll ... y-slavery/

Standard civics-class accounts of the Electoral College rarely mention the real demon dooming direct national election in 1787 and 1803: slavery.

At the Philadelphia convention, the visionary Pennsylvanian James Wilson proposed direct national election of the president. But the savvy Virginian James Madison responded that such a system would prove unacceptable to the South: “The right of suffrage was much more diffusive [i.e., extensive] in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.” In other words, in a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves (more than half a million in all) of course could not vote. But the Electoral College—a prototype of which Madison proposed in this same speech—instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count.
A big permanent gerrymander loaded to serve southern interests.

The capitulation of the northern delegates to the blackmail of the slave states (led by the State of Virginia) effectively handed political power over the new Federal Republic to the southern slave-owning aristocracy until civil war in the 1860's finally broke the impasse. It broke the maldistribution of power without ridding the US of the source of that warping.
.................................................................................................................................
Other countries quite successfully elect their governments without needing to use this convoluted electoral college system. In all 50 of your component states political executives (State governors) are directly elected without any electoral college :
https://time.com/4558510/electoral-coll ... y-slavery/

After all, state governors in all 50 states are elected by popular vote; why not do the same for the governor of all states, a.k.a. the president?
Good point!

There is no excuse for the electoral college system of selecting presidents to continue at federal level.

Doc, considering that the electoral college system vested power in the hands of the exploiters and oppressors of your own ancestors: that you can support this system now illustrates just how far you (and a lot of other Americans) have been duped by an official lie.
I am from a state that was cut out from another state. A part that got almost nothing from the State Government. West Virginia. AS there were mountains separating the two sides of the state of Virginia were the ridges of the Appalachian mountains. It would take days to travel to the state capital from "Western Virginia" Taxes were collected however none of the money was returned.

The time magazine article is spoon fed political propaganda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... ge#History
Leftist Slate.com after Obama won in 2012:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... llege.html
In Defense of the Electoral College
Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the president.
Leftist Slate.com after Trump won in 2016:

https://slate.com/human-interest/2016/1 ... exism.html
The Electoral College Is an Instrument of White Supremacy—and Sexism
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

Post Reply