Danger to the 2nd

NFrameFred

NFrameFred

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
3,637
Reaction score
4,693
Location
WV
I submit that this graphic is an illustration of the need for the country to heed the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in creating the electoral college. To anyone who may have thought abolishing the electoral college is a good idea, this dramatically illustrates the folly of that opinion. We're dangerously close to disaster in even considering that concept. California, New York and Illinois (just to name three) already demonstrate the control that one small geographic area can force on their states as a whole. We do not need and can ill afford this to become the standard for the nation.


Should the EC be abolished, the Second and First Amendments (One and Two in the BILL OF RIGHTS for the terminally slow) will be scrapped on the fickle winds of politics and unstable policies based on emotion. :mad:




proof of need - Electoral College.jpg
 
Register to hide this ad
I've long considered the Electoral College to be one of the most brilliant concepts the Founding Fathers introduced into our Constitution, and getting rid of it would indeed be disastrous.

Whenever someone starts preaching to me about the "fairness" of eliminating the EC, my first question is: How would we then elect our presidents? There are always more than two candidates running in every state. If we require that the winning candidate in a given election get 50%+ of the national vote, then how do we handle situations where the top vote getter has less than 50%? Runoff elections? And how would candidates for the general election be selected? Should there be a national primary election day, so that everyone in the nation has the same opportunity to vote for the same candidates? Or should primaries be eliminated altogether, and let the parties pick their candidates at their respective conventions?

Getting rid of the Electoral College would open the biggest can of worms in our history, and would transform the United States into something the Founders never envisioned or intended it to be. The only thing we can count on to save it is that amending the Constitution requires that three-quarters of the states vote for the amendment, and I don't think 38 of the 50 states would agree to something so obviously antithetical to their self-interest.
 
The only thing we can count on to save it is that amending the Constitution requires that three-quarters of the states vote for the amendment, and I don't think 38 of the 50 states would agree to something so obviously antithetical to their self-interest.
Click to expand...

For fun, since I knew the answer was stunning, I asked the generic question "How many amendments to the Constitution have been proposed?"

Microsoft's AI, called "Copilot" sent me a longer answer than I expected and it's unlikely to be copyrighted but I'll definitely credit Copilot:


Since 1789, there have been approximately 11,770 proposed measures to amend the United States Constitution. These proposals are introduced during each session of the United States Congress. However, most of them never progress beyond the congressional committees where they were initially proposed. Typically, around 200 amendments are suggested by members of the House and Senate during each two-year term of Congress. Of these, only a fraction receive enough support to proceed through the constitutional ratification process1.

Congress has sent 33 constitutional amendments to the states for ratification, and 27 of these have been successfully ratified. The framers of the Constitution intentionally designed the amendment process to be challenging but not inflexible, striking a balance between adaptability and stability. Article V outlines the two-step process for amending the Constitution:

Proposal: An amendment can be proposed by either:
A two-thirds majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
A national convention, convened by Congress upon the application of the legislatures of two-thirds (currently 34) of the states. However, this latter procedure has never been used.
Ratification: An adopted amendment must be ratified by either:
The legislatures of three-fourths (currently 38) of the states within a specified time period (if any).
State ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states within the stipulated time period (if any)1.

In summary, while thousands of proposed amendments have been introduced, only a select few have made their way into the Constitution, shaping the course of American history. 🇺🇸
Click to expand...

Emphasis mine.
 
There are several states that are trying to do an end run around the electoral college. They have passed legislation stating that once 270 electoral votes worth of states pass equivalent legislation, their delegates will be required to vote according to the popular vote, not according to their individual state. So they are abandoning their representation in the electoral college. Talk about stupid.

But then ratifying the 17th amendment was stupid, and they did that too.
 
The concept of the Electoral College vote was nothing short of genius. It's purpose was to prevent one or two heavily populated states from running roughshod over all the other states when it came to electing the President and VP. A great analogy is baseball's World Series. The winner of the World Series is not determined by tallying all the scores, it is determined by which team wins the majority of the 7 games.
 
johngalt said:
There are several states that are trying to do an end run around the electoral college. They have passed legislation stating that once 270 electoral votes worth of states pass equivalent legislation, their delegates will be required to vote according to the popular vote, not according to their individual state. So they are abandoning their representation in the electoral college. Talk about stupid.

But then ratifying the 17th amendment was stupid, and they did that too.
Click to expand...

I don’t think stupidity has anything to do with it.
It is simply hardball politics that the Left is so adept at.
If by some miracle we get a conservative President and conservative majorities in the House and Senate, enjoy them while you can-it will never happen again.
The next 5 to 7 years will prove to be among some of the most tumultuous in our nation’s history. We are going to see even more bad things that we thought we would never see than we have the in the last 10 years.
It’s gonna’ get ugly.
 
Last edited:
You hear a lot of people today talk about "democracy". The founders wisely didn't create a pure democracy, which sometimes translates to mob rule.
 
Warren and his crew chipped away at the EC when they required states to abandon the similar system relating to counties. States like NV, OR, CA, and WA all suffer from the overreach of urban politicians riding roughshod over different ways of life.
 
Countrycuz said:
You hear a lot of people today talk about "democracy". The founders wisely didn't create a pure democracy, which sometimes translates to mob rule.
Click to expand...
Correct! The U.S. is not a democracy. A democracy is mob rule. We were founded as a constitutional republic. Our elections are carried out in a democratic fashion, with each eligible citizen guaranteed the right to vote, but we vote for people to represent us in the government. In a democracy, citizens would be casting votes on every conceivable issue.
 
smoothshooter said:
I don’t think stupidity has anything to do with it.
It is simply hardball politics that the Left is so adept at.
If by some miracle we get a conservative President and conservative majorities in the House and Senate, enjoy them while you can-it will never happen again.
The next 5 to 7 years will prove to be among some of the most tumultuous in our nation’s history. We are going to see even more bad things that we thought we would never see than we have the in the last 10 years.
It’s gonna’ get ugly.
Click to expand...

Leftist and stupid aren't mutually exclusive conditions...

Forfeiting your representation is stupid, regardless the motives. Basically they are saying to the citizens of their state "your vote doesn't count"
 
LVSteve said:
Warren and his crew chipped away at the EC when they required states to abandon the similar system relating to counties. States like NV, OR, CA, and WA all suffer from the overreach of urban politicians riding roughshod over different ways of life.
Click to expand...

This. Look up Reynolds v. Sims and see how SCOTUS disenfranchised everyone not living in a big city.

If a court decision needs to be abrogated by an Amendment, this is one.

Regarding XVII, it's really worth reading this:

https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1539&context=clevstlrev
 
WCCPHD said:
The founding fathers were not only geniuses, but psychic as well. They designed the US Constitution to account for what is happening today.
Click to expand...

And to which, unfortunately, is being silently scrapped by politicians and/or being challenged in court, as that can take years to undo. In the meantime, while waiting for the courts, it's law and there are no repercussions, only consequences...
 
stansdds said:
Correct! The U.S. is not a democracy. A democracy is mob rule. We were founded as a constitutional republic. Our elections are carried out in a democratic fashion, with each eligible citizen guaranteed the right to vote, but we vote for people to represent us in the government. In a democracy, citizens would be casting votes on every conceivable issue.
Click to expand...

and then you get California.

QED
 
‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

Winston S. Churchill, 11 November 1947
 
biku324 said:
‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

Winston S. Churchill, 11 November 1947
Click to expand...

So? The UK in the 40's wasn't a democracy either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top