Does Anybody's Vote On This Board

[Seawytch]

Why am I not surprised that a lefty refers to the Constitution as a relic?

I wasn't referring to the Constitution, but the Electoral College. Why am I not surprised a righty doesn't understand the difference?

The Constitution is a "changeable" document for a reason.

The reasons for the Electoral College no longer exist. It doesn't take weeks or months to get information across the US, it takes seconds.

Moron.

THAT is in the Constitution. Article II.

Idiot.

Douchebag, I'm aware of what article it is, but that doesn't change the fact that it is an archaic leftover and is no longer needed.

Have we never changed the Constitution before, dipwad?

 

[Si modo]

I wasn't referring to the Constitution, but the Electoral College. Why am I not surprised a righty doesn't understand the difference?

The Constitution is a "changeable" document for a reason.

The reasons for the Electoral College no longer exist. It doesn't take weeks or months to get information across the US, it takes seconds.

Moron.

THAT is in the Constitution. Article II.

Idiot.

Douchebag, I'm aware of what article it is, but that doesn't change the fact that it is an archaic leftover and is no longer needed.

Have we never changed the Constitution before, dipwad?

Yeah, riiiight. You were aware of that.

So, you want to change our entire form of government, because, see we are a constitutional republic. "Archiac leftover" means shit, only to you it must mean something.

 

[Seawytch]

Why am I not surprised that a lefty refers to the Constitution as a relic?

I wasn't referring to the Constitution, but the Electoral College. Why am I not surprised a righty doesn't understand the difference?

The Constitution is a "changeable" document for a reason.

The reasons for the Electoral College no longer exist. It doesn't take weeks or months to get information across the US, it takes seconds.

Really?

Explain, please.

Yes, really. At the time the EC was conceived, it was necessary. A popular vote of the President was all but impossible because it took weeks to months to get information to voters. That is no longer the case.

 

[Si modo]

I wasn't referring to the Constitution, but the Electoral College. Why am I not surprised a righty doesn't understand the difference?

The Constitution is a "changeable" document for a reason.

The reasons for the Electoral College no longer exist. It doesn't take weeks or months to get information across the US, it takes seconds.

Really?

Explain, please.

Yes, really. At the time the EC was conceived, it was necessary. A popular vote of the President was all but impossible because it took weeks to months to get information to voters. That is no longer the case.

I am stunned at how fucking moronic you are. We. Are. A. Constitutional. Republic.

 

[Seawytch]

Moron.

THAT is in the Constitution. Article II.

Idiot.

Douchebag, I'm aware of what article it is, but that doesn't change the fact that it is an archaic leftover and is no longer needed.

Have we never changed the Constitution before, dipwad?

Yeah, riiiight. You were aware of that.

So, you want to change our entire form of government, because, see we are a constitutional republic. "Archiac leftover" means shit, only to you it must mean something.

It does not change our entire form of government, Drama Queen, to directly elect the President.

 

[syrenn]

actually count?

We all know that no matter how much you hate Obama, if you live in California, Connecticutt or Minnesota your vote is useless

Ditto if you live Nebraska, Kansas or Alaska and you love Obama, your vote is moot...

So whose vote will actually mean something come November?

Move to Florida! There, as they proved in 2000, votes hardly ever count unless you're a Republican.

Move to California.... votes hardly ever count unless you're a democrat.

 

[Si modo]

Douchebag, I'm aware of what article it is, but that doesn't change the fact that it is an archaic leftover and is no longer needed.

Have we never changed the Constitution before, dipwad?

Yeah, riiiight. You were aware of that.

So, you want to change our entire form of government, because, see we are a constitutional republic. "Archiac leftover" means shit, only to you it must mean something.

It does not change our entire form of government, Drama Queen, to directly elect the President.

Still stunning. Absolutely stunning.

See, we are a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

So, yeah, that would be a big change.

 

[Seawytch]

Really?

Explain, please.

Yes, really. At the time the EC was conceived, it was necessary. A popular vote of the President was all but impossible because it took weeks to months to get information to voters. That is no longer the case.

I am stunned at how fucking moronic you are. We. Are. A. Constitutional. Republic.

And we still would be, asswipe. BTW, these unnecessary expletives sure are fun, aren't they twatface?

 

[Si modo]

Yes, really. At the time the EC was conceived, it was necessary. A popular vote of the President was all but impossible because it took weeks to months to get information to voters. That is no longer the case.

I am stunned at how fucking moronic you are. We. Are. A. Constitutional. Republic.

And we still would be, asswipe. BTW, these unnecessary expletives sure are fun, aren't they twatface?

Twatface? Meh, seems more appropriate for a dyke.

Regardless, why don't you (1) explain how it is an "archaic leftover"; (2) explain how changing the entire methodology of elections is not a significant change, if not entire change, of governmental type; and (3) reconcile your pedestrian idea with other parts of the Constitution (hint, there isn't just one).

TIA

 

[Seawytch]

I am stunned at how fucking moronic you are. We. Are. A. Constitutional. Republic.

And we still would be, asswipe. BTW, these unnecessary expletives sure are fun, aren't they twatface?

Twatface? Meh, seems more appropriate for a dyke.

Regardless, why don't you (1) explain how it is an "archaic leftover"; (2) explain how changing the entire methodology of elections is not a significant change, if not entire change, of governmental type; and (3) reconcile your pedestrian idea with other parts of the Constitution (hint, there isn't just one).

TIA

http://www.mcgeorge.edu/Research_Ce..._Review_Reports/Electorial_College_Reform.htm

http://lakeplacidcsd.net/lpcsweb/highschool/edinburgh/william.html

The office of the President is the ONLY office we elect with the EC and yet we are still a representative Republic. Voting for President the same exact way will not change that.

 

[Si modo]

And we still would be, asswipe. BTW, these unnecessary expletives sure are fun, aren't they twatface?

Twatface? Meh, seems more appropriate for a dyke.

Regardless, why don't you (1) explain how it is an "archaic leftover"; (2) explain how changing the entire methodology of elections is not a significant change, if not entire change, of governmental type; and (3) reconcile your pedestrian idea with other parts of the Constitution (hint, there isn't just one).

TIA

Electoral College Reform

The Electoral College is no longer necessary in today's society.

The office of the President is the ONLY office we elect with the EC and yet we are still a representative Republic. Voting for President the same exact way will not change that.

Thank you for the links and I will read them, but you really do need to quote the pertinent parts that are responsive.

 

[Liability]

And we still would be, asswipe. BTW, these unnecessary expletives sure are fun, aren't they twatface?

Twatface? Meh, seems more appropriate for a dyke.

Regardless, why don't you (1) explain how it is an "archaic leftover"; (2) explain how changing the entire methodology of elections is not a significant change, if not entire change, of governmental type; and (3) reconcile your pedestrian idea with other parts of the Constitution (hint, there isn't just one).

TIA

Electoral College Reform

The Electoral College is no longer necessary in today's society.

The office of the President is the ONLY office we elect with the EC and yet we are still a representative Republic. Voting for President the same exact way will not change that.

Wrong. We also vote for Vice President in the same way.

 

[Liability]

Douchebag, I'm aware of what article it is, but that doesn't change the fact that it is an archaic leftover and is no longer needed.

Have we never changed the Constitution before, dipwad?

Yeah, riiiight. You were aware of that.

So, you want to change our entire form of government, because, see we are a constitutional republic. "Archiac leftover" means shit, only to you it must mean something.

It does not change our entire form of government, Drama Queen, to directly elect the President.

It fucked us up pretty badly when we went to popular elections for U.S. Senators.

Newsflash, Seabiscuit: you DON'T actually know "better" than the Founders and the Framers.

 

[Clementine]

actually count?

We all know that no matter how much you hate Obama, if you live in California, Connecticutt or Minnesota your vote is useless

Ditto if you live Nebraska, Kansas or Alaska and you love Obama, your vote is moot...

So whose vote will actually mean something come November?

The Dems have managed to create a large numbers of dependents in enough states so that they will get the votes. It sucks, but the workers across the country are helpless in many, many ways.

 

[Seawytch]

Yeah, riiiight. You were aware of that.

So, you want to change our entire form of government, because, see we are a constitutional republic. "Archiac leftover" means shit, only to you it must mean something.

It does not change our entire form of government, Drama Queen, to directly elect the President.

It fucked us up pretty badly when we went to popular elections for U.S. Senators.

Newsflash, Seabiscuit: you DON'T actually know "better" than the Founders and the Framers.

News flash, Lieability: the Framers thought women shouldn't vote and blacks weren't fully human...so, yeah, I do. BTW, a strong majority of Americans agree with me on the EC.

 

[Seawytch]

Twatface? Meh, seems more appropriate for a dyke.

Regardless, why don't you (1) explain how it is an "archaic leftover"; (2) explain how changing the entire methodology of elections is not a significant change, if not entire change, of governmental type; and (3) reconcile your pedestrian idea with other parts of the Constitution (hint, there isn't just one).

TIA

Electoral College Reform

The Electoral College is no longer necessary in today's society.

The office of the President is the ONLY office we elect with the EC and yet we are still a representative Republic. Voting for President the same exact way will not change that.

Thank you for the links and I will read them, but you really do need to quote the pertinent parts that are responsive.

And were I home on a computer, I would have.

 

[del]

It does not change our entire form of government, Drama Queen, to directly elect the President.

It fucked us up pretty badly when we went to popular elections for U.S. Senators.

Newsflash, Seabiscuit: you DON'T actually know "better" than the Founders and the Framers.

News flash, Lieability: the Framers thought women shouldn't vote and blacks weren't fully human...so, yeah, I do. BTW, a strong majority of Americans agree with me on the EC.

h.l. mencken was right

 

[Dr Grump]

Not too sure if changing the way you vote for a govt would change the type of govt you have. NZ had the FFP system until 1996 and was a Parliamentary constitutional monarchy. We now use MMP and are still that type of govt...shrug..

 

[Missourian]

actually count?

We all know that no matter how much you hate Obama, if you live in California, Connecticutt or Minnesota your vote is useless

Ditto if you live Nebraska, Kansas or Alaska and you love Obama, your vote is moot...

So whose vote will actually mean something come November?

Reagan won every state except Minnesota.

 

[Harry Dresden]

actually count?

We all know that no matter how much you hate Obama, if you live in California, Connecticutt or Minnesota you vote is useless

Ditto if you live Nebraska, Kansas or Alaska and you love Obama, you vote is moot...

So whose vote will actually mean something come November?

I live in CA.... and i have voted in very election since i was old enough to vote.....

The way i see it.... you have zero right to complain if you don't vote.

yep.....i feel the same way....