Thank God Voter Fraud never happens. Or Something.

[PoliticalChic]

Trump 'All levels of government and Law Enforcement are watching carefully for VOTER FRAUD, including during EARLY VOTING,

Traditionally the Corrupt Democratic Party has used Voter Fraud to violate the Voting Rights of Americans.
That is why the Leftist are so enraged that they have to prove that they are a citizen and that they are not voting under a fake name.
Democrat Voter Fraud is an attack on our democracy that people have died for.
Only someone voting illegally would refuse to show their ID.
Early voting gives the Democrats more opportunities to vote multiple times.


Trump warns against voter fraud and threatens maximum penalties for anyone caught cheating | Daily Mail Online

Here we go again.... trump screaming a rigged election while the Russians come in and save the day for him....

is this deja vu nightmare ever going to end?

A pity you never read a book.....

While the Russians would have benefited from having the family they had a history of bribing in the White House, the Clintons, and their choice was clear when they produced the dossier to sink Trump, no nation has the ability to sway our election.


Even when their survival depended on it....the Russians had zero ability to move the vote.

Now, once upon a time….there was a candidate that the Kremlin feared, a military threat, they were actually convinced that a certain candidate for President was planning a first strike on Russia.

And they went all out to prevent his election…..with the conscious and active support of elected Democrats, the Liberal Lion, Ted Kennedy....

Ronald Reagan.


Vasili Mitrokhin worked for 30 years in the foreign intelligence archives of the KGB. In 1972 he was made responsible for moving the entire archives to new headquarters in Moscow. But Mitrokhin spent over a decade making notes and transcripts of these classified files. In 1992, British Secret Intelligence Service exfiltrated the defector, and his presence in the west remained secret until the publication of this book.


His book:

‘The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archives, the History of the KGB,” by Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin.

Mitrokhin outlines the full-court press that the Soviet power structure used to prevent a Reagan presidency….with, of course the joyful aid of such Democrat luminaries as Ted Kennedy.
“…chairman of the KGB….all foreign intelligence officers….active measures to ensure Reagan’s defeat….”
Mitrokhin, Op. Cit., p. 243


“Reagan won a forty-nine state landslide. The entire Soviet government, working hand-in-hand with [the Democrat hierarchy] and America’s most influential newspaper, couldn’t put a dent a US election…”
Coulter, “Resistance Is Futile,”p. 44-45

 

[bullwinkle]

The only way DemonRATS can win is by lying, cheating and VOTER FRAUD. So many DemonRATS have been arrested for this they even go so low as to remove Republican ROAD SIGNS ....how delusional is yhat?

Read MUCH MORE at
Townhall.com ^ |

From decrying illegal immigration to espousing an America First trade policy, from denouncing “angry mobs” to taking jabs at “Crazy Maxine” and “Pocahontas,” few would disagree that when it comes to triggering lefties, President Trump is the ultimate Zen master. And given the president’s almost superhuman ability to drive the Left insane with the push of a few buttons to his Twitter account, one might be forgiven for being surprised that one seemingly ubiquitous Saturday tweet topped all or most of the rest, not by calling someone “Horseface” (although yeah, that was hilarious) or taking another well-deserved jab at Robert Mueller’s “witch hunt,” but by bringing a key issue to light that the Left desperately wants to hide.

Namely - voter fraud.

“All levels of government and Law Enforcement are watching carefully for VOTER FRAUD, including during EARLY VOTING,” Trump tweeted. “Cheat at your own peril. Violators will be subject to maximum penalties, both civil and criminal!”

Now if you’re a normal person reading this, you might think - ‘What’s the big deal? Isn’t Trump basically saying law enforcement will be looking out for, uh, those who, you know … BREAK THE LAW?’ And you’d be entirely correct, but remember when it comes to liberals we aren’t talking about “normal” people, not on any intellectual or moral level. We’re talking about people whose entire lives revolve around obtaining power, retaining power, and using that power to pound the rest of us into submission. By any means necessary. So when Trump or anyone else to the right of center talks about an issue like voter fraud, liberals don’t hear ‘law and order’ or ‘fair elections,’ but instead they see it as mean-old-Trump trying to take away one of their primary tools for stealing elections.

And they go absolutely ballistic.

The first strategy, of course, is to claim that voter fraud doesn’t exist. It’s a “conspiracy theory,” don’t you know ...

“Voter fraud is virtually non-existent,” tweetedthe Ohio State Young Democratic Socialists. “Wage theft is ubiquitous. Only one gets talked about because we are governed by elites and facists.”

Well, alrighty then.

“Donald Trump and Republicans know that they have to lie about voter fraud—which is virtually nonexistent—to suppress and intimidate voters in order to win,” tweeted Bernie Sanders, because nobody would ever try any funny business to keep him from getting elected.

“Don’t be fooled by the continued demonization of immigrants,” tweeted CNN’s Jim Acosta. “Voter fraud in this country is actually very rare. What we should be on the lookout for is Russian meddling.”

One cannot help but wonder if Acosta is aware that immigrants aren’t allowed to vote until they become citizens.

“VOTER FRAUD is itself a fraud,” wrote MSNBC analyst Richard Stengel. “The highest measured rate of voter fraud in our elections is 0.0003%. It is virtually non-existent.”


It’s a common theme, one that’s been repeated often since Trump first raised the issue after the 2016 election, and it still begs the question - If voter fraud is so “non-existent,” why are these geniuses so apoplectic that Trump is concerned about it?

The other tactic is to accuse Trump and others concerned about voter fraud of “voter suppression,” or trying to keep minorities from voting. But by some of the below reactions, you’d think Trump was planning to have hooded KKK members at polling places checking party affiliations and allowing only Republicans to enter.

“Shame on you, Mr. President, for trying to intimidate voters, especially while you yourself are under investigation for the most egregious electoral fraud this nation has ever experienced,” wrote former Clinton-era Labor Secretary Robert Reich.

“Don’t let this fearmongering deter you from voting,” wrote Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. “It’s your civil right. It’s how you make your voice heard. And it scares him more than anything.”

“Normally this stuff is printed on anonymous, deniable flyers and thrust under minority voters' doors in the dead of night,” wailed David Frum.

Seriously, only Frum and his ilk would think eligible-to-vote minorities are so stupid that they would stay away from the polls simply because Trump said authorities would be making sure everyone is … eligible to vote.

Singer Bette Midler tried to tattle to Twitter’s Jack Dorsey: “Hey Jack, this habitual bully is at it again – intimidating early voters…a.k.a. Good citizens participating in the democratic process that is part of the foundation of this country.”

I don’t know. Did Trump say citizens weren’t allowed to vote? Maybe I missed that part, Bette? Of course, there’s always the possibility that you and I define “citizen” differently.

But seriously, in what universe does insisting that one must be properly and legally registered to vote in order to vote amount to “voter suppression.” Sure, maybe it “suppresses” the votes of dead people, illegal immigrants and people who planned to “vote early and often” on election day, but other than that, on what level is insisting on law and order some sort of immoral act?

In other words, there is one logical reason and one logical reason alone why Democrats wail about voter fraud - because they know the practice exists and they expect to benefit from it. Even if the numbers aren’t in the millions that Trump alleged after 2016, a few thousand or even a few hundred well placed “votes” can turn the tide in key districts.

And things grow even more murky when Democrats won’t even allow investigations into the issue. Case in point, President Trump being forced to dissolve the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity in January because certain Blue States refused to cooperate or give the commission any data.

Might they have something to hide?

It is very remarkable that Trump is the only president to ever challenge the veracity of an election that he won.

If the Democrats didn't know for certain that they are the beneficiaries of voter fraud, then they would welcome an investigation regarding the matter with open arms.

Except the HAS been an investigation by the States that found minuscule results.

 

[Astrostar]

Donald Trump warns of non-existent voter fraud - CNNPolitics

Hey Trumpanzees,

At the next Trump rally for the stupid you attend (they occur daily, so you should have an easy time locating one). ask the leader to give you some examples of what he considers to be the epidemic of "voter fraud."

Two things will happen:
Trump will just give you a dirty look and no evidence, and
his faithful will boo and hoot, since you dared to question His Majesty.

I dare you!!!

PS - there was one instance of voter fraud in my area during the 2016 election. A white female was caught voting twice; she was a Republican.

 

[Stratford57]

Hey, Astrostar , if there is no voter fraud how can you explain a lot more people actually voted in Detroit in 2016 than there were registered voters? (After that Dems very quickly quit their "recounting").

How can you explain millions of illegals voting Democrat especially, after Obama encouraged them to vote?

 

[SavannahMann]

Trump 'All levels of government and Law Enforcement are watching carefully for VOTER FRAUD, including during EARLY VOTING,

Traditionally the Corrupt Democratic Party has used Voter Fraud to violate the Voting Rights of Americans.
That is why the Leftist are so enraged that they have to prove that they are a citizen and that they are not voting under a fake name.
Democrat Voter Fraud is an attack on our democracy that people have died for.
Only someone voting illegally would refuse to show their ID.
Early voting gives the Democrats more opportunities to vote multiple times.


Trump warns against voter fraud and threatens maximum penalties for anyone caught cheating | Daily Mail Online

Voting rights of Americans?

What rights would they be then?

To have their vote count and not be offset by that of an illegal vote.

But counted as WHAT?

I mean, someone in Wyoming has a vote that's counted 3 times, compared to someone in California.

Fair? No, it's not fair.

It's as unfair as having a vote and then having an illegal immigrant voting too. But then if the illegal is voting in Wyoming it's much worse than if they're voting in California, wouldn't you agree?

What about voting in a gerrymandered district. Hardly fair then either, is it?

Or how about voting for a party and then not getting any representation from that party because the main two parties get all the wins, because the system is inherently unfair?

You're worrying about illegals, and they're hardly the biggest problem, not even close to it.

Can you help me out on the issue of Gerrymandering? The claim, while laughable, is often heard. But help me out anyway if you can. Senators are representing a State. Not a district drawn by anyone. The State elects them. RCP has it that the Republicans will certainly maintain control of the Senate this election.

RealClearPolitics - 2018 Election Maps - Battle for the Senate 2018

This Gerrymandering can not influence the Senate, but the Senate is going to remain Republican. So the wave of a vast majority of the people in those states, who would elect Democrats if they had a chance, aren’t. The Senate alone, as well as the Governorships, utterly disprove the Gerrymandering arguments.

Wyoming. Sigh. Look, Wyoming has the bare minimum amount of representation in Washington according to the Constitution. It is one state, and thus has two senators. It can not have less than one Representative in the House, so that is what they have.

California, a single state, has 53 Representatives in the House of Representatives. That means that California has 12% of the representatives for the entire nation. They are one single state, one of fifty, and they have more than one fifth of all the Representatives in the nation. Hardly fair is it? Yes, it is actually.

The more populous a State is, the louder that voice is in the House of Representatives, the people’s house. The States are represented in the Senate, and there, all states are equal. Each State has one fiftieth of the political power of the nation. Thus the people are represented in the House, and the States are represented in the Senate. California’s larger population gives it a larger voice in the House, but the voice in the Senate is equal to every other state. Wyoming for example, has one tiny little voice, 1/435th of the political power in the House. One tiny little voice, drowned out by the more populous states. California can and does trample right over little Wyoming in the House, one voice is hardly noticed. But the Senate isn’t about population, but about each State being equally represented to the nation.

So what have we learned? Gerrymandering as an excuse is a lie. And the political situation is in fact quit fair.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Trump 'All levels of government and Law Enforcement are watching carefully for VOTER FRAUD, including during EARLY VOTING,

Traditionally the Corrupt Democratic Party has used Voter Fraud to violate the Voting Rights of Americans.
That is why the Leftist are so enraged that they have to prove that they are a citizen and that they are not voting under a fake name.
Democrat Voter Fraud is an attack on our democracy that people have died for.
Only someone voting illegally would refuse to show their ID.
Early voting gives the Democrats more opportunities to vote multiple times.


Trump warns against voter fraud and threatens maximum penalties for anyone caught cheating | Daily Mail Online

Voting rights of Americans?

What rights would they be then?

To have their vote count and not be offset by that of an illegal vote.

But counted as WHAT?

I mean, someone in Wyoming has a vote that's counted 3 times, compared to someone in California.

Fair? No, it's not fair.

It's as unfair as having a vote and then having an illegal immigrant voting too. But then if the illegal is voting in Wyoming it's much worse than if they're voting in California, wouldn't you agree?

What about voting in a gerrymandered district. Hardly fair then either, is it?

Or how about voting for a party and then not getting any representation from that party because the main two parties get all the wins, because the system is inherently unfair?

You're worrying about illegals, and they're hardly the biggest problem, not even close to it.

Can you help me out on the issue of Gerrymandering? The claim, while laughable, is often heard. But help me out anyway if you can. Senators are representing a State. Not a district drawn by anyone. The State elects them. RCP has it that the Republicans will certainly maintain control of the Senate this election.

RealClearPolitics - 2018 Election Maps - Battle for the Senate 2018

This Gerrymandering can not influence the Senate, but the Senate is going to remain Republican. So the wave of a vast majority of the people in those states, who would elect Democrats if they had a chance, aren’t. The Senate alone, as well as the Governorships, utterly disprove the Gerrymandering arguments.

Wyoming. Sigh. Look, Wyoming has the bare minimum amount of representation in Washington according to the Constitution. It is one state, and thus has two senators. It can not have less than one Representative in the House, so that is what they have.

California, a single state, has 53 Representatives in the House of Representatives. That means that California has 12% of the representatives for the entire nation. They are one single state, one of fifty, and they have more than one fifth of all the Representatives in the nation. Hardly fair is it? Yes, it is actually.

The more populous a State is, the louder that voice is in the House of Representatives, the people’s house. The States are represented in the Senate, and there, all states are equal. Each State has one fiftieth of the political power of the nation. Thus the people are represented in the House, and the States are represented in the Senate. California’s larger population gives it a larger voice in the House, but the voice in the Senate is equal to every other state. Wyoming for example, has one tiny little voice, 1/435th of the political power in the House. One tiny little voice, drowned out by the more populous states. California can and does trample right over little Wyoming in the House, one voice is hardly noticed. But the Senate isn’t about population, but about each State being equally represented to the nation.

So what have we learned? Gerrymandering as an excuse is a lie. And the political situation is in fact quit fair.

I don't get into those debates. Beyond my pay grade but I look forward to his answer

 

[Faun]

Hey, Astrostar , if there is no voter fraud how can you explain a lot more people actually voted in Detroit in 2016 than there were registered voters? (After that Dems very quickly quit their "recounting").

How can you explain millions of illegals voting Democrat especially, after Obama encouraged them to vote?

View attachment 224108

Detroit was human error of not accurately counting voters. There were precincts which submitted under voting as well as over voting for the same reason.

There’s no evidence that millions of illegals voted in 2016.

Obama never encouraged illegals to vote.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump 'All levels of government and Law Enforcement are watching carefully for VOTER FRAUD, including during EARLY VOTING,

Traditionally the Corrupt Democratic Party has used Voter Fraud to violate the Voting Rights of Americans.
That is why the Leftist are so enraged that they have to prove that they are a citizen and that they are not voting under a fake name.
Democrat Voter Fraud is an attack on our democracy that people have died for.
Only someone voting illegally would refuse to show their ID.
Early voting gives the Democrats more opportunities to vote multiple times.


Trump warns against voter fraud and threatens maximum penalties for anyone caught cheating | Daily Mail Online

Voting rights of Americans?

What rights would they be then?

To have their vote count and not be offset by that of an illegal vote.

But counted as WHAT?

I mean, someone in Wyoming has a vote that's counted 3 times, compared to someone in California.

Fair? No, it's not fair.

It's as unfair as having a vote and then having an illegal immigrant voting too. But then if the illegal is voting in Wyoming it's much worse than if they're voting in California, wouldn't you agree?

What about voting in a gerrymandered district. Hardly fair then either, is it?

Or how about voting for a party and then not getting any representation from that party because the main two parties get all the wins, because the system is inherently unfair?

You're worrying about illegals, and they're hardly the biggest problem, not even close to it.

Can you help me out on the issue of Gerrymandering? The claim, while laughable, is often heard. But help me out anyway if you can. Senators are representing a State. Not a district drawn by anyone. The State elects them. RCP has it that the Republicans will certainly maintain control of the Senate this election.

RealClearPolitics - 2018 Election Maps - Battle for the Senate 2018

This Gerrymandering can not influence the Senate, but the Senate is going to remain Republican. So the wave of a vast majority of the people in those states, who would elect Democrats if they had a chance, aren’t. The Senate alone, as well as the Governorships, utterly disprove the Gerrymandering arguments.

Wyoming. Sigh. Look, Wyoming has the bare minimum amount of representation in Washington according to the Constitution. It is one state, and thus has two senators. It can not have less than one Representative in the House, so that is what they have.

California, a single state, has 53 Representatives in the House of Representatives. That means that California has 12% of the representatives for the entire nation. They are one single state, one of fifty, and they have more than one fifth of all the Representatives in the nation. Hardly fair is it? Yes, it is actually.

The more populous a State is, the louder that voice is in the House of Representatives, the people’s house. The States are represented in the Senate, and there, all states are equal. Each State has one fiftieth of the political power of the nation. Thus the people are represented in the House, and the States are represented in the Senate. California’s larger population gives it a larger voice in the House, but the voice in the Senate is equal to every other state. Wyoming for example, has one tiny little voice, 1/435th of the political power in the House. One tiny little voice, drowned out by the more populous states. California can and does trample right over little Wyoming in the House, one voice is hardly noticed. But the Senate isn’t about population, but about each State being equally represented to the nation.

So what have we learned? Gerrymandering as an excuse is a lie. And the political situation is in fact quit fair.

Well there are lots of issues that affect each different part of the US government. Gerrymandering impacts the house mostly.

The Senate is still made up of two parties when in reality it should be made up of at least 6 political parties and this is due to FPTP.

Okay, so I bring up Wyoming as being an unfair example and you just "well that's what it has", yes, I know this is what it has. And somehow you say it's fair. No, it's clearly not, for multiple reasons.

I'll explain with Germany because in Germany they vote twice on the same day. Once FPTP like the US and once PR.

German federal election, 2017 - Wikipedia

Here's the wiki page. Go to results if you will.

So, last year's election.

The CDU and CSU are the same party. They gained 37.2% of the votes with FPTP. They gained 231 seats of the 299 seats available for FPTP.

That's like 77% of the seats. Does that sound fair to you? 37.2% of the people wanted them to represent them, so they get 77% of the power.

Also, the FDP had 7% of people want them to represent them. They got ZERO seats. Is that fair that 7% of the people don't get what they want?

8% wanted the Alliance and the Greens. They got one seat. 8.6% wanted die Linke and they got only 5 seats.

You see the problem here. People got and vote. If the party they wanted to win doesn't win, they don't get represented in parliament. That's not what government is about, is it?

So, we go to PR where the CDU/CSU got 246 seats up from their origianl 231. The Bundestag went from 299 seats to 709 seats and the CDU/CSU gain only 15 new seats.

The FDP instead of getting zero seats got 80 seats because 10.7% of people wanted to vote for them, up from 7% with FPTP. Why? Because FPTP is NEGATIVE VOTING. It leads people to vote against the party they don't like rather than FOR the party they do like.

So in the US there's potential for other parties, but the main two parties hog all the votes because people are afraid of voting for someone else, wasting their vote, and it would be a waste because the smaller parties CAN'T WIN. The system says "fuck you" and so they get fucked.

No, Gerrymandering is not an excuse, your argument is lame in that you ONLY talk about the Senate, without understanding that Gerrymandering is going on in the HOUSE elections.

 

[SavannahMann]

Trump 'All levels of government and Law Enforcement are watching carefully for VOTER FRAUD, including during EARLY VOTING,

Traditionally the Corrupt Democratic Party has used Voter Fraud to violate the Voting Rights of Americans.
That is why the Leftist are so enraged that they have to prove that they are a citizen and that they are not voting under a fake name.
Democrat Voter Fraud is an attack on our democracy that people have died for.
Only someone voting illegally would refuse to show their ID.
Early voting gives the Democrats more opportunities to vote multiple times.


Trump warns against voter fraud and threatens maximum penalties for anyone caught cheating | Daily Mail Online

Voting rights of Americans?

What rights would they be then?

To have their vote count and not be offset by that of an illegal vote.

But counted as WHAT?

I mean, someone in Wyoming has a vote that's counted 3 times, compared to someone in California.

Fair? No, it's not fair.

It's as unfair as having a vote and then having an illegal immigrant voting too. But then if the illegal is voting in Wyoming it's much worse than if they're voting in California, wouldn't you agree?

What about voting in a gerrymandered district. Hardly fair then either, is it?

Or how about voting for a party and then not getting any representation from that party because the main two parties get all the wins, because the system is inherently unfair?

You're worrying about illegals, and they're hardly the biggest problem, not even close to it.

Can you help me out on the issue of Gerrymandering? The claim, while laughable, is often heard. But help me out anyway if you can. Senators are representing a State. Not a district drawn by anyone. The State elects them. RCP has it that the Republicans will certainly maintain control of the Senate this election.

RealClearPolitics - 2018 Election Maps - Battle for the Senate 2018

This Gerrymandering can not influence the Senate, but the Senate is going to remain Republican. So the wave of a vast majority of the people in those states, who would elect Democrats if they had a chance, aren’t. The Senate alone, as well as the Governorships, utterly disprove the Gerrymandering arguments.

Wyoming. Sigh. Look, Wyoming has the bare minimum amount of representation in Washington according to the Constitution. It is one state, and thus has two senators. It can not have less than one Representative in the House, so that is what they have.

California, a single state, has 53 Representatives in the House of Representatives. That means that California has 12% of the representatives for the entire nation. They are one single state, one of fifty, and they have more than one fifth of all the Representatives in the nation. Hardly fair is it? Yes, it is actually.

The more populous a State is, the louder that voice is in the House of Representatives, the people’s house. The States are represented in the Senate, and there, all states are equal. Each State has one fiftieth of the political power of the nation. Thus the people are represented in the House, and the States are represented in the Senate. California’s larger population gives it a larger voice in the House, but the voice in the Senate is equal to every other state. Wyoming for example, has one tiny little voice, 1/435th of the political power in the House. One tiny little voice, drowned out by the more populous states. California can and does trample right over little Wyoming in the House, one voice is hardly noticed. But the Senate isn’t about population, but about each State being equally represented to the nation.

So what have we learned? Gerrymandering as an excuse is a lie. And the political situation is in fact quit fair.

Well there are lots of issues that affect each different part of the US government. Gerrymandering impacts the house mostly.

The Senate is still made up of two parties when in reality it should be made up of at least 6 political parties and this is due to FPTP.

Okay, so I bring up Wyoming as being an unfair example and you just "well that's what it has", yes, I know this is what it has. And somehow you say it's fair. No, it's clearly not, for multiple reasons.

I'll explain with Germany because in Germany they vote twice on the same day. Once FPTP like the US and once PR.

German federal election, 2017 - Wikipedia

Here's the wiki page. Go to results if you will.

So, last year's election.

The CDU and CSU are the same party. They gained 37.2% of the votes with FPTP. They gained 231 seats of the 299 seats available for FPTP.

That's like 77% of the seats. Does that sound fair to you? 37.2% of the people wanted them to represent them, so they get 77% of the power.

Also, the FDP had 7% of people want them to represent them. They got ZERO seats. Is that fair that 7% of the people don't get what they want?

8% wanted the Alliance and the Greens. They got one seat. 8.6% wanted die Linke and they got only 5 seats.

You see the problem here. People got and vote. If the party they wanted to win doesn't win, they don't get represented in parliament. That's not what government is about, is it?

So, we go to PR where the CDU/CSU got 246 seats up from their origianl 231. The Bundestag went from 299 seats to 709 seats and the CDU/CSU gain only 15 new seats.

The FDP instead of getting zero seats got 80 seats because 10.7% of people wanted to vote for them, up from 7% with FPTP. Why? Because FPTP is NEGATIVE VOTING. It leads people to vote against the party they don't like rather than FOR the party they do like.

So in the US there's potential for other parties, but the main two parties hog all the votes because people are afraid of voting for someone else, wasting their vote, and it would be a waste because the smaller parties CAN'T WIN. The system says "fuck you" and so they get fucked.

No, Gerrymandering is not an excuse, your argument is lame in that you ONLY talk about the Senate, without understanding that Gerrymandering is going on in the HOUSE elections.

There are more than two parties. Those other parties tend to be fringe. For example, here in Georgia, we have three candidates for Governor. The Republican, the Democrat, and a Libertarian. The Libertarian won’t win. Not because the parties suck up all the votes, but because the Libertarians have abandoned pretty much all their positions except one, Drugs. Twenty Five years ago, I attended several Libertarian party gatherings. They discussed a myriad of issues. Now, it’s all about drugs. I remember when Ann Counter, to defeat a RINO republican, tried to run as a Libertarian just to make sure the RINO lost. The Libertarians declined, despite the fact that she would have gotten them the biggest share of the vote in their history, because she was not in favor of drug legalization.

The Green Party, same problem. They represent a fringe belief system. As does the rest of the other parties. The two main parties have staked out positions on most issues, and have staked out positions on their bastions. For Democrats it’s Gun Control, stealthy if need be, and Abortion. For Republicans, it’s stopping gun control, and Law and Order.

I don’t like any of the parties, and I doubt I would like it if we were some sort of insane version of a Parilmentary position. The problem with that parliamentary system is that you don’t necessarily get the candidate you vote for. Even if he wins. You get seats, percentage of seats. Then the party leaders decide what the party will do, and who it will align with, so coalitions can govern. That can’t happen today, ever. Using the Libertarians again, and their penchant for drug legalization.

When Democrats were not in the majority, I asked why we couldn’t team up with the libertarians to push for legalization. The answer, they couldn’t until they had a supermajority in the Senate. You see, first they had to have an impossible margin, and then they could address issues that mattered. Pfui. Teaming up with Libertarian leaning Republicans for that issue would have given the Democrats a victory, and that could not be allowed, because it would show the Libertarians were a serious player instead of a fringe belief. One party, one rule.

We set our system up to represent the two segments of our life in the Federal System. The House as always intended to be the voice of the people. Wyoming gets the bare minimum, one voice. California gets fifty three voices, representative of their larger population. That is fair. No less than one, and the rest is according to population.

The other half is the state. We are Citizens of the United States, and residents of a specific state. Look at it this way. Originally the Senate was intended to be an almost ambassadorial type of position, the Senators chosen by the States to represent the state’s interests. The Governor would appoint them, and have that appointment ratified by the State Legislatures. The States interests and concerns were heard along with the people. That did not work out, so we went with State Wide elections for Senator.

If Gerrymandering was in fact slewing the House to Republicans, then the Senate would be Democratic controlled. It isn’t. It isn’t going to be after this election. The states as a whole seem intent on sending Republicans again. You saw the link, fifty Senate Seats are nearly certain for Republicans. That leaves six as Toss Up’s. Even if the Democrats win all six, its still Republican controlled.

But we’ve had independents in the Senate, the famed Bernie Sanders. Jim Jeffords who was a Republican and left the party to be Independant who caucused with the Democrats. The Governor of Alaska is an Independant, although he just dropped out of the race.

The Two Party system may have flaws. Lord knows it does. But it is no worse than the parliamentary system you advocate. Because in the end, the various factions team up, to form essentially two parties anyway. Coalitions are formed, and Liberals join with Liberal Democrats to maintain control of the parliament. While then More conservative factions join together to try and wrest control away. Look at Britain. They have multiple parties, and in the end the PM is always either a Tory, or a Liberal. Even with a coalition, it is always the same. None of the smaller factions ever do anything except enable the larger more powerful party.

Yes, the Constitutional System is fair. Both the interests of the district, in the House of Representatives are heard, and the concerns of the entire State, in the senate. All States deserve an equal voice in the Senate, and all districts deserve their voice, even if it is a single voice that is drowned out by the chorus of California, Texas, or New York.

We are not going to hold a Constitutional Convention to create a new system based upon trampling the rights of the Independant states. We are the United States of America. United States means that the States are all represented, and that the local governments are not just branches of a powerful Federal Authority. If we ever change it, we will have to have a new name for our nation. We could call it Oceana after the fictional nation in 1984.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Dem's caught red handed mailing voter registration cards to illegals with the US Citizen box pre-checked.

Yep, that was in Texas, and they were hitting up the old Folks who could not go to vote. I found out that if you check the box democrat, and the machine will not scan anything else..So all they have to is check the D box