Virginia Presidents and Slaves among other things , the EC

[Penelope]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Right.....that putting your own ass on the line had nothing to do with it

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

After reading your posts it would appear we still do have an education problem.

The EC isn’t going anywhere. You really think 38 states are going to agree to let CA and NY decide who the president is going to be for them?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

The three-fifth rule was a compromise. The slave states wanted to fully count the slaves for this purpose, while the non-slave states opposed counting them at all, since they were not allowed to vote, and were barely considered human.

Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

Today, without the Electoral College, the nation would face domination from a few densely-populated coastal states where opinions are prevalent that are not representative of the rest of the country. At least one of these extreme states actively harboarts and counts invading foreign criminals, and looks the other way as these foreign invaders cast votes. Is it really fair to allow this state to have so dominant an effect on the outcome of the election as it would have in a direct election?

 

[peach174]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

It was designed to be totally opposite of what you said.
It gave less power to the South.
Read some history and you will be fully informed about it.
The South wanted to extend slavery in new territories.

 

[Penelope]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

It was designed to be totally opposite of what you said.
It gave less power to the South.
Read some history and you will be fully informed about it.
The South wanted to extend slavery in new territories.

No it gave more power to the south , and esp since the slaves could not vote or have a say in anything, except were counted as 3/5ths of a person, which increased their population in the south and gave them more representation in Congress.

 

[Penelope]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

After reading your posts it would appear we still do have an education problem.

The EC isn’t going anywhere. You really think 38 states are going to agree to let CA and NY decide who the president is going to be for them?

Oh I know someday the EC is going to be demolished as it makes no sense today.

 

[Penelope]

Right.....that putting your own ass on the line had nothing to do with it

My own ass, my ass is not on any line. Its so obvious the EC is obsolete.

 

[peach174]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

It was designed to be totally opposite of what you said.
It gave less power to the South.
Read some history and you will be fully informed about it.
The South wanted to extend slavery in new territories.

No it gave more power to the south , and esp since the slaves could not vote or have a say in anything, except were counted as 3/5ths of a person, which increased their population in the south and gave them more representation in Congress.

Like I said read the history.
3/5th Clause in the Constitution. What is it and why was it put in?

The 3/5ths clause was put in the Constitution not to let everyone know that the slaves were not really human, but because if they were put in as 100% human, slavery would have been a lot harder to get rid of. That is the reason the founding fathers put that in the Constitution, to help get rid of slavery.

 

[peach174]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

After reading your posts it would appear we still do have an education problem.

The EC isn’t going anywhere. You really think 38 states are going to agree to let CA and NY decide who the president is going to be for them?

Oh I know someday the EC is going to be demolished as it makes no sense today.

Even though you just witnessed the EC's power that overthrew the far left ideology and we now have conservative and independent ideology in congress and the WH.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Right.....that putting your own ass on the line had nothing to do with it

My own ass, my ass is not on any line. Its so obvious the EC is obsolete.

Talking about Washington and Jefferson Adams Madison Monroes ass......risked their lives and fortunes .....nation was free largely because of their efforts...of course they became President

 

[BluesLegend]

Liberals say they want a popular vote, yet liberals in California sued in court to overturn a popular vote in their own state because they didn't like the results of that popular vote.

 

[eagle7_31]

Right.....that putting your own ass on the line had nothing to do with it

My own ass, my ass is not on any line. Its so obvious the EC is obsolete.

Only to a number of left wingers because the Hildebeast lost. If the reverse happened Hillary winning the EC but losing the popular vote the left wing would have no problem with that.

 

[Unkotare]

Liberals are so ‘confident’ in their ideology that they want to insist every state not on the east or west coast be disenfranchised.

 

[BluesLegend]

Liberals are so ‘confident’ in their ideology that they want to insist every state not on the east or west coast be disenfranchised.

Liberal policies are so popular liberals have to rig elections to win, oh wait

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

If you think we have the EC because of slavery we clearly have an education problem.

I don't know where you people come up with this shit.

 

[peach174]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

If you think we have the EC because of slavery we clearly have an education problem.

I don't know where you people come up with this shit.

From college professors, far left opinion news, magazines and Hollywood, just to mention a few.

 

[Doc1]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

It was designed to be totally opposite of what you said.
It gave less power to the South.
Read some history and you will be fully informed about it.
The South wanted to extend slavery in new territories.

No it gave more power to the south , and esp since the slaves could not vote or have a say in anything, except were counted as 3/5ths of a person, which increased their population in the south and gave them more representation in Congress.

First, it was the ONLY way the Constitution would be ratified, and second it was to lessen he impact that they would affect representation.

 

[Penelope]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

If you think we have the EC because of slavery we clearly have an education problem.

I don't know where you people come up with this shit.

From college professors, far left opinion news, magazines and Hollywood, just to mention a few.

History, read the above and follow the links. This is the way it was.

The south wanted the slaves to count, even thought they could not vote, so the compromise was:

Long Answer: 3/5 Compromise = 3/5 of the slave population would be counted for BOTH population and taxation purposes. (Example: If Georgia had 1000 slaves total in their state (3/5*1000) would be counted or 600 slaves towards Georgia's population and taxes.

American History Flashcards | Quizlet

So it increased Georgia representation in the congress.

 

[Penelope]

The initial impact was to give slave states additional weight. The infamous constitutional provision counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning Representatives in Congress (and apportioning electoral votes) was designed to favor Southern states. Slaves could not vote, but they could give their owners extra power in both congressional and presidential elections. It is no accident that slave owning Virginians served as President for 32 of the nation’s first 36 years.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-anderson-web-v1.pdf


Opponents of direct election often point to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution. No question, the Founders had incredible wisdom and foresight, but they were dealing with a much different society and the Electoral College was designed for the realities of the 18th century. The landmass of the country was huge; travel and communication were arduous and primitive; and education was limited at best. Lack of information about possible presidential candidates among the general public was a very real consideration. Also, there were issues involving slavery. At the time, 90% of the slave population lived in the South. Since the slaves could not vote, without the weighted vote of the Electoral College, the South faced electoral domination from Northern states. While not the first choice of any Founder, the Electoral College system solved these tricky considerations with a compromise that allowed them to complete the monumental task of creating our country’s Constitution.

http://www.every-vote-equal.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-forward-bayh-web-v1.pdf

As you can see we no longer have slaves, and we no longer have a communication or education problem.

If you think we have the EC because of slavery we clearly have an education problem.

I don't know where you people come up with this shit.

Read the OP, it was because of lack of transportation, education and communication. Today we do not have those issues unless as we know most Republicans are not educated. correctly.