The Constitution and the 1st Amendment are outdated. abolish them and convict Trump!

[basquebromance]

It is difficult to understand how anyone who has read the proceedings of the Federal convention can believe that it was the intention of that body to establish a democratic government. The evidence is overwhelming that the men who sat in that convention had no faith in the wisdom or political capacity of the people.

The Constitution itself furnishes sufficient evidence of that fact. It is not in any sense a democratic instrument, but in every sense a denial of democracy. The Declaration of Independence had been democratic and revolutionary...the Constitution, however, was autocratic and reactionary.

Only six of the fifty-six signers of the declaration had a hand in framing the Constitution. Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and Samuel Adams were not in the convention. Jefferson bitterly opposed the Constitution as finally adopted, and Henry openly denounced it

Woodrow Wilson was right in declaring that the government was established “upon the initiative and primarily in the interest of the mercantile and wealthy classes,” and that “it had been urged to adoption by a minority, under the concerted and aggressive leadership of able men representing the ruling class”

A democracy in name and form ...a despotism in substance and fact!

If you're not convinced yet, here's what Alexander Hamilton said about the constitution

Founders Online: The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

founders.archives.gov

 

[sealybobo]

It is difficult to understand how anyone who has read the proceedings of the Federal convention can believe that it was the intention of that body to establish a democratic government. The evidence is overwhelming that the men who sat in that convention had no faith in the wisdom or political capacity of the people.

The Constitution itself furnishes sufficient evidence of that fact. It is not in any sense a democratic instrument, but in every sense a denial of democracy. The Declaration of Independence had been democratic and revolutionary...the Constitution, however, was autocratic and reactionary.

Only six of the fifty-six signers of the declaration had a hand in framing the Constitution. Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and Samuel Adams were not in the convention. Jefferson bitterly opposed the Constitution as finally adopted, and Henry openly denounced it

Woodrow Wilson was right in declaring that the government was established “upon the initiative and primarily in the interest of the mercantile and wealthy classes,” and that “it had been urged to adoption by a minority, under the concerted and aggressive leadership of able men representing the ruling class”

A democracy in name and form ...a despotism in substance and fact!

If you're not convinced yet, here's what Alexander Hamilton said about the constitution

Founders Online: The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

founders.archives.gov

So true. When what we have allows for gerrymandering, disinfranching voters, electoral votes,

Trump wanted the certification to be stopped and he wanted it to be sent back to the House where each state would get 1 vote? He and his followers claimed there was something in the constitution that allowed such a thing?

Or how about Superdelegates? It's all bullshit. Seems like if the rich ruling class really don't like who we elect. If that person really won't go along, they have a way to not elect that person if they really don't want to and it would all be "constitutional".

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

It is difficult to understand how anyone who has read the proceedings of the Federal convention can believe that it was the intention of that body to establish a democratic government. The evidence is overwhelming that the men who sat in that convention had no faith in the wisdom or political capacity of the people.

The Constitution itself furnishes sufficient evidence of that fact. It is not in any sense a democratic instrument, but in every sense a denial of democracy. The Declaration of Independence had been democratic and revolutionary...the Constitution, however, was autocratic and reactionary.

Only six of the fifty-six signers of the declaration had a hand in framing the Constitution. Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and Samuel Adams were not in the convention. Jefferson bitterly opposed the Constitution as finally adopted, and Henry openly denounced it

Woodrow Wilson was right in declaring that the government was established “upon the initiative and primarily in the interest of the mercantile and wealthy classes,” and that “it had been urged to adoption by a minority, under the concerted and aggressive leadership of able men representing the ruling class”

A democracy in name and form ...a despotism in substance and fact!

If you're not convinced yet, here's what Alexander Hamilton said about the constitution

Founders Online: The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

founders.archives.gov

Fuck you TRAITOR

 

[theHawk]

Boy, the communists are showing their true colors around here.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Boy, the communists are showing their true colors around here.

They think they've won and are invincible. Talk like this will even turn some portion of DEMOCRATS into Republicans

 

[miketx]

It is difficult to understand how anyone who has read the proceedings of the Federal convention can believe that it was the intention of that body to establish a democratic government. The evidence is overwhelming that the men who sat in that convention had no faith in the wisdom or political capacity of the people.

The Constitution itself furnishes sufficient evidence of that fact. It is not in any sense a democratic instrument, but in every sense a denial of democracy. The Declaration of Independence had been democratic and revolutionary...the Constitution, however, was autocratic and reactionary.

Only six of the fifty-six signers of the declaration had a hand in framing the Constitution. Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and Samuel Adams were not in the convention. Jefferson bitterly opposed the Constitution as finally adopted, and Henry openly denounced it

Woodrow Wilson was right in declaring that the government was established “upon the initiative and primarily in the interest of the mercantile and wealthy classes,” and that “it had been urged to adoption by a minority, under the concerted and aggressive leadership of able men representing the ruling class”

A democracy in name and form ...a despotism in substance and fact!

If you're not convinced yet, here's what Alexander Hamilton said about the constitution

Founders Online: The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

founders.archives.gov

Come and get them faggot.

 

[Votto]

It is difficult to understand how anyone who has read the proceedings of the Federal convention can believe that it was the intention of that body to establish a democratic government. The evidence is overwhelming that the men who sat in that convention had no faith in the wisdom or political capacity of the people.

The Constitution itself furnishes sufficient evidence of that fact. It is not in any sense a democratic instrument, but in every sense a denial of democracy. The Declaration of Independence had been democratic and revolutionary...the Constitution, however, was autocratic and reactionary.

Only six of the fifty-six signers of the declaration had a hand in framing the Constitution. Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and Samuel Adams were not in the convention. Jefferson bitterly opposed the Constitution as finally adopted, and Henry openly denounced it

Woodrow Wilson was right in declaring that the government was established “upon the initiative and primarily in the interest of the mercantile and wealthy classes,” and that “it had been urged to adoption by a minority, under the concerted and aggressive leadership of able men representing the ruling class”

A democracy in name and form ...a despotism in substance and fact!

If you're not convinced yet, here's what Alexander Hamilton said about the constitution

Founders Online: The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

The Federalist No. 85, [28 May 1788]

founders.archives.gov

Destroy the Constitution? They ignore it so why bother?

 

[basquebromance]

The FOR THE PEOPLE ACT proposed by Dems would transform America. FULL DETAILS from The Intercept Media:

"The very first legislation proposed by the Democratic Party majorities in both chambers — making it both H.R.1 and S.1 — is the “For the People Act” of 2021, plausibly the most important legislation considered by Congress in decades. ⁠
⁠
The bill would change the basic structure of U.S. politics, making it far more small-d democratic. The bill makes illegal essentially all of the anti-enfranchisement tactics perfected by the right over the past decades. It then creates a new infrastructure to permanently bolster the influence of regular people.⁠
⁠
The bill’s provisions largely fall into three categories: First, it makes it far easier to vote, both by eliminating barriers and enhancing basic outreach to citizens. Second, it makes everyone’s vote count more equally, especially by reducing gerrymandering. Third, it hugely amplifies the power of small political donors, allowing them to match and possibly swamp the power of big money.⁠
⁠
The For the People Act would require states with voter ID requirements to allow people to vote without ID if they complete a sworn statement attesting that they are who they say they are. It would make it impossible for states to engage in bogus purging of voter rolls. States could no longer stop people with felony convictions from voting after they’ve served their time.⁠
⁠
The bill would also require states to allow a minimum of two weeks of early voting. All eligible voters could vote by mail for any reason. All states would also be required to conduct elections via paper ballot.⁠
⁠
Under the bill, candidates for congressional office could opt into a system that would provide matching funds for small donations. To qualify, the candidate would need to raise $50,000 from at least 1,000 individuals; take no more than $1,000 from any contributor; and spend no more than $50,000 of their own money. ⁠
⁠
If the legislation passes with its main provisions intact, a new era could dawn with a creative, lively, nationwide progressive movement. Conversely, those provisions would also empower authentic grassroots conservative movements.⁠"