Walz says abolish the Electoral College

[para bellum]

When you call me a thug because I want to eliminate the thing designed to protect slave States and you reference a slaver to do it that is a college level course in a lack of self awareness.

No I called you a thug because you said:

"Might makes right. It's power that shapes reality. The Constitution isn't a magic forcefield. The only thing necessary to exercise power is to put people in the position to."

The Constitution protects the people from your ilk. You have no regard for the law.

 

[Curried Goats]

The Law is the US Constitution, aka the Supreme Law of the Land.

The electoral college is defined in Article II Section 1.

You cannot have more foundation in law that that.

And yet it's entirely made up. I don't know what foundation you're talking about. What the Constitution says is still disagreed on at the Supreme Court level because it's all a matter of opinion.

Yes, it is a completely inane argument to make, because amending the Constitution means you are modifying it. And since the 14th Amendment does not rewrite the electoral college, it cannot possible invalidate it.

In your opinion. Rewriting is not the same as invalidating. I didn't say anything about rewriting the Constitution, just reinterpreting it to invalidate the electoral college.

Your bizarre legal theory is entirely nonsensical, and the idea of packing the Supreme Court with justices that subscribe to such a loony legal theory is stupid beyond belief.

"The Constitution is Unconstitutional!"

My argument isn't that the Constitution is unconstitutional but that the 14th Amendment renders the electoral college unconstitutional.

 

[Curried Goats]

No I called you a thug because you said:

"Might makes right. It's power that shapes reality. The Constitution isn't a magic forcefield. The only thing necessary to exercise power is to put people in the position to."

The Constitution protects the people from your ilk. You have no regard for the law.

It does not. It's not a magic force field. For the vast majority of this Country's existence the Constitution has defended slavery and segregation. Read a ******* history book for Christ's sake....

 

[para bellum]

And yet it's entirely made up. I don't know what foundation you're talking about. What the Constitution says is still disagreed on at the Supreme Court level because it's all a matter of opinion.

The Supreme Court does not disagree about what the Constitution says. They sometimes disagree about what it means, or what it doesn't say. There are certain unenumerated rights that exist, but are not explicitly described, and they occasionally interpret the text in a clause for it's intent.

They never question the "constitutionality" of the Constitution because that is just nonsensical.

In your opinion. Rewriting is not the same as invalidating. I didn't say anything about rewriting the Constitution, just reinterpreting it to invalidate the electoral college.

My argument isn't that the Constitution is unconstitutional but that the 14th Amendment renders the electoral college unconstitutional.

The Constitution is the Constitution in it's entirety. The 14th Amendment is not some separate thing. "Unconstitutional" means a law is doing something that is prohibited by the Constitution- the Constitution cannot prohibit itself. It is the foundational law that all other laws are derived from.

When the Constitution is amended, the part of the Constitution that was amended is no longer in effect. The Amendment supersedes the old language, and replaces it with new language, or adds new language for language that was never there before.

The 14th Amendment did not do that with the electoral college, Article II Section 1 was not amended. The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment does not mean what you think it means.

 

[struth]

You never heard of judges letting rich people escape prison for things like rape or manslaughter charges when drunk drive and kill people?

'Affluenza' defense: Texas judge under fire for giving rich teen probation in fatal DUI case

not getting a prison sentence isn’t the same as getting off.

 

[para bellum]

It does not. It's not a magic force field. For the vast majority of this Country's existence the Constitution has defended slavery and segregation. Read a ******* history book for Christ's sake....

The Constitution is 235 years old. Slavery was only legal for the first 76 years of that. So no, that is not the "vast majority of time".

Segregation persisted, but not as something that was Constitutionally protected. The 14th Amendment made segregation illegal, and the SCOTUS affirmed that in Brown v Board of Education.

And for someone who claimed he didn't want to "relitigate the past", you are spending an awful lot of time doing that, which is completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread- abolishing the electoral college, not slavery and segregation.

 

[Curried Goats]

The Supreme Court does not disagree about what the Constitution says. They sometimes disagree about what it means, or what it doesn't say. There are certain unenumerated rights that exist, but are not explicitly described, and they occasionally interpret the text in a clause for it's intent.

Same difference. We just need a majority of Justices who are of the opinion that what the 14th amendment says, means the electoral college is unconstitutional. Word it anyway you like.

They never question the "constitutionality" of the Constitution because that is just nonsensical.

I don't even know what that means. I'm using one part of the Constitution to defeat another. Also this entire system of laws is made up. It is itself make believe. What's nonsensical is thinking you can put real constraints on make believe.

That only reveals a lack of imagination.

The Constitution is the Constitution in it's entirety. The 14th Amendment is not some separate thing. "Unconstitutional" means a law is doing something that is prohibited by the Constitution- the Constitution cannot prohibit itself. It is the foundational law that all other laws are derived from.

The Constitution prohibited the sale of alcohol and then prohibited its prohibition. Amendments change the Constitution. That's their job.

When the Constitution is amended, the part of the Constitution that was amended is no longer in effect. The Amendment supersedes the old language, and replaces it with new language, or adds new language for language that was never there before.


The 14th Amendment did not do that with the electoral college, Article II Section 1 was not amended. The equal protection clause of the 14th amendment does not mean what you think it means.

It can mean whatever we want it to mean. We just need an excuse.

The Constitution is 235 years old. Slavery was only legal for the first 76 years of that. So no, that is not the "vast majority of time".

I said slavery and segregation but even if we just took slavery which lasted 76 years that would still be greater than equality which has only been around for 65.

Segregation persisted, but not as something that was Constitutionally protected. The 14th Amendment made segregation illegal, and the SCOTUS affirmed that in Brown v Board of Education.

Clown, when was the 14th amendment ratified and when was Brown v Board of Education?

You said the Constitution protects people from people like me but it didn't protect slaves at all and it didn't protect black people from segregation for almost a hundred years until a Court interpreted that it did. Again the lesson you fail to learn there is to be the people deciding how to wield power.

And for someone who claimed he didn't want to "relitigate the past", you are spending an awful lot of time doing that, which is completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread- abolishing the electoral college, not slavery and segregation.

I'm not relitigating it so much as educating you on it.

 

[Curried Goats]

not getting a prison sentence isn’t the same as getting off.

Sure.

 

[struth]

Sure.

It’s rather amazing how you don’t get that. Actually nevermind, no it’s not

 

[Curried Goats]

It’s rather amazing how you don’t get that. Actually nevermind, no it’s not

It's amazing how you wrote that sentence before and didn't laugh out loud at it.

 

[Couchpotato]

Why not just convict and impeach the electoral college and then pack the electoral college like they want to do with SCOTUS or any other governmental body they don't have enough control over?

Or just assassinate them because that is just how the DNC rolls

impeach the electoral college?

 

[struth]

Same difference. We just need a majority of Justices who are of the opinion that what the 14th amendment says, means the electoral college is unconstitutional. Word it anyway you like.

I don't even know what that means. I'm using one part of the Constitution to defeat another. Also this entire system of laws is made up. It is itself make believe. What's nonsensical is thinking you can put real constraints on make believe.

That only reveals a lack of imagination.

The Constitution prohibited the sale of alcohol and then prohibited its prohibition. Amendments change the Constitution. That's their job.

It can mean whatever we want it to mean. We just need an excuse.

I said slavery and segregation but even if we just took slavery which lasted 76 years that would still be greater than equality which has only been around for 65.



Clown, when was the 14th amendment ratified and when was Brown v Board of Education?

You said the Constitution protects people from people like me but it didn't protect slaves at all and it didn't protect black people from segregation for almost a hundred years until a Court interpreted that it did. Again the lesson you fail to learn there is to be the people deciding how to wield power.

I'm not relitigating it so much as educating you on it.

How can the 14th Amendment make Art 2 of the very Constitution it’s an amendment to, unconstitutional? Are you this dumb?

Nevermind

 

[para bellum]

I'm not relitigating it so much as educating you on it.

Well I will give you this much- you have made a pretty good case for requiring literacy tests for voting...

 

[Rambunctious]

I wish demtards would make up their minds about the rules they want and don't want.... a party that threatens to stack the court ala Maduro should not ever be in power again....

 

[Curried Goats]

Well I will give you this much- you have made a pretty good case for requiring literacy tests for voting...

Says the guy quoting a slaver at me to defend a system that continues to disenfranchise black voters. You sound like the guys you venerate.

 

[para bellum]

Clown, when was the 14th amendment ratified and when was Brown v Board of Education?

Doesn't matter- Brown did not make segregation illegal, the 14th Amendment is what made segregation illegal.

Brown just upheld the Federal enforcement of desegregation- the court relied on the 14th Amendment for that decision.

I do not expect you to understand the difference, that is obviously beyond your capacity.

 

[para bellum]

How can the 14th Amendment make Art 2 of the very Constitution it’s an amendment to, unconstitutional? Are you this dumb?

Nevermind

Republican Senators will need to start asking a new question of judicial nominees.

"Do you believe the Constitution is Constitutional?"

 

[Nostra]

It does not. It's not a magic force field. For the vast majority of this Country's existence the Constitution has defended slavery and segregation. Read a ******* history book for Christ's sake....

Why are you voting for a woman who comes from a slave owning family?

Clearly you support slavery.

 

[struth]

Why are you voting for a woman who comes from a slave owning family?

Clearly you support slavery.

Of course he does, he voted for the party of slavery, he wants more slavery

 

[M14 Shooter]

"Might makes right. It's power that shapes reality. The Constitution isn't a magic forcefield. The only thing necessary to exercise power is to put people in the position to."

Thus, the 2nd Amendment.