Are we a republic or not?

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

Fucking technicality in your mind I guess whether we're a representative republic after this I say, this is a big change and yes, it fucks things up in terms of being a real republic with states where votes matter. You are apparently fine with this as it still satisfies your definition of a representative republic. We'll see if you're fine with it when your vote gets effectively switched and electoral votes go with the "pact" instead.

There are big economic and social differences between our states. I like things better when the state has it's say in the president and think that feels more like a republic. Technically, it still is - but realize this is just the step on the way to a pure popular vote for president which will have massive new side effects and really destroy our "republic." You will still argue that technically we will still be a republic when that happens because you can't have an adult conversation.

You asked another question about 2020 election and how this affects it? It doesn't. The dumbshit states don't add up to 270 so nothing actually happens in their fucking pact.

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

You are so fucking smart, obviously, and yet all you and CD is troll. Never a reasonable debate because you can't lower yourself to our level. Here is a fantastic issue to discuss yet you bring NOTHING to the table. Zero. You must live a miserable life if this is your fucking entertainment.

Why am I here? Because I'm surrounded by idiots like you. I live in Washington state and work in the fucking cesspool called Seattle. I literally have no one to talk about politics with except for guys who "get it" like @RaceBannon , @MikeDamone , and @Swaye - who actually seems like pretty smart fuckers. This board keeps me sane because I actually believe there are some people in this fucking state who aren't dipshits.

Cue the "Meltdown" response.

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

PurpleThrobber said:

2001400ex said:

I'm curious how that changes our structure of government from being a representative republic.

Don't confuse curiosity with dumbfuckery.

Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.

All of that and you still don't answer what that has to do with being a representative republic. How about you educate yourself then come back.

Lol. You do know it's a free country, right? You can move wherever you want. It's nice and cozy over here in Spokane.

I'm curious your take on this. As it sits right now, how will this effect the 2020 election? You want serious discussion so here's your chance.

You’re not curious or interested in a serious discussion. That much we know.

Why don't you answer the question? What effect will this have on the 2020 election?

I wasn’t asked a question dumb fuck.

I didn’t read the entire thread, but did anyone say there will be an effect in 2020? Or is this your normal strawman? Idiot

The OP commented that one they get 270 electoral college votes, our republic will be over. I asked him how anything on the wiki page changes us from being a representative republic. He dodged it. I now ask you the same.

I thought you asked about 2020? Or some fucking thing. Do you even know what you asked?

Also, he answered you:

“ Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.”


Are you going to respond or just say “educate yourself” and start asking about 2020? JFC you’re an idiot.

Yes I also asked about 2020. And you both ignored that question. And his response has and this potential bill have nothing to do with American being a representative republic.

Ok Hondo. It’s in you’re court.

What's wrong with asking clarifying questions Mike? That being said, I explained myself. HTH

I’m curious. Serious question. Have you read federalist 68? What do you think of It?

I generally disagree with Hamilton, but 68 is good.

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

Fucking technicality in your mind I guess whether we're a representative republic after this I say, this is a big change and yes, it fucks things up in terms of being a real republic with states where votes matter. You are apparently fine with this as it still satisfies your definition of a representative republic. We'll see if you're fine with it when your vote gets effectively switched and electoral votes go with the "pact" instead.

There are big economic and social differences between our states. I like things better when the state has it's say in the president and think that feels more like a republic. Technically, it still is - but realize this is just the step on the way to a pure popular vote for president which will have massive new side effects and really destroy our "republic." You will still argue that technically we will still be a republic when that happens because you can't have an adult conversation.

You asked another question about 2020 election and how this affects it? It doesn't. The dumbshit states don't add up to 270 so nothing actually happens in their fucking pact.

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

You are so fucking smart, obviously, and yet all you and CD is troll. Never a reasonable debate because you can't lower yourself to our level. Here is a fantastic issue to discuss yet you bring NOTHING to the table. Zero. You must live a miserable life if this is your fucking entertainment.

Why am I here? Because I'm surrounded by idiots like you. I live in Washington state and work in the fucking cesspool called Seattle. I literally have no one to talk about politics with except for guys who "get it" like @RaceBannon , @MikeDamone , and @Swaye - who actually seems like pretty smart fuckers. This board keeps me sane because I actually believe there are some people in this fucking state who aren't dipshits.

Cue the "Meltdown" response.

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

PurpleThrobber said:

2001400ex said:

I'm curious how that changes our structure of government from being a representative republic.

Don't confuse curiosity with dumbfuckery.

Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.

All of that and you still don't answer what that has to do with being a representative republic. How about you educate yourself then come back.

Lol. You do know it's a free country, right? You can move wherever you want. It's nice and cozy over here in Spokane.

I'm curious your take on this. As it sits right now, how will this effect the 2020 election? You want serious discussion so here's your chance.

You’re not curious or interested in a serious discussion. That much we know.

Why don't you answer the question? What effect will this have on the 2020 election?

I wasn’t asked a question dumb fuck.

I didn’t read the entire thread, but did anyone say there will be an effect in 2020? Or is this your normal strawman? Idiot

The OP commented that one they get 270 electoral college votes, our republic will be over. I asked him how anything on the wiki page changes us from being a representative republic. He dodged it. I now ask you the same.

I thought you asked about 2020? Or some fucking thing. Do you even know what you asked?

Also, he answered you:

“ Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.”


Are you going to respond or just say “educate yourself” and start asking about 2020? JFC you’re an idiot.

Yes I also asked about 2020. And you both ignored that question. And his response has and this potential bill have nothing to do with American being a representative republic.

Ok Hondo. It’s in you’re court.

What's wrong with asking clarifying questions Mike? That being said, I explained myself. HTH

I’m curious. Serious question. Have you read federalist 68? What do you think of It?

I generally disagree with Hamilton, but 68 is good.

I have not read it.

Shocking.

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

Fucking technicality in your mind I guess whether we're a representative republic after this I say, this is a big change and yes, it fucks things up in terms of being a real republic with states where votes matter. You are apparently fine with this as it still satisfies your definition of a representative republic. We'll see if you're fine with it when your vote gets effectively switched and electoral votes go with the "pact" instead.

There are big economic and social differences between our states. I like things better when the state has it's say in the president and think that feels more like a republic. Technically, it still is - but realize this is just the step on the way to a pure popular vote for president which will have massive new side effects and really destroy our "republic." You will still argue that technically we will still be a republic when that happens because you can't have an adult conversation.

You asked another question about 2020 election and how this affects it? It doesn't. The dumbshit states don't add up to 270 so nothing actually happens in their fucking pact.

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

You are so fucking smart, obviously, and yet all you and CD is troll. Never a reasonable debate because you can't lower yourself to our level. Here is a fantastic issue to discuss yet you bring NOTHING to the table. Zero. You must live a miserable life if this is your fucking entertainment.

Why am I here? Because I'm surrounded by idiots like you. I live in Washington state and work in the fucking cesspool called Seattle. I literally have no one to talk about politics with except for guys who "get it" like @RaceBannon , @MikeDamone , and @Swaye - who actually seems like pretty smart fuckers. This board keeps me sane because I actually believe there are some people in this fucking state who aren't dipshits.

Cue the "Meltdown" response.

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

PurpleThrobber said:

2001400ex said:

I'm curious how that changes our structure of government from being a representative republic.

Don't confuse curiosity with dumbfuckery.

Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.

All of that and you still don't answer what that has to do with being a representative republic. How about you educate yourself then come back.

Lol. You do know it's a free country, right? You can move wherever you want. It's nice and cozy over here in Spokane.

I'm curious your take on this. As it sits right now, how will this effect the 2020 election? You want serious discussion so here's your chance.

You’re not curious or interested in a serious discussion. That much we know.

Why don't you answer the question? What effect will this have on the 2020 election?

I wasn’t asked a question dumb fuck.

I didn’t read the entire thread, but did anyone say there will be an effect in 2020? Or is this your normal strawman? Idiot

The OP commented that one they get 270 electoral college votes, our republic will be over. I asked him how anything on the wiki page changes us from being a representative republic. He dodged it. I now ask you the same.

I thought you asked about 2020? Or some fucking thing. Do you even know what you asked?

Also, he answered you:

“ Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.”


Are you going to respond or just say “educate yourself” and start asking about 2020? JFC you’re an idiot.

Yes I also asked about 2020. And you both ignored that question. And his response has and this potential bill have nothing to do with American being a representative republic.

The pact isn't in place. That's the point of my questions. It even says so right in your wiki page. This has been staring since 2006 and means nothing other than a few states have passed a law that won't take into effect unless a certain threshold is passed. Which it won't.

Even if this were in place. It still doesn't change anything with the election of Congress, the powers of Congress, president or the supreme Court. All it would do is change the method of how the president is elected.

Ummm...you do know that the electors are appointed by state legislatures, right? Who are representatives of the people in their state...


HTH.

You do know that the history on the Constitution is that electors in the electoral college were free to vote for who they wished regardless how the state voted. So in the instance in 2000 or 2016, the electors could change their vote to follow the popular vote.

Many states now have laws that force electors how to vote. That already changed the method outlined in the Constitution.

Come on Mike, you are better than that. And you don't address what I even said.

And who has the power to select electors?

Your position that a direct election for president doesn’t chip away at a representative government is being undermined by your own comments. But you’re too dumb to know that.

I didn't say I support direct election for president. And I don't support it. But it still has nothing to do with the US being a representative republic. And the link we are discussing does not say we will have direct election for president. HTH

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

Fucking technicality in your mind I guess whether we're a representative republic after this I say, this is a big change and yes, it fucks things up in terms of being a real republic with states where votes matter. You are apparently fine with this as it still satisfies your definition of a representative republic. We'll see if you're fine with it when your vote gets effectively switched and electoral votes go with the "pact" instead.

There are big economic and social differences between our states. I like things better when the state has it's say in the president and think that feels more like a republic. Technically, it still is - but realize this is just the step on the way to a pure popular vote for president which will have massive new side effects and really destroy our "republic." You will still argue that technically we will still be a republic when that happens because you can't have an adult conversation.

You asked another question about 2020 election and how this affects it? It doesn't. The dumbshit states don't add up to 270 so nothing actually happens in their fucking pact.

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

You are so fucking smart, obviously, and yet all you and CD is troll. Never a reasonable debate because you can't lower yourself to our level. Here is a fantastic issue to discuss yet you bring NOTHING to the table. Zero. You must live a miserable life if this is your fucking entertainment.

Why am I here? Because I'm surrounded by idiots like you. I live in Washington state and work in the fucking cesspool called Seattle. I literally have no one to talk about politics with except for guys who "get it" like @RaceBannon , @MikeDamone , and @Swaye - who actually seems like pretty smart fuckers. This board keeps me sane because I actually believe there are some people in this fucking state who aren't dipshits.

Cue the "Meltdown" response.

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

PurpleThrobber said:

2001400ex said:

I'm curious how that changes our structure of government from being a representative republic.

Don't confuse curiosity with dumbfuckery.

Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.

All of that and you still don't answer what that has to do with being a representative republic. How about you educate yourself then come back.

Lol. You do know it's a free country, right? You can move wherever you want. It's nice and cozy over here in Spokane.

I'm curious your take on this. As it sits right now, how will this effect the 2020 election? You want serious discussion so here's your chance.

You’re not curious or interested in a serious discussion. That much we know.

Why don't you answer the question? What effect will this have on the 2020 election?

I wasn’t asked a question dumb fuck.

I didn’t read the entire thread, but did anyone say there will be an effect in 2020? Or is this your normal strawman? Idiot

The OP commented that one they get 270 electoral college votes, our republic will be over. I asked him how anything on the wiki page changes us from being a representative republic. He dodged it. I now ask you the same.

I thought you asked about 2020? Or some fucking thing. Do you even know what you asked?

Also, he answered you:

“ Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.”


Are you going to respond or just say “educate yourself” and start asking about 2020? JFC you’re an idiot.

Yes I also asked about 2020. And you both ignored that question. And his response has and this potential bill have nothing to do with American being a representative republic.

The pact isn't in place. That's the point of my questions. It even says so right in your wiki page. This has been staring since 2006 and means nothing other than a few states have passed a law that won't take into effect unless a certain threshold is passed. Which it won't.

Even if this were in place. It still doesn't change anything with the election of Congress, the powers of Congress, president or the supreme Court. All it would do is change the method of how the president is elected.

Ummm...you do know that the electors are appointed by state legislatures, right? Who are representatives of the people in their state...


HTH.

You do know that the history on the Constitution is that electors in the electoral college were free to vote for who they wished regardless how the state voted. So in the instance in 2000 or 2016, the electors could change their vote to follow the popular vote.

Many states now have laws that force electors how to vote. That already changed the method outlined in the Constitution.

Come on Mike, you are better than that. And you don't address what I even said.

And who has the power to select electors?

Your position that a direct election for president doesn’t chip away at a representative government is being undermined by your own comments. But you’re too dumb to know that.

I didn't say I support direct election for president. And I don't support it. But it still has nothing to do with the US being a representative republic. And the link we are discussing does not say we will have direct election for president. HTH

Did you read 68? It certainly does.

Post the link and I'll read it.

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

Fucking technicality in your mind I guess whether we're a representative republic after this I say, this is a big change and yes, it fucks things up in terms of being a real republic with states where votes matter. You are apparently fine with this as it still satisfies your definition of a representative republic. We'll see if you're fine with it when your vote gets effectively switched and electoral votes go with the "pact" instead.

There are big economic and social differences between our states. I like things better when the state has it's say in the president and think that feels more like a republic. Technically, it still is - but realize this is just the step on the way to a pure popular vote for president which will have massive new side effects and really destroy our "republic." You will still argue that technically we will still be a republic when that happens because you can't have an adult conversation.

You asked another question about 2020 election and how this affects it? It doesn't. The dumbshit states don't add up to 270 so nothing actually happens in their fucking pact.

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

You are so fucking smart, obviously, and yet all you and CD is troll. Never a reasonable debate because you can't lower yourself to our level. Here is a fantastic issue to discuss yet you bring NOTHING to the table. Zero. You must live a miserable life if this is your fucking entertainment.

Why am I here? Because I'm surrounded by idiots like you. I live in Washington state and work in the fucking cesspool called Seattle. I literally have no one to talk about politics with except for guys who "get it" like @RaceBannon , @MikeDamone , and @Swaye - who actually seems like pretty smart fuckers. This board keeps me sane because I actually believe there are some people in this fucking state who aren't dipshits.

Cue the "Meltdown" response.

2001400ex said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

PurpleThrobber said:

2001400ex said:

I'm curious how that changes our structure of government from being a representative republic.

Don't confuse curiosity with dumbfuckery.

Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.

All of that and you still don't answer what that has to do with being a representative republic. How about you educate yourself then come back.

Lol. You do know it's a free country, right? You can move wherever you want. It's nice and cozy over here in Spokane.

I'm curious your take on this. As it sits right now, how will this effect the 2020 election? You want serious discussion so here's your chance.

You’re not curious or interested in a serious discussion. That much we know.

Why don't you answer the question? What effect will this have on the 2020 election?

I wasn’t asked a question dumb fuck.

I didn’t read the entire thread, but did anyone say there will be an effect in 2020? Or is this your normal strawman? Idiot

The OP commented that one they get 270 electoral college votes, our republic will be over. I asked him how anything on the wiki page changes us from being a representative republic. He dodged it. I now ask you the same.

I thought you asked about 2020? Or some fucking thing. Do you even know what you asked?

Also, he answered you:

“ Because the mostly liberal states will pool their electoral votes in case one of them doesn't produce like it normally does ruining a fundamental way our republic form of government works. Can't wait until it backfires and California, Washington, and Oregon send all their electoral votes in for Ivanka. Of course this won't happen because this "pact" tips the scales against urban America which is why it must not happen.”


Are you going to respond or just say “educate yourself” and start asking about 2020? JFC you’re an idiot.

Yes I also asked about 2020. And you both ignored that question. And his response has and this potential bill have nothing to do with American being a representative republic.

The pact isn't in place. That's the point of my questions. It even says so right in your wiki page. This has been staring since 2006 and means nothing other than a few states have passed a law that won't take into effect unless a certain threshold is passed. Which it won't.

Even if this were in place. It still doesn't change anything with the election of Congress, the powers of Congress, president or the supreme Court. All it would do is change the method of how the president is elected.

Ummm...you do know that the electors are appointed by state legislatures, right? Who are representatives of the people in their state...


HTH.

You do know that the history on the Constitution is that electors in the electoral college were free to vote for who they wished regardless how the state voted. So in the instance in 2000 or 2016, the electors could change their vote to follow the popular vote.

Many states now have laws that force electors how to vote. That already changed the method outlined in the Constitution.

Come on Mike, you are better than that. And you don't address what I even said.

And who has the power to select electors?

Your position that a direct election for president doesn’t chip away at a representative government is being undermined by your own comments. But you’re too dumb to know that.

I didn't say I support direct election for president. And I don't support it. But it still has nothing to do with the US being a representative republic. And the link we are discussing does not say we will have direct election for president. HTH

Did you read 68? It certainly does.

Post the link and I'll read it.

Fuck off.

Imagine asking for a serious discussion on the EC and never have read Fedealist 68.

At least Hondo is consist in his willful ignorance.

Funny how you never want to post something to support your assertion. Like there's not more than one source to read as it is.

MikeDamone said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

"Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States."

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp

But how does the effect 2020!!!1!1!!1!!!!!!!!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!!2!2

It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.

That repeats exactly like I said. And I've stated this system is not in place in many states.

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

"Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States."

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp

But how does the effect 2020!!!1!1!!1!!!!!!!!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!!2!2

It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.

That repeats exactly like I said. And I've stated this system is not in place in many states.

You’re a fucking idiot. And still haven’t read 68.

Are your gong to ask how it effects 2020? Dumbshit

Here comes the strawman.....

Tell us more how you don’t think direct election of the president doesn’t chip away at a representative government. Idiot

You sure do get angry when I read what you want me to. Then quote it. And you ignore everything I've stated. But I'll try one more time Mike. You ready?

Yes if you went to direct election of the president, one piece of a representative republic would be gone. However the main part of our government is Congress representing the electorate, which is also repeated at the state level. Although at the state level, there are more items directly voted on by the population. How the president is elected doesn't change the legislative process.

That being said, as I've already stated, many states already trash this paper. As they require the electors to vote with the state. The electoral college was established to allow for the electors to ensure the right person is elected, which you paper states as well.

It's almost like we agree but you want to argue to argue.

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

"Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States."

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp

But how does the effect 2020!!!1!1!!1!!!!!!!!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!!2!2

It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.

That repeats exactly like I said. And I've stated this system is not in place in many states.

You’re a fucking idiot. And still haven’t read 68.

Are your gong to ask how it effects 2020? Dumbshit

Here comes the strawman.....

Tell us more how you don’t think direct election of the president doesn’t chip away at a representative government. Idiot

You sure do get angry when I read what you want me to. Then quote it. And you ignore everything I've stated. But I'll try one more time Mike. You ready?

Yes if you went to direct election of the president, one piece of a representative republic would be gone. However the main part of our government is Congress representing the electorate, which is also repeated at the state level. Although at the state level, there are more items directly voted on by the population. How the president is elected doesn't change the legislative process.

That being said, as I've already stated, many states already trash this paper. As they require the electors to vote with the state. The electoral college was established to allow for the electors to ensure the right person is elected, which you paper states as well.

It's almost like we agree but you want to argue to argue.

JFC. So what are you blathering about then? You’re the one who started making up shit to argue that doggie never said. Then stared in on 2020 and “answer the question”! Then when confronted with federalist 68 and facts you’re running to “you want to argue to argue”. Take the L. Move on. And go fuck yourself. Idiot.

You can't even discuss what you were begging me to read. Nice work Lil Man.

B

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

2001400ex said:

MikeDamone said:

DoogieMcDoogerson said:

"Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States."

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp

But how does the effect 2020!!!1!1!!1!!!!!!!!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!!2!2

It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.

That repeats exactly like I said. And I've stated this system is not in place in many states.

You’re a fucking idiot. And still haven’t read 68.

Are your gong to ask how it effects 2020? Dumbshit

Here comes the strawman.....

Tell us more how you don’t think direct election of the president doesn’t chip away at a representative government. Idiot

You sure do get angry when I read what you want me to. Then quote it. And you ignore everything I've stated. But I'll try one more time Mike. You ready?

Yes if you went to direct election of the president, one piece of a representative republic would be gone. However the main part of our government is Congress representing the electorate, which is also repeated at the state level. Although at the state level, there are more items directly voted on by the population. How the president is elected doesn't change the legislative process.

That being said, as I've already stated, many states already trash this paper. As they require the electors to vote with the state. The electoral college was established to allow for the electors to ensure the right person is elected, which you paper states as well.

It's almost like we agree but you want to argue to argue.

JFC. So what are you blathering about then? You’re the one who started making up shit to argue that doggie never said. Then stared in on 2020 and “answer the question”! Then when confronted with federalist 68 and facts you’re running to “you want to argue to argue”. Take the L. Move on. And go fuck yourself. Idiot.

You can't even discuss what you were begging me to read. Nice work Lil Man.

You just look foolish now.

You now agree that eliminating the EC erodes representative government as doogie originally asserted. Nothing left to discus.

It’s also obvious you still didn’t read 68.

Move on dipshit

Sledog said:

Hondo always against America.

He didn’t even know what he was talking about. Then came to agree and didn’t even realize it. What a dumbshit. What an ignorant uneducated fuck. “Educate yourself” was his main argument here. Then was exposed as an ignorant dumbshit. “Link federalist 68 and I’ll read it” JFC. I bet he hasn’t read a single federalist papers. My bet is he doesn’t know what they are.

MikeDamone said:

Sledog said:

Hondo always against America.

He didn’t even know what he was talking about. Then came to agree and didn’t even realize it. What a dumbshit. What an ignorant uneducated fuck. “Educate yourself” was his main argument here. Then was exposed as an ignorant dumbshit. “Link federalist 68 and I’ll read it” JFC. I bet he hasn’t read @ single federalist papers. My bet is he doesn’t know what they are.

I only read what you wanted and posted a quote. That agrees with what I already argued.

Other than that, spot on.