If you can’t win by the rules, change the rules (or cheat, if you’re the Astros)
Well, this is a new one to create a Democrat mob rule nation https://t.co/gxARPZrXMp
— William Teach2 ??????? #refuseresist (@WTeach2) January 17, 2020
From the article
Harvard has released a radical proposal to fix America’s broken democracy.
We aren’t a democracy. Sigh. Anyhow, it’s really worse than you might think from the tweet
Researchers suggest Congress needs to pass legislation reducing the size of Washington, D.C. to just a few core federal buildings and declaring its 127 neighborhoods as states.
These new states would add enough votes for Congress to rewrite the Constitution in a way that ‘every vote counts equally’ by ratifying four amendments.
The plan entails equal representation in both the Senate and the House, replacing the Electoral College with a popular vote and modifying ‘the Constitution’s amendment process that would ensure future amendments are ratified by states representing most Americans.’
And that’s exactly why the Constitution was written in a certain way, and the amendment process in a certain way. To avoid mob rule. And this would essentially create mob rule.
The authors of the proposal suggest dividing D.C. in to states because it is the only area in the US that can do it legally and every subdivision ‘voted overwhelmingly for the Democratic party in the 2016 election.
And, according to the anonymous writers, ‘the Democratic caucus in Congress could be confident that new states created within the District would elect like-minded delegations to Congress.’
Well, good luck with this. Which, let’s be honest, most elected Democrats are not THAT dumb to try it, because things would not go well, including insurrection, revolt, and a civil war, at the worse. But, it’s nice to see where the minds of Progressives really are. This is an attempt to create one party Fascist rule.
But, wait, haven’t Democrats been whining about small population states having the same power as big states, that they are getting a say? How about a “state” with a couple hundred people? Oh, right, they are saving Democracy. My bad.
There are plenty more Hot-takes in the article. Check it out.
“But, wait, haven’t Democrats been whining about small population states having the same power as big states, that they are getting a say? How about a “state†with a couple hundred people?”
That’s DIFFERENT, H8er!
“I would rather be governed by the first 2000 people in the Manhattan phone book than the entire faculty of Harvard.†– William F Buckley
Supreme Court to hear ‘faithless elector’ case ahead of 2020 presidential election
SCENARIO that could happen. trump wins 272-276 electoral votes but loses the popular vote again.
8-10 faithless electors paid millions by leftist Democratic billionaires vote for the Dem Candidate.
Trump wins electoral college but loses the presidency to faithless electors who vote for the other fellah.
SCENARIO.that could happen. Bernie wins 272-276 electoral votes but loses the popular vote again.
Billionaires inercede Trump wins and the democrats are left holding the bag.
In 2016 4 electors voted against HRC and for someone else trying to convince others to vote for anyone but Trump denying him the White House and the win he won very convincingly in the Electoral college.
Unless and until the electoral college is abolished by constitutional means the republic is facing chaos if this were to happen.
the same holds true for the blue states trying to force 270 electoral college vote states to committ to voting for the popular vote winner.
That is in my opinion unconstitutonal but if the Dems can pack the supreme court one day in the future. Hell they can do what they want, including getting rid of fly over country because there is nothing out here that they want or need. It can all be found in The capital with the 13 districts providing them with grow crops and coal and fuel and food and things to keep their gigantic cities flourishing.