Who believes U.S. Constitution is a great system?

DiogenesTheWiser

DiogenesTheWiser

Well-Known Member
It's failing us now. Congress should at least censure the el presidente (but really should impeach him for gross incompetence if for anything else). Congress holds checks against POTUS power, but aren't using it because they want Trump to rubber stamp their oppressively harsh agenda. And I think that's clear cut evidence that the U.S. Constitution is a big failure. The founding generation could not have forseen this, yeah right!
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
DiogenesTheWiser said:
It's failing us now. Congress should at least censure the el presidente (but really should impeach him for gross incompetence if for anything else). Congress holds checks against POTUS power, but aren't using it because they want Trump to rubber stamp their oppressively harsh agenda. And I think that's clear cut evidence that the U.S. Constitution is a big failure. The founding generation could not have forseen this, yeah right!
Click to expand...
Is it really the Constitution's fault or the Cucks that voted Republican/Trump?
 
MrRoboto

MrRoboto

Well-Known Member
DiogenesTheWiser said:
It's failing us now. Congress should at least censure the el presidente (but really should impeach him for gross incompetence if for anything else). Congress holds checks against POTUS power, but aren't using it because they want Trump to rubber stamp their oppressively harsh agenda. And I think that's clear cut evidence that the U.S. Constitution is a big failure. The founding generation could not have forseen this, yeah right!
Click to expand...
And your better idea is?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
By having the individuals tasked with being Electors casting the state electoral votes. They aren't obliged to cast their vote for the same nominee that the people of their state voted for
Click to expand...
i'd love to see the electors actually representative of populations (rather than having wyoming votes count 3x compared to a california vote) and split their electoral votes proportionately.

if we did that, the electoral vote would have been really close to the popular vote, with hillary winning 270-268-1 (a single lonely EV for evan mcmullin).

imagine the election night drama of the presidency coming down to who overperformed in idaho. it would give every candidate a good reason to travel everywhere too, not just the 7-9 swing states.
 
Jimdamick

Jimdamick

Well-Known Member
It's like the Bible, some good points, but by no means a perfect solution to humankind's problems.
That is why there are amendments that improve upon it, like freeing the black man with the13th amendment (free at last/lol), and giving women the right to vote with the 19th (still cheap to hire/lol), although some think that was a big mistake apparently, even today.
Personally, I want to see the 25th being used soon, whereas when a POTUS is deemed to be fucking insane, he can be removed from office.
Now is the time to dust that one off, and use it, but then Pence would be next, and then Ryan, so what the fuck are we left with?
A total bag of shit.
Jameson time (lol)
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Jimdamick said:
It's like the Bible, some good points, but by no means a perfect solution to humankind's problems.
That is why there are amendments that improve upon it, like freeing the black man with the13th amendment (free at last/lol), and giving women the right to vote with the 19th (still cheap to hire/lol), although some think that was a big mistake apparently, even today.
Personally, I want to see the 25th being used soon, whereas when a POTUS is deemed to be fucking insane, he can be removed from office.
Now is the time to dust that one off, and use it, but then Pence would be next, and then Ryan, so what the fuck are we left with?
A total bag of shit.
Jameson time (lol)
Click to expand...
My heart says "impeach and execute the prick"...my head says "let them fuck the Republican party up so badly it takes 15-20 years to recover".
 
DiogenesTheWiser

DiogenesTheWiser

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
How?
Click to expand...
Buck is correct. Many people fail to realize that the founding generation--those old men who showed up at the Philadelphia Convention in 1787--were elitists. They called regular fishermen, farmers, and trappers "the rabble" and that wasn't a nice name to call them.

They tended to think of the rabble as nothing but a bunch of semi-literate squirrels. The last thing the founders wanted was for the squirrels to have a say in politics. They wanted to give the squirrels a glimpse of having a say so, but structured the Constitution to greatly restrict the voice of the people.

To vote back then, acc. to the Constitution, one had to own property--either land or slaves. State legislatures elected Senators, not the people in the states. And the Electoral College was another buffer between the gentry politician running for office and the "rabble" who seemingly chose them.

The founders were adamant that the Constitution creates a national Republic, not a democracy. They loathed democracy because it was enfranchised low lifes. They called democracy "rule by the mob."
 
DiogenesTheWiser

DiogenesTheWiser

Well-Known Member
MrRoboto said:
And your better idea is?
Click to expand...
Kind of like the response above -- why would anyone want to live by the governmental structure crafted by a bunch of slaveholders and barons from the eighteenth century!

A better idea would be to create a new national system so we could settle issues like gun control, drug legalization, education, national defense, police brutality, and mass incarceration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top