Runboard.com
You're welcome.

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)


Page:  1  2  3  4 

 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 5504
Karma: 5 (+20/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


quote:

gopqed wrote:

john is promoting revisionist history.



I thought that was my job?
5/19/2017, 4:03 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3948
Karma: 2 (+14/-12)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


Exactly Gop, his opinioned professor professionals forgot the EC was intended to do as it does and just did, equal out level play City/Rural voting and to speed the then painfully slow election process up. Would have been nice to have a popular vote in 1787, just would have taken MONTHS to count, to validate, to verify and not have potential to have graft abuse so EC was established to set the letter of value for a region NOT FOR SLAVERY CONTROL. That is a ridiculous consideration for the EC establishment.
5/19/2017, 2:38 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
John1959 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 1417
Karma: 12 (+16/-4)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


quote:

gopqed wrote:

john is promoting revisionist history.



Please don't imply that I'm pushing some extremist views.

Consider this;

In 1787, the States agreed to count slaves as 3/5ths a person. In terms of elections, that meant nothing because slaves could not vote.

Slave states knew that their lower white voting population put them at a disadvantage to the more populated non-slave holding states.

So how could they include slaves in elections without giving them voting rights?

The Electoral College.



Several proposed methods for electing the executive were put forward in the Convention. Under the Virginia Plan, the President would be elected by the national legislature; according to the plan proposed by Elbridge Gerry, the president would be elected by the various state governors. Hamilton himself suggested that the president should serve for life (although he later dropped the idea).

A direct, popular election was favored by some delegates, but was ultimately rejected as "impractical."1 A major hindrance to a popular election was the issue of slavery, which had already been a point of contention in the apportionment of representatives in Congress. In the words of James Madison,

    "The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to the fewest objections."


In other words, because such a large portion of the population of the south was enslaved (up to 43% in South Carolina) and thus ineligible to vote, Southern States' impact on the presidential election would be drastically reduced.

When the convention first met, many delegates supported the system proposed by the Virginia Plan, that the President be elected by Congress. However, in September of 1787, the Committee of Eleven - formed to sort out some of the specifics of the new constitution, including the electoral process - approached the convention with a new proposal. Their system quickly won the delegates' approval, and was affirmed by the convention on September 6th.

[sign in to see URL]

---
“I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.” - NRA president Karl T. Frederick, 1938
5/19/2017, 4:21 pm Link to this post PM John1959 Blog
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3948
Karma: 2 (+14/-12)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


As determined by Historic records:

[sign in to see URL]
5/19/2017, 5:46 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
John1959 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 1417
Karma: 12 (+16/-4)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


It's amazing the extent to which some people will go in order to downplay slavery's role in American history.

The Founding Fathers had varying opinions on elections. It's quite possible - perhaps probable - that some of them had other reasons for agreeing to the electoral college.

But some had slaves in mind and certainly all of them knew how counting them as 3/5ths a person could influence elections.



Above all, some historians point to the critical role that slavery played in the formation of the system. Southern delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, most prominently James Madison of Virginia, were concerned that their constituents would be outnumbered by Northerners. The Three-Fifths Compromise, however, allowed states to count each slave as three-fifths of a person — enough, at the time, to ensure a Southern majority in presidential races.
[url][sign in to see URL]

---
“I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.” - NRA president Karl T. Frederick, 1938
5/20/2017, 1:25 am Link to this post PM John1959 Blog
 
Yobbo Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2008
Posts: 2274
Karma: 15 (+23/-8)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


Since so many of the founding fathers were contaminated by slavery and the determination to continue it, why are they beatified?
5/20/2017, 2:47 am Link to this post PM Yobbo
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
Global user

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 4557
Karma: 27 (+42/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


Why are so many neglected in any mention from countries that imported the slaves and made tons of money? Those who imported slaves were just as contaminated if not worse by those who captured and sent slaves to the areas they held, yet that is history forgotten by those in England, Spain, Holland, Portugal, France who captured Africans and sent them to their colonies in America and the Caribbean. The founding fathers were contaminated long before by Europeans. And why are they beautified, at the end of the day for what they left is actually brilliant, that is why.
5/20/2017, 4:07 am Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user (premium)

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 5504
Karma: 5 (+20/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


Slavery had nothing to do with it or else the electoral college would have ended with the Civil War. All rural states always want the electoral college, to prevent mob rule.
That is why landless white also originally could not vote.
5/20/2017, 4:58 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Yobbo Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2008
Posts: 2274
Karma: 15 (+23/-8)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


What makes the opinions of urban people so much less valid than those of rural ones?

The electoral college is a denial of democracy.
5/20/2017, 7:02 pm Link to this post PM Yobbo
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
Global user

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 4557
Karma: 27 (+42/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?


One of the anti-Federalist papers make that same claim, that is how long it has been an issue.
5/20/2017, 7:37 pm Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3  4 





You are not logged in (login)