Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government? https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/t1233 Runboard| Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government? en-us Thu, 28 Mar 2024 20:53:09 +0000 Thu, 28 Mar 2024 20:53:09 +0000 https://www.runboard.com/ rssfeeds_managingeditor@runboard.com (Runboard.com RSS feeds managing editor) rssfeeds_webmaster@runboard.com (Runboard.com RSS feeds webmaster) akBBS 60 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15428,from=rss#post15428https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15428,from=rss#post15428quote:katie5445 wrote: One of the anti-Federalist papers make that same claim, that is how long it has been an issue. Well, they got it right.nondisclosed_email@example.com (Yobbo)Sun, 21 May 2017 01:07:55 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15417,from=rss#post15417https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15417,from=rss#post15417One of the anti-Federalist papers make that same claim, that is how long it has been an issue.nondisclosed_email@example.com (katie5445)Sat, 20 May 2017 19:37:03 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15415,from=rss#post15415https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15415,from=rss#post15415What makes the opinions of urban people so much less valid than those of rural ones? The electoral college is a denial of democracy.nondisclosed_email@example.com (Yobbo)Sat, 20 May 2017 19:02:41 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15348,from=rss#post15348https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15348,from=rss#post15348Slavery 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.nondisclosed_email@example.com (Rigby5)Sat, 20 May 2017 04:58:20 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15343,from=rss#post15343https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15343,from=rss#post15343Why 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. nondisclosed_email@example.com (katie5445)Sat, 20 May 2017 04:07:28 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15341,from=rss#post15341https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15341,from=rss#post15341Since so many of the founding fathers were contaminated by slavery and the determination to continue it, why are they beatified?nondisclosed_email@example.com (Yobbo)Sat, 20 May 2017 02:47:12 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15335,from=rss#post15335https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15335,from=rss#post15335It'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. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/11/us/politics/the-electoral-college-is-hated-by-many-so-why-does-it-endure.html?_r=0nondisclosed_email@example.com (John1959)Sat, 20 May 2017 01:25:15 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15305,from=rss#post15305https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15305,from=rss#post15305As determined by Historic records: http://www.historycentral.com/elections/Electoralcollgewhy.htmlnondisclosed_email@example.com (cooter50)Fri, 19 May 2017 17:46:38 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15288,from=rss#post15288https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15288,from=rss#post15288quote: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. http://hamiltonprojectnu.wikidot.com/electoral-collegenondisclosed_email@example.com (John1959)Fri, 19 May 2017 16:21:15 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15283,from=rss#post15283https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15283,from=rss#post15283Exactly 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.nondisclosed_email@example.com (cooter50)Fri, 19 May 2017 14:38:01 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15267,from=rss#post15267https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15267,from=rss#post15267quote:gopqed wrote: john is promoting revisionist history. I thought that was my job?nondisclosed_email@example.com (Rigby5)Fri, 19 May 2017 04:03:31 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15266,from=rss#post15266https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15266,from=rss#post15266john is promoting revisionist history.nondisclosed_email@example.com (gopqed)Fri, 19 May 2017 03:24:31 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15263,from=rss#post15263https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15263,from=rss#post15263It would have been easy to protect slavery without going the route of the electoral college. Originally you had to be a property owner in order to vote. They could have set that large enough and include slaves as property, so that only plantation owners got to vote even. No, the electoral college is to protect small states from large states, rural areas from urban one, and to prevent mob rule.nondisclosed_email@example.com (Rigby5)Fri, 19 May 2017 01:30:49 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15262,from=rss#post15262https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15262,from=rss#post15262quote:cooter50 wrote: A professor's opinion in a class, nothing more than reading into situations and INTERPRETATION to fit a need by the Professor. The Electoral College was explicitly designed to protect slavery http://www.rawstory.com/2016/12/the-electoral-college-was-explicitly-designed-to-protect-slavery/ Five myths about the electoral college ... Remember what the country looked like in 1787: The important division was between states that relied on slavery and those that didn’t, not between large and small states. A direct election for president did not sit well with most delegates from the slave states, which had large populations but far fewer eligible voters. They gravitated toward the electoral college as a compromise because it was based on population. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-the-electoral-college/2012/11/02/2d45c526-1f85-11e2-afca-58c2f5789c5d_story.html?utm_term=.e8b0ecbfd22f The Electoral College Is an Instrument of White Supremacy—and Sexism http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/11/11/the_electoral_college_is_an_instrument_of_white_supremacy_and_sexism.html The story of the Electoral College is also one of slavery—an institution central to the founding of American democracy. The bulk of the new nation’s citizenry resided in cities like Philadelphia and Boston in the North, leaving the South sparsely populated by farmers, plantation owners, other landholders, and, of course, enslaved laborers. This disparity in the population distribution became a core element of the legislative branch, and in turn, the Electoral College. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/electoral-college-has-been-divisive-day-one-180961171/nondisclosed_email@example.com (John1959)Thu, 18 May 2017 21:15:10 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15257,from=rss#post15257https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15257,from=rss#post15257It does not matter if slaves could or could not vote, or is slaves are replaced with machines and tractors. The point is agricultural areas have fewer people, but are more important and valuable than the cities. So you can never switch to popular vote. You also see that with corporations being more important than just people in the "Citizen's United" ruling. There are also religious factions making babies as fast as they can, deliberately intended to abuse the concept of popular vote. popular vote is not inherent more supportive of a democratic republic. Watch "Idiocracy" and you will understand what I mean. nondisclosed_email@example.com (Rigby5)Thu, 18 May 2017 20:04:26 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15253,from=rss#post15253https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15253,from=rss#post15253A professor's opinion in a class, nothing more than reading into situations and INTERPRETATION to fit a need by the Professor.nondisclosed_email@example.com (cooter50)Thu, 18 May 2017 19:17:40 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15228,from=rss#post15228https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15228,from=rss#post15228 Standard civics-class accounts of the Electoral College rarely mention the real demon dooming direct national election in 1787 and 1803: slavery. At the Philadelphia convention, the visionary Pennsylvanian James Wilson proposed direct national election of the president. But the savvy Virginian James Madison responded that such a system would prove unacceptable to the South: “The right of suffrage was much more diffusive [i.e., extensive] in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.” In other words, in a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves (more than half a million in all) of course could not vote. But the Electoral College—a prototype of which Madison proposed in this same speech—instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count. Virginia emerged as the big winner—the California of the Founding era—with 12 out of a total of 91 electoral votes allocated by the Philadelphia Constitution, more than a quarter of the 46 needed to win an election in the first round. After the 1800 census, Wilson’s free state of Pennsylvania had 10% more free persons than Virginia, but got 20% fewer electoral votes. Perversely, the more slaves Virginia (or any other slave state) bought or bred, the more electoral votes it would receive. Were a slave state to free any blacks who then moved North, the state could actually lose electoral votes. If the system’s pro-slavery tilt was not overwhelmingly obvious when the Constitution was ratified, it quickly became so. For 32 of the Constitution’s first 36 years, a white slaveholding Virginian occupied the presidency. http://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/nondisclosed_email@example.com (John1959)Thu, 18 May 2017 15:26:04 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15225,from=rss#post15225https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15225,from=rss#post15225And vs a vs as to emplacement of rurally based execs over lording the cities. there is a balance even as most will not see it.nondisclosed_email@example.com (cooter50)Thu, 18 May 2017 12:20:34 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15208,from=rss#post15208https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15208,from=rss#post15208The point of the Electoral College is to prevent cities from over shadowing rural areas, because we depend on rural areas for our food survival.nondisclosed_email@example.com (Rigby5)Thu, 18 May 2017 01:06:54 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15204,from=rss#post15204https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15204,from=rss#post15204Has to be a overwhelming consensus or would be a waste of time and effort, as to the EC good luck seeing that removed or even altered. Especially to the liberals benefit.nondisclosed_email@example.com (cooter50)Wed, 17 May 2017 22:50:28 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15186,from=rss#post15186https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15186,from=rss#post15186Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government? Not so much, no. But to get rid of the out of date, rubber stamp, hidebound Electoral College, which failed to function as intended, the first time it actually needed, there is a plan. nondisclosed_email@example.com (Geezess)Wed, 17 May 2017 18:33:31 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15154,from=rss#post15154https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15154,from=rss#post15154quote:katie5445 wrote: quote:Rigby5 wrote: Maybe changing governments more often than the French change their underwear is a good thing? I guess that depends on if you are French of Italian? I'm going to assume you are joking, if not it is the English who do not change their underwear and the French have BO. Yes, I was just playing off what Gohawks wrote.nondisclosed_email@example.com (Rigby5)Wed, 17 May 2017 14:37:32 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15139,from=rss#post15139https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15139,from=rss#post15139quote:Rigby5 wrote: Maybe changing governments more often than the French change their underwear is a good thing? I guess that depends on if you are French of Italian?[/quote I'm going to assume you are joking, if not it is the English who do not change their underwear and the French have BO. nondisclosed_email@example.com (katie5445)Wed, 17 May 2017 06:24:52 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15137,from=rss#post15137https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15137,from=rss#post15137Hawk, do you not find fault in the disintegration of the US polity? I find it very disconcerting.nondisclosed_email@example.com (Yobbo)Wed, 17 May 2017 05:51:50 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15133,from=rss#post15133https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15133,from=rss#post15133Maybe changing governments more often than the French change their underwear is a good thing? I guess that depends on if you are French of Italian?nondisclosed_email@example.com (Rigby5)Wed, 17 May 2017 05:12:21 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15131,from=rss#post15131https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15131,from=rss#post15131quote:Yobbo wrote: Face it, your country's government gets ever more dysfunctional as time goes by. Actually one of my two countries (Italy) has had totally dysfuncfional government ever since I can remember. As my father always said - "We Italians change governments more often than the French change their underwear". So much for Yobbo's theory that a parlimentary form of government is the answer to all that ails America. Seriously, give us so me latter day Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Adams, and Washinton, and I will make any form of government work. Saddle me with the collection of arrogant cerebral midgets that currently occupies government, and nothing works. And Gawd protect us all if they are ever turned loose in a constitutional convention. I don't even want tol, envision the outcome. Hey, maybe being an Italian isn't so bad after all. Vive d'Italia. APJnondisclosed_email@example.com (GoHawk)Wed, 17 May 2017 04:28:04 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15126,from=rss#post15126https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15126,from=rss#post15126Face it, your country's government gets ever more dysfunctional as time goes by.nondisclosed_email@example.com (Yobbo)Wed, 17 May 2017 01:43:06 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15104,from=rss#post15104https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15104,from=rss#post15104The law is already very clear, and agencies like the BATF, DEA, TSA, Homeland Security, etc., are all totally and completely illegal. Even agencies like the FDA must only be advisory, and have no legal power. So there is no point in having another constitutional convention. The federal government has already totally ignored the Constitution anyway, and all it would do is give them an opportunity to make it even worse.nondisclosed_email@example.com (Rigby5)Tue, 16 May 2017 16:17:23 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15097,from=rss#post15097https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15097,from=rss#post15097It would be a disaster. There would be no limits on its scope and it would end up being a race to dismantle the constitutional limits on the federal government's authority.nondisclosed_email@example.com (gopqed)Tue, 16 May 2017 13:03:58 +0000 Re: Constitutional Convention to rein in the Government?https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15094,from=rss#post15094https://bthepoliticalgrilltwo.runboard.com/p15094,from=rss#post15094Getting more than a few to step forward to do so would be amazing. To get it to happen then get it into a mass agreed consensus would be a miracle.nondisclosed_email@example.com (cooter50)Tue, 16 May 2017 12:14:16 +0000