Is Tony aware that if the 17th were repealed, you’d have nearly half the states (or more) in the country that would never elect a Republican Senator again because of permanent and obscenely Democrat majorities ? If the profoundly corrupt MA legislature elected Senators, Marcia (sic) Coakley would’ve beaten Scott Brown by a 90%-10% margin. Even in my state of TN, no Republican would’ve been elected to the Senate until this past year (since Reconstruction, 140 years).
So maybe the imbecile voters in these states should start considering voting for Republicans, if their grotesquely Rat legislatures would continually appoint airheads like Marcia Cokehead to the Senate? Not that the party of Miss Lindsey Grahamnesty, Juan McCain, Olympia Snowe, and Dede Scozzafava (not to mention morally bankrupt shark-jumper Newt Gingrich) is that much better than the Dems, anyhow, if you’re worried about the makeup of the U.S. Senate.
The point is, maybe working to change the state legislatures is a better idea than throwing out repeal entirely. That way, we wouldn’t have to worry so much about what kind of scum Massachusetts, Maryland, and New York would appoint to the U.S. Senate.
It’s breathtaking a conservative could still nurture this silly idea post-Scott Brown. I bet the brit Blakley loves the House of Lords too.
Maybe, if it happened in a vacuum. If the 17th were repealed and state legislatures appointed senators, you could go down and pound on the desk of the guy who voted to appoint the Rat senator that is screwing things up. It’s a lot easier to get rid of the local guy come election time too. And you can look him in the eye and tell him that.
With such a situation, you’d most assuredly see shifts occur at the local level. It would suddenly become much more important to control state legislatures and get more people directly involved in their local politics.