It’s not snobbery, fool. It’s called a Republic.
Harry, I hope your exercise equipment beats you up again for that comment.
The Constitution still baffles them.
I wonder how fast Reid will walk that landmine back
sounds like yet another total failure of the public schools system
The Electoral College was created to prevent a heavily populated state from always choosing who would be president. It allowed two or three less populated states to block them. Can you imagine NY,CA,IL, FL, etc to always pick the president? It’s the difference between a democracy and a republic. An example would be two wolves and a sheep deciding on what’s for dinner (democracy) but in a republic the sheep would have two votes and the wolves one each.
Reid had better get down on his knees every day and thank God for the Founding Fathers. Otherwise a retarded individual such as himself could never hold office.
There’s no need to debate the wisdom of the electoral college in this context because it has nothing to do with nominations. The founding fathers didn’t even envision the emergence of parties let alone nominating primaries or conventions so the question of whether they were snobs or not has nothing to do with whatever it is she is talking about.
Yeah, blame it on those old white slave owners.
can you know, if, like....you know...this woman...you know...like....string together a whole coherent sentence?
This is what passes for "political commentary" in 2016.
One could say the same thing about the Democrats nominating (Buying) Hillary Clinton. We’ve never had a candidate buy their nomination through paying off the Party HQ debt. Kind of like what Banana Republicans do
We are not homogeneous. We are a representative republic.
The states, if we didn’t have a two party system, would certainly be exerting their rightful power.
Senators never should have become elected. I would be all about repealing that disastrous amendment.
Holy carp she’s ugly. Capital punishment guilty. Dumb too!
Noting that state sovereignty-ignoring Senator Reid is another excellent example why the ill-conceived 17th Amendment (17A) should never have been ratified, please consider the following.
Senator Reid is wrongly rewriting Constitutional history concerning the Founding Fathers as evidenced by the following. Consider that most of the delegates to the Constitution Convention were wealthy. However, they put their money where their mouths were by committing themselves, and all other wealthy Americans, to uniquely paying the taxes needed to run the federal government. This is evidenced by the following excerpt from the writings of Thomas Jefferson.
“The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied [emphasis added]. … Our revenues liberated by the discharge of the public debt, and its surplus applied to canals, roads, schools, etc., the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings.” —Thomas Jefferson to Thaddeus Kosciusko, 1811.
Also consider that one of the few powers that the states have actually delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, to regulate an aspect of domestic policy is to regualte the U.S. Mail Service (1.8.7).
In other words, the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to establish most of the federal spending programs that we now have. Such programs have been wrongy established outside the framework of the Constitution.
More specifically, such programs have been established using 10th Amendment-protected state powers and associated state revenues which the corrupt feds have stolen from the states in the form of unconstitutional federal federal appropriations bills imo, bills which Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8 limited powers. This is evidenced by the following excerpt by state sovereignty-respecting justices.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Probably that all that post-17A ratification Senators like Reid have in mind with respect to rewriting constitutional history is for the corrupt Wahington cartel to continue to exersise stolen state powers and spend likewise stolen state revenues.
Remember in November !
When patriots elect Trump, Cruz, or whatever conservative they elect, they need to also elect a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to support the new president, but also protect the states from unconstitutional federal government overreach, putting a stop to unconstitutional, vote-winning federal social spending programs for example.
Also, consider that such a Congress would probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
The last of the signers of the Declaration Charles Carroll (from memory - I didn’t look up all 56) died 1832; the last of the signers of the Constitution appears to be James Madison died 1836. The first of the political conventions was 1832.
Now you could say that the conventions were a more open system than the “caucus” system that it replaced. On the other hand, 1824 brought with it 4 major candidates for President; of course the decision went to the House and the House served the purpose that the political convention would in later years.
The idiot thinks he’s brilliant, you couldnt clean thier toilets
