It's time for changes..... lots of them.

POSTED BY: 6ixStringJack
UPDATED: Tuesday, September 9, 2025 15:58
VIEWED: 6785
PAGE 4 of 9

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

It's not just that he's wrong so often, it's that he's so often SPECTACULARLY wrong, and then remains steadfast in his resolve that he's absolutely right, and we're all just too stupid to "get it".

---

He didn't say there was "no right to vote" he said there was no right to vote for President.

He is technically correct. We vote for Electors and THEY vote for the President. None of this is official until the electors make their official selection and they can choose anybody.

I note for the letter the stupid lady that gave Gore her electoral vote in 1992.

Edited to add: When I say they can "choose anybody" that is both right and wrong...the issue has never really been decided. They can "choose anybody" but in order to become an Elector they enter into a binding agreement with the Party, candidate, or campaign (depending on how they've got it organized, Obama, for example, did his stuff seperate and distinct from the Party). What does that agreement mean? It means they can be sued for breach of contract. Remedies can include being replaced, being forced to do as promised, or paying "damages". Until a court case comes about on this subject, I don't see this issue being resolved. I think the key, if any of you happen to be wavering electors, is don't advertise what your going to do. Just show up, shout "Sarah Palin!" and run for the door.

H

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

He said something right, then he went on to say something wrong, and something almost-right and something sort-of wrong:

but there is NO Constitutal right for anyone to vote for Presdient (true, you vote for electors). All the 24th Amendment does is state that , if you DO allow citizens to vote (wrong, every citizen of age has the right to vote, it's not up to the states to decide who does and who doesn't), there can't be any discrimination (almost-right, as it stands without the limitation he imposes next), or poll tax (sort-of wrong - any discrimination is forbidden, not just a poll tax).

But his main point - that states can decide who 'gets' to vote and who doesn't - is flat out wrong. As usual.
***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

The BEST change to expect????

We won't have an loose cannon blowing holes in the USA like we've had for the last eight years! (Yeah, I have low expectations.)

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
I'm sorry Rue, but there is NO Constitutal right for anyone to vote for Presdient.

---

15th
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

19th
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

24th
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

26th
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

It's not just that he's wrong so often, it's that he's so often SPECTACULARLY wrong, and then remains steadfast in his resolve that he's absolutely right, and we're all just too stupid to "get it".

This is right up there with the 95% of "them" who pay no taxes whatsoever.

Hey, I've got an idea: Why don't we take those 95% of them who pay no taxes, and do away with their right to vote? Y'know, since there IS no "right" to vote anyway...

Mike

---

Nothing there that says anything about a RIGHT to vote for the President of the United States.

Sorry, I'm right, you're wrong. Again.



It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

But his main point - that states can decide who 'gets' to vote and who doesn't - is flat out wrong. As usual.
***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

No, you're wrong, as usual.

Quote:

---

Almost everyone in America, thanks to the presidential election mess of 2000, knows that the Constitution provides that the president will be selected by an Electoral College, not by direct popular vote. Only 538 persons, representing the slates of electors chosen by voters in the fifty states and the District of Columbia, actually vote directly for president. The person receiving a majority of the votes of electors becomes the president. In the event that no candidate receives a majority of electoral votes, the decision falls, under the 12th Amendment, to the House of Representatives.The mode of the selection of the president was one of the most difficult and contentious issues in the 1787 Convention. Some delegates urged that the president be selected by the legislature. Other delegates, favoring direct election, argued that selection by the legislature would mean--at least if presidents could serve more than one term--that the president would be continually trying to please the legislators and would not be truly independent. Delegates opposed to direct election expressed the concern that presidents would always come from more populous states and wondered whether the public would have the knowledge of various candidates necessary to make a wise selection. The final decision of the delegates, to have electors chosen by the various state legislatures elect the president, was the result of a compromise worked out by a committee comprised of one delegate from each of the states and presented to the Convention on September 4, 1787.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/electoralcoll.
htm




It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME