Election 2020

The rules: No spamming, no making a nuisance of yourself.

Moderators: chijohnaok, Kameolontti

Message
Author
User avatar
chijohnaok
Sergeant Major
Posts: 37447
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: West coast of the east coast
Contact:

Re: Election 2020

#1621 Post by chijohnaok » Fri Dec 20, 2019 8:18 am

jack t ripper wrote:Sadly, that is not a "policy".

That is the existing interpretation of the Constitution. Fortunately, the by far largest effect is in California, which hasn't voted Republican since Reagan. The electoral nightmare would be Texas.

I don’t have time to do a deep dive/research this right now but I think that you are correct.

How could this potentially be changed?

A) an attempted change in law (unlikely with a divided Congress right now) followed by challenges to such change in the courts. Even with a conservative leaning SCOTUS, a “favorable” SCOTUS decision would IMHO come across as “activist” meaning that it’s quite likely that even some of the conservative justices might not support it.

B) a challenge to the existing interpretation via a lawsuit and then that suit making its way through the courts to SCOTUS. the likely outcome being as I described in A)

C) a change via amendment to the US Constitution. Also very unlikely given that the members in Congress from left leaning/Democratic states would not support it AND the state legislatures from those states would also oppose it. Such an amendment would be characterized by some as being “anti-immigration” so there would be a lot of public angst/protests associated with such an amendment.
Given how difficult it is to amend the US Constitution (easier with widely supported ideas, difficult or near impossible with controversial ideas) a change via amendment would also seem stillborn.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links

Dinosaur
PFC
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2014 2:49 pm

Re: Election 2020

#1622 Post by Dinosaur » Fri Dec 20, 2019 8:42 am

I think Lava summed it up correctly ...
... America is lost, folks ...

Anthropoid
Sergeant Major
Posts: 16260
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Location: marching home to [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAzVYCs4BMY]Erica[/url]

Re: Election 2020

#1623 Post by Anthropoid » Fri Dec 20, 2019 8:44 am

DEE FEET IZM!

User avatar
chijohnaok
Sergeant Major
Posts: 37447
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Location: West coast of the east coast
Contact:

Re: Election 2020

#1624 Post by chijohnaok » Fri Dec 20, 2019 9:37 am

Anthropoid wrote:DEE FEET IZM!

I don’t think that all hopes is necessarily lost.

There is a D), although D) differs greatly from A, B, and C that I outlined above.

A,B, and C are more active approaches to change, i.e. you have to develop a plan and then put that plan into action, “pushing” those changes along.

D) however differs from the first three in that there is less that you can do to “push” it along. It is less organized.

The Democrats/leftists have been for decades pushing change in our society, some of it legislatively and much of it through activist courts. The pace of this has IMHO accelerated dramatically. A man (Barack Obama) who 10 years ago ran on a platform of “hope and change” and was ranked at the most leftists member of the US Senate, has in the last year been labeled by some on the left as being conservative/too conservative.

The left keeps pushing ever more radical ideas: gender fluidity, open borders, mass giveaways, open bathrooms, boys competing in girl’s sports, etc.

The day may (or hopefully will) come where the average American looks at these ideas that the left are pushing and says WTF????

The Average American will resist/rebel against some of these ideas, particularly the most radical ones and may start voting against those ideas and the people/political party pushing them.

D) is less controllable though and more up to chance.

What would be more sustaining about D) though is that it is IMHO more difficult in some ways to change people’s views than it is to merely change laws or find a favorable activist judge.

And that whiplash reaction that I describe in D) would be more long lasting than A, B or C.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links

Dinosaur
PFC
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2014 2:49 pm

Re: Election 2020

#1625 Post by Dinosaur » Fri Dec 20, 2019 9:48 am

Ok, so if I was reading you correct Chi_john ... you already really ruled out A, B and C ...

And restating "D" ... that sounds like "Wait until the people have had enuff and do something to fix it" ... and yes I think ultimately that will happen, but not in my lifetime. I could be wrong.

==

About 15 years ago, I gave up on the "hope" thing ... and wow, did that feel good ... it was like a huge boulder was lifted from my shoulders. I recommend it !!!

jack t ripper
Sergeant Major
Posts: 32674
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm

Re: Election 2020

#1626 Post by jack t ripper » Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:25 am

It's the Enumeration Clause.

The clause calls for an "actual count" of the population every ten years to determine apportionment of House seats (and Electoral College weighting).

In 1996, SCOTUS ruled UNANIMOUSLY that the original intent of the wording was to provide an accurate count of population by state to allow apportionment. They approved of the notion of using statistical methods to achieve this goal even though it might alter the raw physical count.

It is pretty damned obvious the purpose of the census was to allow apportionment of House seats among the states. They clearly meant to count even those who could not vote because that is where the embarrassing 3/5th business for slaves came from.

An "originalist" led SCOTUS is never going to overturn a 9-0 ruling that adheres to the original purpose.

It will NOT change unless there is a Constitutional Amendment.
Strong supporter of global warming as I have invested in speculative vineyard properties around Nome

Dinosaur
PFC
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2014 2:49 pm

Re: Election 2020

#1627 Post by Dinosaur » Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:51 am

So, going back to Lava's point ... "The House is lost" ... but perhaps for the moment ... the Senate is not lost. And as a result, the electoral college is less lost.

For those who forgot, the electoral college numbers for each state are defined as

Electoral College Delegate count for each state = Sum ( senators + representatives for that state)

Hence for small pop states like Wyoming, the electoral college count is 3 ... 2 senators and 1 rep. But this means the senate is highly representative of the small pop states vis a vis the large pop states where there are overwhelmingly more reps than senators.

It is this fact, that won the election for trumpf .. and this fact that holds the gangland formerly known as ooosah, from bouncing off the bottom of the abyss ... but how long will de muc rats allow this "relic" of the Constitution to impede them ?? Time will tell.

Anthropoid
Sergeant Major
Posts: 16260
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Location: marching home to [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAzVYCs4BMY]Erica[/url]

Re: Election 2020

#1628 Post by Anthropoid » Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:48 am

jack t ripper wrote:It's the Enumeration Clause.

The clause calls for an "actual count" of the population every ten years to determine apportionment of House seats (and Electoral College weighting).

In 1996, SCOTUS ruled UNANIMOUSLY that the original intent of the wording was to provide an accurate count of population by state to allow apportionment. They approved of the notion of using statistical methods to achieve this goal even though it might alter the raw physical count.

It is pretty damned obvious the purpose of the census was to allow apportionment of House seats among the states. They clearly meant to count even those who could not vote because that is where the embarrassing 3/5th business for slaves came from.

An "originalist" led SCOTUS is never going to overturn a 9-0 ruling that adheres to the original purpose.

It will NOT change unless there is a Constitutional Amendment.
Well, a system which was designed to STRENGTHEN slave states can hardly be held up today as a valid interpretation of "Constitutional!" :)

SCOTUS may have ruled what the original wordings intent was, but (i) SCOTUS rulings can be overturned by subsequent SCOTUS rulings and (ii) original intents, i.e., to support a system that facilitates slavery in some states, can also be deemed to be "no longer Constitutional" within the SPIRIT of the constitution. The SPIRIT of the constitution is "All persons are created equal," and slavery clearly was an internal contradiction from the beginning. This current system for apportioning is an anachronistic holdover which supports slavery!

Seems to me the whole idea of non-citizens being counted, or at least counted "in full" is HIGHLY dubious.

Non-citizens cannot vote. Why do they need "representation?" If non-citizens are given representation (which they presently ARE being given) then effectively what is happening is representation is being given to foreign nationals. IF enough foreign nationals are concentrated from one foreign nation in one state (Mexico maybe?) then what this amounts to is: giving Mexico (or at least its expatriate citizens in the U.S.) REPRESENTATION in the United States legislature!

That has WRONG written all over it! :P

User avatar
Lava
Sergeant
Posts: 2003
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 10:09 am
Location: On the beach

Re: Election 2020

#1629 Post by Lava » Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:18 pm

Dinosaur wrote:So, going back to Lava's point ... "The House is lost" ... but perhaps for the moment ... the Senate is not lost. And as a result, the electoral college is less lost.

For those who forgot, the electoral college numbers for each state are defined as

Electoral College Delegate count for each state = Sum ( senators + representatives for that state)

Hence for small pop states like Wyoming, the electoral college count is 3 ... 2 senators and 1 rep. But this means the senate is highly representative of the small pop states vis a vis the large pop states where there are overwhelmingly more reps than senators.

It is this fact, that won the election for trumpf .. and this fact that holds the gangland formerly known as ooosah, from bouncing off the bottom of the abyss ... but how long will de muc rats allow this "relic" of the Constitution to impede them ?? Time will tell.
That is an excellent summation of the situation.

And it will only get worse as demographic trends world-wide are for folks to move from the exterior to the coasts.

Ultimately... only the Senate stands between the people and total Democratic domination.

We're fucked.
"In this present crisis, Government is not the solution to our problem; Government is the problem." - Ronald Reagan

"Because in America, we don't worship Government; we worship God." - Donald Trump

Dinosaur
PFC
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2014 2:49 pm

Re: Election 2020

#1630 Post by Dinosaur » Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:56 pm

... We're fucked ...
+1

si vis pacem para bellum

Post Reply