Eliminate the Electoral College

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
States rights are antidemocratic. No one ever sees anyone standing up for the states' rights to protect their citizens, only to screw them.

I call bull****. One need to only look at the marijuana initiatives in California, Euthanasia in Oregon over federal objections, and the battle over gay marriage to see what crock you're spewing.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Wraith
--"I think Wraith just gave a good example of where States stood up for the rights of their citizens."

Have I even posted in this thread before now? ^_^

That's what I was thinking. So, do you just like, do searches on your name or what?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I call bull****. One need to only look at the marijuana initiatives in California, Euthanasia in Oregon over federal objections, and the battle over gay marriage to see what crock you're spewing.

Whose upholding states rights to help gay marriage? And Repug and Democrat alike have attacked both the euthenasia and medical marijuana initiatives, so when I see someone stand up for them I'll agree. In any event, two counter examples do not reverse an historical trend.

[Wraith]

--"So, do you just like, do searches on your name or what?"

Not often. I just happened to be reading this one. This kind of thread seems to pop up every year. They're always amusing.

Wraith
"The Constitution admittedly has a few defects and blemishes, but it still seems a hell of a lot better than the system we have now."
- Robert Anton Wilson

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Whose upholding states rights to help gay marriage?

The whole issue wouldn't exist if it were up to the Federal Government or haven't you been paying attention.

And Repug and Democrat alike have attacked both the euthenasia and medical marijuana initiatives, so when I see someone stand up for them I'll agree.

Yes, it's to be expected that the Federal government would be hostile to State's Rights given its history on the matter. As for people standing up for them you might try looking at the people of said State.

In any event, two counter examples do not reverse an historical trend.

No one ever sees anyone standing up for the states' rights to protect their citizens, only to screw them. What's your opinion again Mr. Kerry?

[chequita guevara]

Okay, fine, you proved my hyperbole was hyperbole.

[DinoDoc]

It's always interesting see you argue for increased federal control when the federal government uses said control to squash initiatives from the "evil" states that you agree with.

[chequita guevara]

What can I say? States' rights is in general more oppressive than helpful. If I have to lose some good things to get rid of a lot of bad things, I can sacrifice.

[Jon Shafer]

I live in Colorado and I'm willing to give water to California, even if it makes my water costs go up.

Can we get rid of the EC now?

[DinoDoc]

No.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by PLATO


The Federal government has the ability to trump any State's attempt at segregation if they wanted to. State's rights is NOT about segregation. It is about giving equal protection for regional issues to the States. For example, The Colorado river could be totally dominated by the large population of southern California and the people of Colorado and Arizona left out in the cold if it wasn't for their respective State governments standing up for their rights.

I have some respect for the principle of states' rights, since, as you pointed out, there are positive uses for holding to the principle of states' rights.


But you also have to acknowledge the fact that historically, states' rights has often been used to repress minority groups and discriminate against them.


I'm kinda torn between respect for the positive potential of states' rights and its historical legacy of being used to beat down minority groups.

[GePap]

What the hell does all this small state crap have to do with electing a president?

HELLO PEOPLE! The president as the executive enforces the law- it is the LEGISLATURE that makes the law. Only in our current screwed up mentality is this basic fact forgotten. The SENATE is the greatest power that small states have, NOT the EC.

In fact, how the hell do small states gain in the current 2 party EC system? Does anyone visit Montana,the Dakotas, or any of the toher small states that are now solidly in one party? The only small state getting any attention is New Hampshire. Michigan, Ohio, Florida, Minnessota hardly count as "small States.

The last election saw a difference of 500,000 voters, You could get that in New York, OR in Nebraska. If the election of a president was purely based on the popular vote, the candidates would have top go everywhere (or at least those places they thought their party would be able to secure the most votes) to get votes. What republican would head to NYC? They would head to rural and suburban Upstate NY.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by GePap
What republican would head to NYC? They would head to rural and suburban Upstate NY.

Isn't Guilliani (**** spelling) a Republican?


If so, how did he ever became mayor of New York City?

[GePap]

Because he is for gun control, for gay rights, for abortion rights, and won because his opponent and the incumbent had precided over a huge spike in crime (highest number of recorded murders ever in the City) and racial tension riots.

of 59 elected positions in City Government, the republican party in NYC holds 5.

You do the math.

[MrFun]

ok, then