View Poll Results: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the states

Voters
75. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    31 41.33%
  • No

    41 54.67%
  • Not sure

    3 4.00%
Page 7 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 186

Thread: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the states

  1. #61
    Pragmatist
    AlabamaPaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 11:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,834

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    So you value geography over people? Interesting perspective.
    I value original intent over either, and that intent was to ensure States maintained an equal role in the federal government...
    I don't often change my signature, but this was just too over the top to let anyone forget with what this country is up against...
    Quote Originally Posted by James D Hill View Post
    I am for gay marriage because it ticks off Jesus freaks and social conservatives. Gays are also good voters because the vote for my side so I fight next to them.

  2. #62
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,299
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Quote Originally Posted by AlabamaPaul View Post
    I value original intent over either, and that intent was to ensure States maintained an equal role in the federal government...
    As long as each state has the same number of senators, that is maintained.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #63
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,892

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Which people? If a state has a few large cities that, when combined, make up a majority of their populaiton then the rest of the state has no say at all in the U.S. Senate. Even though most states are red the Democrats have a U.S. Senate majority. I can see why a very liberal person sees no problem with that.
    So what you want is for the minority population to elect the senate? Couldn't then the same be said for those liberal minority populations in the red states?
    I don't attack my constituents. Bob is my constituent now.
    This is the important stuff. We can’t get lost in discrimination. We can’t get lost in B.S. We can’t get lost tearing each other down. I want to make a point here that no matter what you look like, where you come from, how you worship, who you love, how you identify, and yeah, how you run, that if you have good public policy ideas, if you are well qualified for office, bring those ideas to the table, because this is your America, too. This is our commonwealth of Virginia, too.
    Danica Roem - The nation's first openly transgender person elected to serve in a U.S. state legislature.

  4. #64
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,299
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    well you have no show it by what you have said.
    Apparently we need a little history lesson since you seem confused. The method of selecting senators was changed 100 years ago this year. It was changed by amending the constitution, using the procedure the founding fathers set out. The allowed for an amendment process because they knew they where not perfect, and because they knew the times they would be a changin'. Now, how many of the founding fathers where alive to see the effects o9f direct elections of senators? Based on that, why would I feel bound by their opinions when I can look at the results myself and form my own opinion?

    I seriously think the founding fathers would have a desire to kick the ass of any one who suggested we should hold them as holy and ignore any evidence of better ways to do things. They where not that hidebound.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  5. #65
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,078

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the states?
    not only no, but **** no.

  6. #66
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the states?
    I say no.Plus I do not think it would really make a difference one way or the other if the states or the people choose their senators.The same quality of people would be chosen no matter what.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  7. #67
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Apparently we need a little history lesson since you seem confused. The method of selecting senators was changed 100 years ago this year. It was changed by amending the constitution, using the procedure the founding fathers set out. The allowed for an amendment process because they knew they where not perfect, and because they knew the times they would be a changin'. Now, how many of the founding fathers where alive to see the effects o9f direct elections of senators? Based on that, why would I feel bound by their opinions when I can look at the results myself and form my own opinion?

    I seriously think the founding fathers would have a desire to kick the ass of any one who suggested we should hold them as holy and ignore any evidence of better ways to do things. They where not that hidebound.

    well you seem to be running off from the op, and that is "should we repeal the 17th", ...and we should........the founders wanted no one, few, groups, of all of the people to have all direct power.

    do you believe that if the people have all the power, which is democracy ,they themselves cannot be corrupt and not use that power against their fellow citizens...because that is actually what democracy does, and the founders knew that, that is why they did not create such a form of government.

    the house is the representation of the people, and their interest, the senate the representation of the states, and their interest, since both have separate interest, no single entity has all the power, this helps to prevent tyranny, which comes when power is concentrated only in one, be that a person ,group, of all of the people.

    never will i understand why people of today think democracy is great, and they have no clue what it is, yet they act as thought they are wiser then the founders on forms of government.

    when your senator comes back to your state, ..does he visit the state legislature and ask their problems.......no!, he does not care about state interest, he cares about his own interest and, will the people keep electing him, and what can he do to get those on his side by promising them something on a ......national level.

    because of the 17th amendment our constitution this has made our government more centralized, and bound to corruption, because senator can be easily bought, by buying just him, .......before the 17th, any special interest /faction would have to buy influence of a whole state legislature to get the senator to vote there way.

    can you imagine how much harder it is to buy a senators vote before the 17th, since it is the state legislators is who directs the senator how to vote, the senator is not free to vote his own way ,he has to vote the way the state tells him to ------>so he votes in the states interest.

    CA has 80 people in its state legislature,...... so think of how hard it would be for exxon /mobil to get your senators who if the state had the power again, to control the senators vote. instead of buying two senators to get their vote, they would have to try to buy 80 people votes, and do this in every state, ....their lobbying affords, and time would be huge, as well and the billions they would have to spend. this is why the 17th needs to be gone, so we would not longer have a centralized place where lobbyist can go to buy votes, from out senators.

  8. #68
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Of course not. States don't need representation. People need representation.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  9. #69
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,299
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    well you seem to be running off from the op, and that is "should we repeal the 17th", ...and we should........the founders wanted no one, few, groups, of all of the people to have all direct power.

    do you believe that if the people have all the power, which is democracy ,they themselves cannot be corrupt and not use that power against their fellow citizens...because that is actually what democracy does, and the founders knew that, that is why they did not create such a form of government.

    the house is the representation of the people, and their interest, the senate the representation of the states, and their interest, since both have separate interest, no single entity has all the power, this helps to prevent tyranny, which comes when power is concentrated only in one, be that a person ,group, of all of the people.

    never will i understand why people of today think democracy is great, and they have no clue what it is, yet they act as thought they are wiser then the founders on forms of government.

    when your senator comes back to your state, ..does he visit the state legislature and ask their problems.......no!, he does not care about state interest, he cares about his own interest and, will the people keep electing him, and what can he do to get those on his side by promising them something on a ......national level.

    because of the 17th amendment our constitution this has made our government more centralized, and bound to corruption, because senator can be easily bought, by buying just him, .......before the 17th, any special interest /faction would have to buy influence of a whole state legislature to get the senator to vote there way.

    can you imagine how much harder it is to buy a senators vote before the 17th, since it is the state legislators is who directs the senator how to vote, the senator is not free to vote his own way ,he has to vote the way the state tells him to ------>so he votes in the states interest.

    CA has 80 people in its state legislature,...... so think of how hard it would be for exxon /mobil to get your senators who if the state had the power again, to control the senators vote. instead of buying two senators to get their vote, they would have to try to buy 80 people votes, and do this in every state, ....their lobbying affords, and time would be huge, as well and the billions they would have to spend. this is why the 17th needs to be gone, so we would not longer have a centralized place where lobbyist can go to buy votes, from out senators.
    I am aware of what the founders wanted. I am also aware that not everything the founders wanted is relevant today. The 17th was passed for a reason, and it was a good decision to do so.

    Furthermore, if an individual is for sale, it does not matter who places him in power, he is for sale. Trying to suggest that otherwise is silly.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  10. #70
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Should the choosing of Senators be taken from the people and given back to the st

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I am aware of what the founders wanted. I am also aware that not everything the founders wanted is relevant today. The 17th was passed for a reason, and it was a good decision to do so.

    Furthermore, if an individual is for sale, it does not matter who places him in power, he is for sale. Trying to suggest that otherwise is silly.

    the founders hated democracy be it direct or representative, all one has to do is read the founders, becuase they state their distaste for both kinds.........but people WILL NOT READ THEM.


    So by what your saying, you a big supporter of democracy, which the founders hated and wanted to void for our government, becuase democracy is very factious/special interest oriented, and serves, the rich and powerful ,corporations, and special interst group, which care nothing of the general welfare, ..but there own welfare.

    John Adams wrote in 1806: "I once thought our Constitution was quasi or mixed government, but they (Republicans) have now made it, to all intents and purposes, in virtue, in spirit, and in effect, a democracy. We are left without resources but in our prayers and tears, and have nothing that we can do or say, but the Lord have mercy on us."

    democracy is the most vile from of government--james madsion

    “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” -John Adams, 1814

    “The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the rights of mankind.” -Thomas Jefferson, 1790

    Democracy is indispensable to socialism.”- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

    “Democracy is the road to Socialism.”- Karl Marx

    A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.”

    “Between a republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.” -Chief Justice John Marshall

    Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

    John Adams: letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814

Page 7 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •