Are Electors still relevant?

[Rich2018]

For the same reason that Vermont and California each get two votes in the Senate.

Vermont and California do not get the same number of senators in order for a minority to boss a majority


The EC is an excuse for mob rule.

 

[Samwise]

Which government employees to you wish to see laid off ?

Just stop hiring anyone and attrition will solve the problem over time.

 

[Samwise]

Vermont and California do not get the same number of senators in order for a minority to boss a majority

Each state doesn't get a number of electors equal in number to its congressional delegation in order for a minority to boss a majority.

The EC is an excuse for mob rule.

I think the founders would disagree.

 

[Rich2018]

Just stop hiring anyone and attrition will solve the problem over time.

In all government departments ?

If you consider a government dept unnecessary, why tolerate it's existance at all ?

Each state doesn't get a number of electors equal in number to its congressional delegation in order for a minority to boss a majority.

Yet the founders were OK with a process that allowed exactlt that

Time to scrap the EC

I think the founders would disagree.

Because they like the idea of a minority bossing the majority


I think the founders would accept their constitution had a sell-by date and was just a temporary document

Thomas Jefferson agreed with the temporary nature the Constitution should have.

 

[jamesbyoung]

Vermont and California do not get the same number of senators in order for a minority to boss a majority. The EC is an excuse for mob rule.

When the NPV goes through, that excuse will not exist.

 

[Samwise]

In all government departments ?

It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

If you consider a government dept unnecessary, why tolerate it's existance at all ?

I don't think the other poster was talking about existence but rather the size.

Yet the founders were OK with a process that allowed exactlt that

Time to scrap the EC

Because they like the idea of a minority bossing the majority

I think the founders would accept their constitution had a sell-by date and was just a temporary document

Thomas Jefferson agreed with the temporary nature the Constitution should have.

Do you have a preliminary list of the 38 states you think would ratify an amendment eliminating the EC?

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Then why the need for amendments, why have we needed 27 if it was so well "thought out"

The Constitution should have had a "sell by" date in it

It needs a total re-write
Eve people like Thomas Jefferson said it was only every a temporary document



Absolutely not

We need public services that aim to provide for the people not with the aim of making a quick buck.

Sorry but there is no need to chuck one of the best planned governments in the trash because you cannot accept and handle defeat.

The private sector has proven over and over that it can do a better job for less money than the government. When I call the government I sit on hold for hours only to have them hang up on me at the end of the day. When I call the plumbing supply someone answers the phone by the second ring. There is no comparing the government to the private sector. Anything being done by the government can be done by the private sector cheaper, more efficiently, and a hell of lot faster. It takes the government days just to answer a phone call if you are lucky enough to even have someone answer the phone. I have tiled my bathroom while waiting for the government to answer the phone. It took days to get through to unemployment. I had a landline ringing on speakerphone from early in the morning until they hung up on me at 4:30 at the end of the day. These are the people I want working for me. Not a chance.

 

[Rich2018]

When the NPV goes through, that excuse will not exist.

We need to scrap the EC and elect presidents purely on popular vote.

 

[Samwise]

We need to scrap the EC and elect presidents purely on popular vote.

Do you have a preliminary list of the 38 state that you think will agree to a reduction in their political influence and ratify such an amendment?

 

[Rich2018]

It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

So your hiring freeze wouldn't affect all government departments ?

I don't think the other poster was talking about existence but rather the size.

So which government depatments are too big ?

All of them ?

What criteria would you use to determine their optimal size ?

Do you have a preliminary list of the 38 states you think would ratify an amendment eliminating the EC?

No, but if we could get 2/3 of both congressional houses, it would those states where a majority vote could be won in their respective state assemblies.

 

[jamesbyoung]

I agree that a majority PV should be the way, but I don't think an Amendment would get through.

The NPV will withstand SCOTUS scrutiny.

 

[Samwise]

So your hiring freeze wouldn't affect all government departments ?

As I said, it doesn't have to be all or nothing.

So which government depatments are too big ?

All of them ?

What criteria would you use to determine their optimal size ?

Why are you asking me about something I never said?

My point was that headcount could be lowered without layoff by thru attrition.

No, but if we could get 2/3 of both congressional houses, it would those states where a majority vote could be won in their respective state assemblies.

Right. Those 38 states that would support reducing their political influence. I'd be curious to know which particular 38 states would wish to do so.

 

[Rich2018]

Sorry but there is no need to chuck one of the best planned governments in the trash because you cannot accept and handle defeat.

Then do it because it eliminates mob rule and is not democratic

Do it because the US government is the worst planned governments in the developed world (name a single developed country with a worse planned government than the USA)

The private sector has proven over and over that it can do a better job for less money than the government.

When and where ?


Examples please

When I call the government I sit on hold for hours only to have them hang up on me at the end of the day....

Calling Comcast is sometimes like that

There is no comparing the government to the private sector. Anything being done by the government can be done by the private sector cheaper, more efficiently, and a hell of lot faster...

So no need to have the FAA, the FCC, Dept of Agriculture, DoJ, Dept of Labor, Veteran Affairs, Dept of Defense, Treasury, Environment, State Dept, FBI, CDC....etc

Should we let airlines decide amongt themselves who to run aviation, an FBI deciding priorities based on the profit and loss sheet, cable companies deciding what to do for themselves...


What exactly do you have in mind to turning over from the government to the private sector ?

 

[American]

Agreed... or at least modified so that the votes do not come in by State but instead by County or some other structured manner.

You got no dog in this fight.

 

[Rich2018]

As I said, it doesn't have to be all or nothing.

So your hiring freeze wouldn't affect all government departments ?

Why are you asking me about something I never said?

So do you think some government departments are too big ?

My point was that headcount could be lowered without layoff by thru attrition.

So what criteria would you use to determine their optimal size ?

Those 38 states that would support reducing their political influence. I'd be curious to know which particular 38 states would wish to do so.

Those with a Democratic majority in their respective state legislature.

 

[X Factor]

Vermont and California do not get the same number of senators in order for a minority to boss a majority


The EC is an excuse for mob rule.

Actually it prevents mob rule.

 

[Samwise]

So your hiring freeze wouldn't affect all government departments ?

It would not have to. It doesn't need to be all or nothing.

So do you think some government departments are too big ?

I would imagine that some are too big and some are too small.

So what criteria would you use to determine their optimal size ?

I'm not sure there is a one-size-fits-all optimum size.

Those with a Democratic majority in their respective state legislature.

Is a state giving up its political influence really a party issue?

 

[Rich2018]

Actually it prevents mob rule.

No it causes mob rule


In 2016 it allowed a minority to dictate who was to be president to the majority

That is the very definition of mob rule - a minority forcing their will on a majority


Eg: the Nazis, the Bolsheviks, the Taliban...

 

[Rich2018]

It would not have to. It doesn't need to be all or nothing.

So your hiring freeze wouldn't affect all government departments ?

Which depts would you spare ?

I would imagine that some are too big and some are too small.

So what criteria would you use to determine the optimal size for any given individual dept ?

Is a state giving up its political influence really a party issue?

Yes


A state controlled by the Democratic party would willingly scrap the EC to prevent the mob rule of a Republican minority dictating to a Democratic majority.

 

[Samwise]

So your hiring freeze wouldn't affect all government departments ?

Which depts would you spare ?

Haven't given it much consideration. It's not really on my radar. My point was that headcount can be achieved through attrition and not layoffs.

So what criteria would you use to determine the optimal size for any given individual dept ?

I'm sure it would require some sort of research study.

Yes

A state controlled by the Democratic party would willingly scrap the EC to prevent the mob rule of a Republican minority dictating to a Democratic majority.

So how many states is that?

 

[Rich2018]

Haven't given it much consideration. It's not really on my radar. My point was that headcount can be achieved through attrition and not layoffs.

Then you are wrong in that point

As you have no aim for your head count, assume that all employees have equal strengths/skills, and assume that retirement" happens evenly across departments or at a rate/proportion that your plan desires.

I'm sure it would require some sort of research study.

So you have absolutely no idea how this grand plan would/could work

So how many states is that?

Wait until Nov 4th.

 

[Bodi]

You got no dog in this fight.

But I do...

 

[Samwise]

Then you are wrong in that point

As you have no aim for your head count, assume that all employees have equal strengths/skills, and assume that retirement" happens evenly across departments or at a rate/proportion that your plan desires.

So you have absolutely no idea how this grand plan would/could work

Headcount can be reduced by attrition. Not quite sure why you this bit of common knowledge so odd.

Wait until Nov 4th.

So the amendment can't be passed until Nov 4th?

 

[Rich2018]

Headcount can be reduced by attrition. Not quite sure why you this bit of common knowledge so odd.

Of course it can be, but for reasons stated, you cannot build a plan on that....or expect those depts to function

Nor that it looks like you've even a semblance of one

So the amendment can't be passed until Nov 4th?

Jan 21st 2021 actually.

 

[Samwise]

Of course it can be, but for reasons stated, you cannot build a plan on that....or expect those depts to function

Nor that it looks like you've even a semblance of one

Nope. I never offered a plan. I was just pointing out that headcount can be reduced by attrition vs. layoffs.

Jan 21st 2021 actually.

And which 38 states will pass an amendment to reduce their political influence?