**** the Founding Fathers

[Fishking]

If they were so smart, how come they didn’t foresee where the US finds itself today?


Tired of hearing about the FF and what they meant........

Your statement is idiotic. No system can survive the failings of people. I will say that that the current system is great in that the way that it inhibits the most extreme pushes from either side from being implemented.

 

[AlphaOmega]

And pray tell what are you and your voting doing for this?

Well, lets start with this ?





So was Patrick Henry's grievances in the beginning(wink)

Well for starters...why should I do anything about legal immigration?

 

[Luther]

Well for starters...why should I do anything about legal immigration?

Well, for one, our greatest immigration study EVER conducted RECOMMENDED to reduce our immigration in 1/2 of what it is today


Look what the congress back in the mid 1990's poo pooed?
I'm not your enemy

 

[GreatNews2night]

If they were so smart, how come they didn’t foresee where the US finds itself today?


Tired of hearing about the FF and what they meant........

I'm not reading this entire thread, just responding to the OP, so maybe someone or multiple people have made this point already, but the problem does not reside with the Founding Fathers' wisdom (which was considerable, even uncanny, and which kept this great democratic republic functioning well for centuries in a phenomenal and historically unique display of prescience), but with the fact that the current GOP, cowardly becoming the Party of Trump, abdicated from the responsibility and the duty of doing what the Founding Fathers recommended, that is, providing appropriate checks and balances and curbing abuse of power by the executive, especially the kind that brings up foreign influence, by impeaching and removing the bastard.

If the GOP sycophants actually did what the Founding Fathers recommended, we wouldn't be in this mess.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Well, for one, our greatest immigration study EVER conducted RECOMMENDED to reduce our immigration in 1/2 of what it is today


Look what the congress back in the mid 1990's poo pooed?
I'm not your enemy

Who cares? Not me. I care abouy illegal immigration. I voted for the candidate who would do something about it. You didn't vote at all much less for a candidate who supports your ideology so what did you expect to happen....me voting for your principles? Good luck with that. I suggest you never change.

 

[Rexedgar]

Your statement is idiotic. No system can survive the failings of people. I will say that that the current system is great in that the way that it inhibits the most extreme pushes from either side from being implemented.

Back atcha on the idiotic statement.

 

[cmoneal71]

Agreed. I think it’s a civic duty for every American to vote. I do not support forcing people to vote but I certainly encourage them to do so. Besides the Presidential election, there are numerous other elections and bills to vote upon, so it’s good to show upon on Election Day.

I’ve gone the “Vote for the Lesser of Two Evils” route far too many times and refuse to do it anymore. In 2016 I voted for the Libertarian candidate because I couldn’t hold my nose long enough to vote for two corrupt liars. Yes, Johnson was an idiot but I knew he wouldn’t win.

My voting Libertarian was multi-fold: It supported the Libertarian party which, IMO, could grow into the true successor of conservative values as the Republicans have sold their souls for avarice and authoritarianism. It took away percentage points from the “Lesser of Two Evils”.

If, out of 100 voters, only 60 vote and they vote for one of the two candidates; then the votes are split between them percentage-wise. The 40 voters who didn’t vote don’t count. If, OTOH, 10 of of those non-voters voted for a Third Party candidate, meaning 70 total with 30 each for the main candidates and 10 for a third candidate, then the percentage is divided 3 ways. As in 2016, neither of the main candidates will have 50% or more of the vote. Even with the 3M votes, Hillary only got 48.2% of the vote. More people voted against her than for her. Same for Trump, of course. That’s a significant point neither candidate can refute.

I agree...Voting should NOT be mandatory but if people don't vote for candidate or some referendum or ballot measure, their complaints are worthless.

 

[Luther]

Who cares? Not me. I care abouy illegal immigration. I voted for the candidate who would do something about it. You didn't vote at all much less for a candidate who supports your ideology so what did you expect to happen....me voting for your principles? Good luck with that. I suggest you never change.

Who cares? Not me. I care abouy illegal immigration

Question for you?

Can Illegal immigrants vote "legally" or legal immigrates?

Illegal immigration is a "side show" compared to legal immigration

Guess who wants even more High number legal immigration?

You know who


Immigration: Trump says he wants more legal migrants in U.S.

Trump Administration announces additional 30,000 seasonal worker visas | fox43.com

 

[Luther]

I agree...Voting should NOT be mandatory but if people don't vote for candidate or some referendum or ballot measure, their complaints are worthless.

You know what's really worthless?

Apathetic(Lack of feeling) Americans that do vote

What kind of "lack of feeling" do you think I'm referring to?

"The tyranny of a prince in an oligarchy is not so dangerous to the public welfare as the apathy of a citizen in a democracy."

--Montesquieu, Spirit of the laws, 1748

 

[Fishking]

Back atcha on the idiotic statement.

I don't think you understand the term you used. Stating a reality isn't idiotic. Maybe the problem is that you cannot grasp reality. That might be your failing, among the many others.

 

[Luther]

Yeah, technically a write-in vote is "in vain" but it's sort of a "f**k you" to all the candidates on the ballot and at least you can say you voted for President. Writing in "Mickey Mouse" for President is in vain but you're saying you think Mickey Mouse would be a better President than those listed.

I agree with the others that if you don't vote/write-in for President or some other elected position, you don't get to complain. You have an opportunity to pick someone so do it.

but it's sort of a "f**k you" to all the candidates on the ballot and at least you can say you voted for President

(LOL) Yep, that works every time someone does that right?

 

[Luther]

I agree...Voting should NOT be mandatory but if people don't vote for candidate or some referendum or ballot measure, their complaints are worthless.

Nah...

We just haven't acted AMERICAN yet

Here are some Americans acting


7 Surprising Facts About the Boston Tea Party - HISTORY

 

[cmoneal71]

You know what's really worthless?

Apathetic(Lack of feeling) Americans that do vote

What kind of "lack of feeling" do you think I'm referring to?

Which is why I don't think voting should be mandatory. Still doesn't change that if you don't vote, you shouldn't get to complain.

 

[Luther]

Which is why I don't think voting should be mandatory. Still doesn't change that if you don't vote, you shouldn't get to complain.

Do you know what Americanism 101 is?

It is the "spirit" in what was our very American revolution(Who we are)

Could it be possible that if our very citizenry is truly broken then.. our very political process is broken as well?

 

[Rich2018]

I think we agree that this should be left to the experts. The problem is that even experts are now biased experts. You can find experts on both sides of any debate. The true path forward is to find experts who honestly care more about the idea of America than their opinion of America. The one thing the founders had going for them was honestly in terms of philosophy and the history of law. Yes, you had some who had a bias but in aggregate, they were so focused on doing something unique and good that many of them admitted their own prejudices and did what was right because it was good. Were there compromises? Yes. Were there intense philosophical debates about obscure issues that are not part of our public discourse today? Yes. If we could find men and women of that caliber today, I would trust them. But the constitution would not allow it. Any new convention is bound by the constitution and restrictions placed upon it by a small nation of 13 colonies in 1790. Today, most of the people live in a few states. Why should they cowtow to states with very few people? Is there something in the water of Wyoming that should give their opinions more credence then a person in New York or Texas? No. We are now so polarized that I would never accept this version of America to think beyond their own horizons. Sad but that is the state we are in today.

What issues do you think Rep and Democrats would be divided on ?

Obviously gun control. The 2nd amendment is the worst clause in the Constitution.

 

[Rich2018]

Same for Hillary: More people voted against her than for her.

She got more votes than Trump

Maybe we need a French style presidential election, with everyone but the top two running off against each other ?

today’s toxic environment, we’d more likely end up with 2-4 different countries than a single Constitution. The original Constitution required controversial compromises such as the 3/5’s compromise just to pass ratification of all 13 colonies.

That's not a compromise

As it is, I doubt our nation could ratify a single amendment much less an entire rewrite of the Constituiton....unless we broke up the US into different countries.

Then we tone the constitution down until we have one that a majority of people accept.
I really only see the right to bear arms as a stumbling block.

 

[gdgyva]

I'm not reading this entire thread, just responding to the OP, so maybe someone or multiple people have made this point already, but the problem does not reside with the Founding Fathers' wisdom (which was considerable, even uncanny, and which kept this great democratic republic functioning well for centuries in a phenomenal and historically unique display of prescience), but with the fact that the current GOP, cowardly becoming the Party of Trump, abdicated from the responsibility and the duty of doing what the Founding Fathers recommended, that is, providing appropriate checks and balances and curbing abuse of power by the executive, especially the kind that brings up foreign influence, by impeaching and removing the bastard.

If the GOP sycophants actually did what the Founding Fathers recommended, we wouldn't be in this mess.

so you, like others want to remove a sitting president because you dont LIKE him

wonderful that the standards of what it may take to impeach will be different from this point on....

go back and look at why Nixon was being impeached....or Clinton....

Clinton would have NEVER been impeached if he hadnt lied and perjured himself....and EVEN WITH THAT, it wasnt enough to remove him from office

Removing a sitting president should be a HUGE DEAL....and the vast majority of the country should WANT the same thing

that want the case here...not even close....hell there was barely a 50/50 split in most of the polls

you want to remove a sitting president, you better have 65-70% of the country behind you....

so maybe, just maybe it is time you guys come up with a GREAT candidate and a great platform...and let the country decide

 

[Rich2018]

so you, like others want to remove a sitting president because you dont LIKE him

We don't like him because:

1. He's a criminal

2. He's unfit for office

3. He abuses his power

4. He is causing massive damage to America's interests, credibility and reputation.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Question for you?

Can Illegal immigrants vote "legally" or legal immigrates?

Illegal immigration is a "side show" compared to legal immigration

Guess who wants even more High number legal immigration?

You know who


Immigration: Trump says he wants more legal migrants in U.S.

Trump Administration announces additional 30,000 seasonal worker visas | fox43.com

Only U.S. Citizens can vote legally. I wany more legal immigrants. There are many people who want to be Americans that are very smart and would benefit us. Trump agrees with me thats why I voted for him.

 

[Vadinho]

What issues do you think Rep and Democrats would be divided on ?

Obviously gun control. The 2nd amendment is the worst clause in the Constitution.

Great question. I would say democracy itself is the biggest difference between the two parties today. I am quite certain the left would do away with the EC and put some limits on the Senate. As for the House, the left would want some uniform method of creating districts across the nation to allow it to truly be the house of the people not the parties. The 2nd is an anachronism, you are right on that one. I would also guess money and corporate personhood would be in play. Both would argue about the right to vote and eligibility standards across the nation. In essence, the left would whittle away state power in favor of federal power to insure that a citizen shares the same basic rights anywhere and everywhere they live. I would also argue that freedom of and from religion would be addressed including taxing religious organizations if they engage in any political activities or if they do not give X amount away as a true charity. The 9th amendment should also be more prominent somehow, it is rarely used and understood. Lastly, limiting war powers has to be done.

 

[Divine_Wind]

She got more votes than Trump...

So? Are you saying more people didn't vote against Hillary than voted for her?

 

[GreatNews2night]

so you, like others want to remove a sitting president because you dont LIKE him

wonderful that the standards of what it may take to impeach will be different from this point on....

go back and look at why Nixon was being impeached....or Clinton....

Clinton would have NEVER been impeached if he hadnt lied and perjured himself....and EVEN WITH THAT, it wasnt enough to remove him from office

Removing a sitting president should be a HUGE DEAL....and the vast majority of the country should WANT the same thing

that want the case here...not even close....hell there was barely a 50/50 split in most of the polls

you want to remove a sitting president, you better have 65-70% of the country behind you....

so maybe, just maybe it is time you guys come up with a GREAT candidate and a great platform...and let the country decide

No, you're assuming things about me. I was actually contrary to impeaching Trump for months and years... although yes, I don't like him. It's only when he committed the obvious impeachment-grade offense of enrolling a foreign power's help (or trying to) to twist a domestic election in his own favor, that I became for impeachment, as this is absolutely what the Founding Fathers established as worthy of impeachment (see, through the emoluments clause and others, how they were extremely concerned about a US president owing favors to foreigners).

Now, what YOU are saying, is about someone liking or not liking the president. You think that a president can only be impeached if 65-70% of the country won't like him...

Me, I think it's black on white: the task is to gauge if he is guilty of an impeachment grade offense or not. If he is, regardless of his popularity, he should be impeached.

Bill Clinton was extremely liked, very popular. As a married man, he lied about a blow job given to him by a mistress... and the GOP thought that it was enough to impeach him. Hopefully the Senate was less silly. But the double standard is mind-boggling.

A married man lies about a BJ from a woman not his wife - OH MY GOD THE SKY IS FALLING IMPEACH THE BASTARD!!! CERTAINLY THAT'S WHAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS MEANT AS HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS!!!

A president tries to cheat for personal gain and re-election by soliciting favors from a foreign government. NOOOOO! That's not an impeachable offense, not even close!!!

Yeah, right.

 

[Cardinal]

If they were so smart, how come they didn’t foresee where the US finds itself today?


Tired of hearing about the FF and what they meant........

The founding fathers lived before the industrial revolution, flight, radio, nuclear technology, space exploration, the internet and Pink Floyd. They can be forgiven for missing a few possible scenarios.

 

[redrover]

If they were so smart, how come they didn’t foresee where the US finds itself today?


Tired of hearing about the FF and what they meant........

Then the founders recorded this catchy little tune.YouTube

 

[Rich2018]

So? Are you saying more people didn't vote against Hillary than voted for her?

No she still didn't get over 50%