GET RID OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE! The Presidential election should be a national election, not an election of 50 individual states, plus DC, with the "winner" of the state getting all of the electoral votes. As we know, four times, the 'loser' of the election (that is, the person who did not receive the most votes) was elected President by grabbing the most electoral votes, including in 2000 and 2016. It is kind of fascinating that since 1990, the Republican candidate has won the popular vote exactly once-2004, but we have had 12 years of Republican presidents in that time. It is a stupid, archaic, racist, bigoted and, most of all, anti-democratic bit of stupidity. Perhaps, an easier solution than dumping the Electoral College in total would be to get rid of the "winner take all" in each state and go to proportional voting. Also, provide a franchise to all citizens (and include people in American Samoa and other places as citizens). Note, in Puerto Rico and Guam, the residents are US citizens, but cannot vote for President. The "territories" have no vote in Presidential Elections, as the Electoral College is limited (by the Constitution) to states (and then DC was added), as only those areas in the US that have Congressional Representation are allowed to have a voice in the Electoral College. So, PR and the territories have the ability to vote in the Primaries and send delegates to RNC and DNC to 'select' the candidates (in 2020, Tulsi Gabard "won" the America Samoa caucus, even though people in America Samoa are NOT US citizens), they don't actually have a say in the Presidential election.
Yep. Again would not have been my first choice, but if we have to have a "balanced ticket*," he is a solid pick. A decent governor, military background, from a very rural part of the country, etc., etc. I think the most effective candidate, both from a political and governing perspective would have been Governor Gretchen Whitmer. She is terrific. *Note, we don't have to have this, but it is conventional "wisdom" (er stupidity).
Turns out he is just five months older than VP Harris. Yes, he looks decades older. He claimed it was from being a teacher and supervising the school cafeteria. "Nobody does that and comes out of it with a full head of hair."
Or maybe Whitmer didn't survive the vetting process, or maybe the big money folks couldn't handle two women heading the ticket. She is a terrific governor.
Gov. Whitmer said early on that she didn't want to be considered for Vice President. She either bides her time to run for President in 2032 (or 2028 if Harris/Walz do not win) or becomes Commerce Secretary or another top post in the Cabinet.
Day laborers abused by off-duty CPD officers working as Home Depot security guards: lawsuit https://abc7chicago.com/post/day-la...curity-guards-brighton-park-lawsuit/15151130/
Nope, and it's a damned shame they didn't. I wonder how seriously they considered a black/Indian woman and a gay man. Or I wonder how seriously they considered a black/Indian woman ans a black man or a Hispanic man. Probably, not at all. That said, Harris and Walz make a formidable team. Not ideal, but formidable.
This is shocking and horrible, but the most shocking thing about it is that is not in the least but surprising.
Like I said, ban the street fests: City Street Festivals Are Underestimating Crowds By Tens of Thousands, Endangering Attendees https://blockclubchicago.org/2024/0...s-by-tens-of-thousands-endangering-attendees/
Interesting article. I like the database at the bottom! I am sure if I would want to attend this: Event Chicago For Moral Clarity Dates 08/18/24 - 08/20/24 Location 219 S DEARBORN ST (isn't that Federal Plaza?) Permit UNPAID $100.00 Alcohol? NO Attendance 500 So, the Moral Clarity folks have an event in six days and have NOT paid the fee?!? Also, how can one have "moral clarity" WITHOUT alcohol? Something doesn't sound right here. Sadly, I cannot find much about Chicago for Moral Clarity, other than it is/was run by a Chicago dermatologist named Dr. Pamela Scheinman. "If we cannot have MORAL Clarity, let's at least have FACIAL Clarity" shouts Dr. Scheinman, while scrubbing an acne-riddle teen's face with a microderm abrasive. (okay, that didn't happen, as far as I can tell)
lol, riot fest back at Douglass Park. This fall. When given the choice between the Chicago Park District, all that comes with Chicago politics, or Bridgeview, they couldn’t stick with Bridgeview for much more than a couple of months. https://blockclubchicago.org/2024/0...fall-after-ditching-plans-to-move-to-suburbs/
I know, man. I read the headline that they’re going back to Douglass Park and was like “why is this breaking news, they’re still in Bridgeview this year, right?”. lol nope. Pure WTF, no chaser.
FIX THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE!!! The intent remains key to our American experiment… The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Can’t find the other language I was recalling…but it included ‘temperament’ and ‘experience’…kinda important. The parties had been vetting candidates and fulfilling this intent, to the point the EC became a formality, but things changed in the Newt-ian political world…win at all cost…and the current RNC took that to the extreme with the ‘whatever the reality TV guy spews’ over having any documented platform and process. Don’t throw out a key piece of the founders structure…restore its intent! Yes I know there are arguments that undermine the EC’s role, but IMO they are all about the things that happen after this essential piece that IS broken. FIX IT!
I hope you are all safe and well protected from the ANARCHY and DeStRuCtiOn! of the protesters at the DNC. If you have not already, please take cover, shelter in place and protect yourselves and loved ones! It is all over Fox News! The are Fair and Balances, do it MUST be the case! SEE IT: Protests erupt, businesses board up outside the DNC in Chicago The Democratic National Convention starts Monday Chicago businesses boarding up, bracing for protests ahead of Democratic National Convention Illinois Gov JB Pritzker said around 150 Illinois National Guard members were on standby It is all over OAN, as well. Pro-Palestine Protesters Arrested Outside Of DNC, Nearby Businesses Require Extra Security The Blaze (it's still around?) This Week's DNC Convection Will Be Pure Anarchy The Conservative Review headline: Chaos in Chicago: This Week's DNC Convention will be PURE ANARCHY and, worse, The DNC Is Offering Free Abortions & Vasectomies. Really. | Ep 1053 No, not "really." The DNC has not part of the Planned Parenthood mobile clinic providing contraceptive and health services. (I deleted the links. Those f*ckers don't deserve it). I was recruited to be a Wisconsin delegate to the DNC. I went through the training in the Spring. Sadly, I had to turn it down, since this is the ONE week that I have to be on campus, as it is Professional Development week Wed-Friday. I am sure glad I did turn it down. Yesiree, Bob! I would surely have been killed in the VIOLENT protests as anarchy sweeps the City. Actually, I was in Chicago over the weekend and left yesterday. Everything seemed fine to me. O'Hare was even busier than usual (dropped my better half off at O'Hare, as she went to Poland on Sunday night), but nothing out of the ordinary.
DNC host Chicago, haunted by 1968 convention rioting, braces for bloodshed Chaos at 1968 DNC in Chicago scarred Democratic Party for decades I thought you’d like this one, too.
Why not "throw out a key piece of the founders structure"? We have done that many times. We did that by ending slavery. We did that by extending the vote to people of color, women and people between 18-21. We did that with the direct election of Senators. It is anti-democratic. It is elitist. It is archaic. It serves precisely no purpose anymore. Frankly, other than being anti-democratic, it never served a purpose. Just read the sentence you put in blue. Essentially, it is saying that the "founding fathers" did believe in the populace and was afraid of someone THEY do not approve of being elected president. It was giving the small group of elitist "electors" the right to overrule the will of the people. Worst of all, IT DOES NOT WORK. The Electoral College is the ONLY reason that the office of President will (fell) to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Donald J. Trump was the LEAST qualified person (umm, MAN) ever elected to the Presidency. He LOST the popular vote by over 3 million votes, but was elected solely because of the idiocy of the Electoral College. If there is to be a fix, there is a simple fix: Proportionate state voting. Split the electors along the popular vote and END the winner take all insanity of "battleground" states. If the vote is 50-50, then the Electors are split 50-50. If the vote is 60-40, then the Electors are split 60-40. The problem is that margins are so slim and the number of Electors is so small, that would not be possible. If a state is 49.45-48.82 with 10 Electors (the actual Wisconsin tally in 2020), how do you split that? 5-5 is not correct. 5.1 to 4.9 is not possible.
Yes, and the "haunting of 1968" is in the mainstream media, because of the horrific situation in Gaza. The MSM is trying to stir up controversy. They WANT the bloodshed as it makes for "good television" (note, it doesn't).
Sorry this is double posted, but I could not edit the first one (time limit). I wanted to make it a bit clearer and address the points raised directly. If a mod could delete the first post, I would appreciate it. "Founders structure"? What kind of talk is that? Hamilton and other "founders" wanted direct election of the President. The Electoral College was a compromise. We did that by ending slavery. We did that by extending the vote to people of color, women and people between 18-21. We did that with the direct election of Senators. By design, far be it that it was "Founders structure," the 'intent' of the Electoral College was: anti-democratic. elitist. archaic. gave small population states a disproportionate say in presidential elections. gave slave owning states a disproportionate say in presidential elections. It serves precisely no purpose anymore. Frankly, other than being anti-democratic, it never served a purpose. Just read the sentence you put in blue. Essentially, it is saying that the "founding fathers" did not believe in the populace and was afraid of someone THEY do not approve of being elected president. It was giving the small group of elitist "electors" the right to overrule the will of the people. Worst of all, IT DOES NOT WORK. Why not "throw out a key piece of the founders structure"? We have done that many times. We call it Constitutional Amendments. The Constitution has been amended 27 times, not to mention the many thousands of statutes over the past 240 years that have changed or thrown out "the founders structure." The Electoral College is the ONLY reason that the office of President (fell) to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Donald J. Trump was the LEAST qualified person (umm, MAN, per the thing you posted in blue) ever elected to the Presidency. Poorly educated (no advance degree, barely a college graduate), NO governmental experience, NO professional experience-other than being a real estate developer and tv host. Not to mention a wanna be fascist and self-proclaimed dictator in waiting. He LOST the popular vote by over 3 million votes, but was elected solely because of the idiocy of the Electoral College. If there is to be a fix, there is a simple fix: Proportionate state voting. Split the electors along the popular vote and END the winner take all and the insanity of "battleground" states. If the vote is 50-50, then the Electors are split 50-50. If the vote is 60-40, then the Electors are split 60-40. The problem is that margins are so slim and the number of Electors is so small, that would not be possible. If a state is 49.45-48.82 with 10 Electors (the actual Wisconsin tally in 2020), how do you split that? 5-5 is not correct. 5.1 to 4.9 Electors is not possible. The best we could do is to go by district, as Maine and Nebraska do. That would help, but would not be enough to avoid inequities. Why is that 'kinda important'? It is not important at all. Also, how does the Electoral College do that? Note, it didn't work in 1828 and sure as hell didn't work in 2016. This statement is so fundamentally wrong, that I am shocked you posted it. The Electoral College is NOT a formality and never has been. 1876-the winner of the Popular vote lost. Tilden one the majority and won by more 1%, but lost the EC 1888-the winner of the Popular vote lost. Cleveland won by .8%, but lost the EC. 2000-the winner of the Popular vote lost. The Supreme Court gave the election to George W Bush 2016-the winner of the Popular vote lost. Clinton won the popular vote by over 2% (48.2-46.1) and almost 3,000,000 votes (more votes than the vote totals in 11 states Trump won and WAY more votes than the margin of "victory" ) a, but Trump took the EC.