-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Should we eliminate the electoral college??
- Thread starter traderdan
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
I hope that true conservatives would fight tyranny and push for the Constitution.
All of this hull-a-baloo is reminiscent of the Bush v Gore election. After that, just like now, the democrats came completely unglued. This time we have the spector or riots and colleges shutting down to tend to the snow flakes' PTSD and whatnot. But the same hue and cry to rid ourselves of the EC was just as loud then. They'll get over it. Pretty soon Trump will be sworn in and they'll switch gears to wearing themselves out critiquing him and the republican congress for every perceived misstep.
Has anything conclusive been released though? and let me make clear I'm not proposing that there is no voter fraud, Trump claimed widespread voter fraud, in the millions, which is what I'm interested in.
Seven million people are registered to vote in multiple States.
11 million (and counting) illegal aliens... Not risking deportation is strong motivation to cast an illegal vote.
There are 1.8 million corpses that are registered to vote.
Did they all vote? How did they vote? That would be a very difficult (and illegal) audit to perform.
To satisfy our interests, consider multiplying the Indianapolis case by a bunch of other Cities and States, then factor some more for the States that permit illegals, felons. and the dead to cast ballots. That's probably the best we can do, short of the audit mentioned above.
11 million (and counting) illegal aliens... Not risking deportation is strong motivation to cast an illegal vote.
There are 1.8 million corpses that are registered to vote.
Did they all vote? How did they vote? That would be a very difficult (and illegal) audit to perform.
To satisfy our interests, consider multiplying the Indianapolis case by a bunch of other Cities and States, then factor some more for the States that permit illegals, felons. and the dead to cast ballots. That's probably the best we can do, short of the audit mentioned above.
There are several reasons to absolutely keep the Electoral College. The Founders were extremely, and rightly so, afraid of a democracy, and so, the Constitution is written in such a way that is supposed to protect the rights of the individual from a mob majority. The Electoral College is one part of this design. I do not adhere to the flawed notion that the Constitution is some "living document", I believe that it says what it means, and means what it says. It`s ridiculous to infer that the basic principles enshrined in the Constitution are antiquated, since the Constitution acknowledges and orders the defense of liberty, freedom, and the ability for one to pursue one`s own destiny. Only statist`s object to these ideals, and are then, natural enemies to freedom, and this American government. Too many people don`t grasp that we are NOT a democracy. Even many of our elected employees fail to understand this most basic premise.
City machines=voter fraud. It's been that way for a long time and I've heard jokes about it for over 50 years. Small cities to big ones, if there's an organized machine there will be vote "modification" of one sort of another. How much rises to the level of an investigation of the fraud by the local definition is hard to say. Illegals voting I had no doubts about since the day I was in the HR office of a customer's factory back in the 90s and they were questioning a hispanic man with three social security cards and two drivers licenses.
Personally I don't care about the recount, although it's pretty obvious she's not doing it because she thought she lost a close race. Who's paying her and why is the bigger question that big media is turning a blind eye too.
Always follow the money
Always follow the money
I have been paying very close attention. I am quite happy with the president-elect's cabinet choices, (the ones that he has made so far). What really, really concerns me is the feeling that I get from many, who feel that the ball game is over! I would recommend that YOU also remain highly suspicious of the president elect...and be aware that a real push from a groundswell of progressives is coming.
I would like the source for this information. I speak daily via social media with folks that will deny such figures...
Sources? you're in the wrong place buddy.
This thread is quickly becoming am anti-Trump screed.
I strongly reject the premise that we have to be watchful of what Trump will do.
- I am ever watchful of government in general.
- I have lived long enough to realize that men lie.
I will give a man who claims to love My America the benefit of the doubt, every time. I believe he is a uniter, unlike the present occupant of the WH.
If you are here to be negative in all that you post then I'll have nothing more to do with you. We don't need your negativity. You warn us of progressive backlash, while adding nothing positive yourself.
While he was not my first choice, I am now 100% for Trump, only because it is impossible to be 110% in.
First - good to see you back around here, my friend. I hope all is well for you.
While I am no fan of the folks that use the social safety net as a hammock - I don't believe that we should take away the right to vote. There are truly needy folks that can be taken care of. I personally would prefer to see those needs taken care of privately, as I suspect you would.
Anyone sufficiently interested in going off-site to refute the numbers I provided should also be able to use a search site to confirm them. The truth is out there. I find things more believable when I do the leg work myself.
The burden of proof is always on the person making the claim. It's a general rule of thumb when you make a potentially controversial claim that you post your source to be scrutinized.
It's the old 'democracy inevitably fails when folks realize they can grant themselves the treasury' trope, I think folks leech in a lot of different ways and agree that preventing one group from voting isn't a solution (not that I pretend to have a solution)
