 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
On the table, nevertheless, were resolutions of impeachment sponsored by Bush's principal congressional bete noire, Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, whose second presidential bid had been buried by the voters last spring. The resolutions met the same fate by being shunted to the committee for non-consideration.
Notice the propegation of the lie above.
"had been buried by the voters"
The vote has been rigged, will be rigged, and is rigged.
Voters do not decide the outcome of presidential elections.
The outcome of presidential elections are decided by some other power other than "the voters".
That is a design feature incorporated into The Constitution (even if you ignore the electronic voting "record").
What can be more defective than the clause concerning the elections? The control given to Congress over the time, place, and manner of holding elections, will totally destroy the end of suffrage. The elections may be held at one place, and the most inconvenient in the state; or they may be at remote distances from those who have a right of suffrage: hence nine out of ten must either not vote at all, or vote for strangers; for the most influential characters will be applied to, to know who are the most proper to be chosen.
I repeat, the control of Congress over the manner, &c., of electing, well warrants this idea. The natural consequence will be, that this democratic branch will possess none of the public confidence; the people will be prejudiced against representatives chosen in such an injudicious manner. The proceedings in the northern conclave will be hidden from the yeomanry of this country. We are told that the yeas and nays shall be taken, and entered on the journals. This, sir, will avail nothing: it may be locked up in their chests, and concealed forever from the people; for they are not to publish what parts they think require secrecy: they may think, and will think, the whole requires it.
http://www.wakeforest.edu/~zulick/340/henry.html
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_elec.html
Some proposals gave the power to the Congress, but this did not sit well with those who wanted to see true separation of the branches of the new government.
Today, the day of choosing the electors is set at the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, and the date the Electors meet is set at the first Monday following the second Wednesday in December - in 2000, these dates are November 7 and December 18. These dates are set in the US Code, at 3 USC 7.
In most states, the winner of the state election gets all of the state's electoral votes. In two states, Maine and Nebraska, however, the winner of the state only gets two votes, one representing each Senator. The other electoral votes are distributed according to the winner of each congressional district in the state.
That's the process. Electors are chosen by the states and the Electors elect the President and Vice-President.
But, of course, there is much more to it than that, when the inconvenience of details slip in. But that's another topic.
The election of 2000, as did several elections before it, called the wisdom of the Electoral College system into question. Will there be changes to this uniquely American institution? The answer to that question remains to be seen.
Wisdom of the Electoral College system?
I smell a rat; and I'm not the only one.