Again if you don't have a base level of freedom to self govern there will be no union.
General Senate Judiciary Committee Report on Jan 6th
- Thread starter Wintermute
- Start date
Or the minority if they happen to live in the correct combination of locations.
Majority of electoral votes is still a majority.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand your reply. You say "they may have been minority in that area, but not those states." What are you referring to here? The whites in Zimbabwe and South Africa were absolutely minorities as were the Sunni in Iraq or the Tigrayans in Ethiopia. The Nazi party in Germany was also a small minority in the political sphere until they and their allies murdered many of their political rivals, allied with various nominally centrist groups to prosecute or execute many more and then won a slim majority that they built on through engineering or taking advantage of crises until they became the most popular party in Germany. The Gang of Four was a small faction within the Chinese communist party grappling for power within China following Mao's death after they'd already led a reign of terror that saw many of their political enemies beaten, imprisoned or executed. Eventually they were outmaneuvered and taken down once people snapped out of their fear. Similarly, the HUAC and the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security were small minorities in congress led by rogue demagogues who forced witch hunts before they were finally corralled by a the majority standing up and saying this is madness. In the Jim Crow south there was no such condemnation of minority murder and rule until almost half a century later when a mass movement that was also deeply unpopular in the US rose up to combat it.
The pareto principle describes a small group of people (around 20%) usually leading an activity or movement toward something and 80% being "free riders" who go along letting that 20% do the work. This is not the same as minority domination of majorities or seizure of influence to take power.
Also, this notion that "no other place has been as egalitarian and prosperous" to minority groups is a crazy drink of the American exceptionalism kool aid. There are plenty of foreigners here on this forum who can tell you straight up what a joke that is.
The same constitution also empowers the federal government to dictate tax policy and laws for each state.
Im replying to your certain minorities in areas of those states. Whites were not minorities in those states. Also yes in South Africa whites were a minority but they not when counted in the greater context of the United Kingdom who was propping them up and put them in power. Nazi's may have been a minority when they started. Of course they did nothing starts big. But they were overwhelming elected into power and then supported by the majority of Germany during their time of power.
Enumerated and limited powers. Read any of the federalist papers or anything written by the founding fathers and the behemoth we see today as our federal government far exceeds what was originally intended.
It didn't have the power to tax til 1913.
When would a majority of electoral vote not be a majority? Are you saying Trump did win?!?!?Not always
Edit: GWs first win and Trumps one win were both examples of a president being elected by a minority
I figured you'd dodge a yes or no question and throw out a non sequitur
are you high?
Would you dismiss this so easily if it had occurred the same exact way, only it was Hillary?
this is your question. I directly responded to your question.
The answer is yes our society responds the same exact way for multiple scandals including abuse of our federal agencies to undermine an election by moving on as it's no big deal.
Minority of popular vote. Not of the electoral college.
Your direct response to my yes or no question was to ask a question.
And then you answered a question you weren't asked.
?
I think that's a fair position. But that's a far cry from the "Let's get a bunch of hearsay witnesses so we can punish our political enemies." which is what this has been.
Apologies. I answered your question for a broad audience because we have literally seen it play out instead of just for myself.
Here's my direct answer. Yes. I and many other people have moved past it and easier than we probably should have.
I've been getting a ton of information from it, and have no reason to doubt these testimonies.
What it all leads to is a different story, but the point here is to send a message: if it happens, there will be a fact finding process and punishments to inhibit future political riots.
It sounded like Trump was well pleased with those events, as opposed to being horrified.
If what "happens"?
A riot at the capital for the pleasure of a power mad president.
The embarrassment of it happening, and the president that seemingly wanted it to go on, the pompous ass who didn't even bother himself to address the Nation.
You knew that's what I meant, so I'm biting your verbal hook.
Enumerated powers means specific powers delegated to Congress, it doesn't mean there is a set number of powers that the federal government and they can't go past that limit. It refers to the powers invested in Congress by Article 1, specifically section 8, which has an important clause you may have heard of, sometimes called the elastic clause, which says:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18:
[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
If you'd like to go round and round on the Federalist papers or other texts by the founders, we can. I think you'll find they had far grander visions than you imagine. But even if they didn't, who cares? It's not their country anymore, it's the people's.
Again, I ask the simple yes or no question to those dismissing this as only political theater: would you be similarly dismissive had all the same circumstances occurred under a Hillary administration?
I think the answer is no. I think the answers are different and there's a fair amount of hypocrisy about this.
I think the answer is no. I think the answers are different and there's a fair amount of hypocrisy about this.
You don't ask a question and then provide the answer.
That isn't asking a question.
Yes. I also didn't think Hillary was ever going to be locked up.
For a little perspective. I think Donald Trump should be in jail, just not for reasons associated to this dog and pony show.