• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump will win... watch him win

I'm not slapping anyone in the face. People voted for Trump, just not the majority of people. Thus he isn't there by the Will of the People, which would assume popular vote. But rather because we have a system to balance popularism with the States.

California's FAILED Democratic Party controlled political base (who you must agree are absolute disgraces) should not decide our countries leadership.

Surely you must agree with on this?
 
California's FAILED Democratic Party controlled political base (who you must agree are absolute disgraces) should not decide our countries leadership.

Surely you must agree with on this?

Yes, we should listen to all of the racist former Confederate states that caused the deaths of 600,000 Americans instead. Brilliant logic.
 
So what is it that you're really standing for here. The right for everyone to have equal representation, or for the majority to just beat down on the other and tell them how things are going to be?
The Republic and its future. Majority rule isn't always just or right, it's why we've sought to balance it. I merely pointed out that without the majority support it cannot be said to be be the "Will of the People". But the founders knew well the pitfalls of pure popularism. Perchance they didn't foresee both majority parties being huge piles of shit, but they did their best to balance out the mandates and direction of the Government so that it is not always dominated by the Will of the People. State's Rights and the Rights and Liberties of the Individual matter as well.
 
How do you know the Founders built a system to counter "popularism". Where does it say that in the Constitution? Where does it say in the Constitution that each state must select the candidate that got the most votes in their state? Answer - nowhere.
Because they installed a system like the EC, and they built a system predicated upon the rights and liberties of the individuals. They wrote about this. Madison has writings warning about populist democracies.
 
Trump's NIECE grew up with the asshole. She's a trained psychologist. If she says he's crazy, then I believe her. A lot more than I believe you.
Then you're only marking yourself as a fool. Who will trust anyone so long as they fall in line with your own agenda.

The problem being is that she is only looking to sell a book and will say anything to get that money flowing. After all of this time of calling the man such things as "crazy and racist". I'd think that one of you would be able to actually supply evidence of that matter.

But here I am. Dealing with your insanity and your racism.
 
Because they installed a system like the EC, and they built a system predicated upon the rights and liberties of the individuals. They wrote about this. Madison has writings warning about populist democracies.

Yeah? Madison said each state must support who gets the most votes in their state? No, he did not.

The warnings about "populism" that you speak of was preventing poor white men and women from voting in large numbers. That is what Madison was speaking of, not the nonsense that you're talking about.
 
The Republic and its future. Majority rule isn't always just or right, it's why we've sought to balance it. I merely pointed out that without the majority support it cannot be said to be be the "Will of the People". But the founders knew well the pitfalls of pure popularism. Perchance they didn't foresee both majority parties being huge piles of shit, but they did their best to balance out the mandates and direction of the Government so that it is not always dominated by the Will of the People. State's Rights and the Rights and Liberties of the Individual matter as well.
I would have to agree with you. Sans the whole "piles of shit" aspect, but agree nonetheless.

Pour water into a bowl and it will flow where it can. It's just that our bowl has a rather large amount of odd formations to navigate, after all these years of constant use.
 
Yeah? Madison said each state must support who gets the most votes in their state? No, he did not.

The warnings about "populism" that you speak of was preventing poor white men and women from voting in large numbers. That is what Madison was speaking of, not the nonsense that you're talking about.
I mean, you can be upset about it all you want. But Majority doesn't always rule in the US, and the EC exists, so that alone shows that the Founders sought to balance out populist democracy with the rights of States and the Individual.
 
Then you're only marking yourself as a fool. Who will trust anyone so long as they fall in line with your own agenda.

The problem being is that she is only looking to sell a book and will say anything to get that money flowing. After all of this time of calling the man such things as "crazy and racist". I'd think that one of you would be able to actually supply evidence of that matter.

But here I am. Dealing with your insanity and your racism.

Who will trust anyone so long as they fall in line with your own agenda.

Look in the mirror, pal. 500 books stating that Trump is corrupt and a liar. FORMER EMPLOYEES stating that Trump is corrupt and a liar. HIS FORMER ****ING ATTORNEY stating that Trump is corrupt and a liar. Yet, YOU still believe Trump. I'm embarrassed for you, seriously. No self-respect, no dignity. Just a pitiful Trump prostitute.

I thought Trump "hired all of the best people". Why have all these people that used to work for Trump turned on him?
 
I mean, you can be upset about it all you want. But Majority doesn't always rule in the US, and the EC exists, so that alone shows that the Founders sought to balance out populist democracy with the rights of States and the Individual.

Wrong again. As I already explained to you. The main purpose of the EC was to protect the power of wealthy, landowning white men.
 
Wrong again. As I already explained to you. The main purpose of the EC was to protect the power of wealthy, landowning white men.
Wrong again, that was not the arguments put forth by the Founders for such a system, nor one that recognizes the rights and liberties of the Individual. It's just a convenient narrative for your propaganda is all. Very Trumpian.
 
Look in the mirror, pal. 500 books stating that Trump is corrupt and a liar. FORMER EMPLOYEES stating that Trump is corrupt and a liar. HIS FORMER ****ING ATTORNEY stating that Trump is corrupt and a liar. Yet, YOU still believe Trump. I'm embarrassed for you, seriously. No self-respect, no dignity. Just a pitiful Trump prostitute.

I thought Trump "hired all of the best people". Why have all these people that used to work for Trump turned on him?
Because bad blood does many things to people and if they had any proof to show for it, they'd have done so a long time ago. Which I don't think you've been paying attention here. But they have not.

So, for one last time. Do you actually have any evidence to show that he's either corrupt, insane, or racist?
 
You mean DEMOCRATS?

FACT: The DEMOCRATIC PARTY is the party of slavery and the KKK.

Used to be, yeah. Not anymore. What's your point?

Is Trump going to win Alabama this year because all the Democrats are going to vote for him instead of Repugs?
 
Because bad blood does many things to people and if they had any proof to show for it, they'd have done so a long time ago. Which I don't think you've been paying attention here. But they have not.

So, for one last time. Do you actually have any evidence to show that he's either corruption, insane, or racist?

Again, playing the sucker -- all these former associates of Trump are lying. Only Trump is telling the truth. I'm truly embarrassed for you, how you pathetically grovel for Trump. My sympathies.

I thought Trump "hired the best people". What happened??

Do you have any actual evidence that you are not a Trump prostitute? Because the circumstantial evidence is pretty overwhelming.
 
Last edited:
Wrong again, that was not the arguments put forth by the Founders for such a system, nor one that recognizes the rights and liberties of the Individual. It's just a convenient narrative for your propaganda is all. Very Trumpian.

Yet you can't provide a shred of evidence that the Constitution or Madison supports your stupid interpretation of the EC. Nothing. Zilch. Except wishful thinking on your part.
 
What is your evidence here? Ivanka and other great chidden (and now grandchildren) have also grew up under our president, and I don't see them writing pathetic lies to gain a quick buck.

They don't want to be put through hell, like his niece has gone through. Because they know Trump would do everything he could to ruin them if they ever turned against him.
 
Wrong again, that was not the arguments put forth by the Founders for such a system, nor one that recognizes the rights and liberties of the Individual. It's just a convenient narrative for your propaganda is all. Very Trumpian.
I think everyone can agree that Kerry's argument is more, or less. Going to be based on this "it was for the whites" prospect.
Again, playing the sucker -- all these former associates of Trump are lying. Only Trump is telling the truth. I'm truly embarrassed for you, how you pathetically grovel for Trump. My sympathies.

I thought Trump "hired the best people". What happened??

Do you have any actual evidence that you are not a Trump prostitute? Because the circumstantial evidence is pretty overwhelming.
And once again, you've devolved into doing nothing more than spewing bile and now. You've shown that you can't even produce enough of a spine to prove your own convictions.

So you've been caught behaving in this manner on multiple post now. I guess that means you're completely fine with not being recognized as a legitimate source of discussion.
 
Yet you can't provide a shred of evidence that the Constitution or Madison supports your stupid interpretation of the EC. Nothing. Zilch. Except wishful thinking on your part.
Hamilton is more than just a musical, perchance Federalist Papers 68 will help.
 
Back
Top Bottom