SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Journal by DeathMonkey
Good news everybody!
Hillary Clinton will be an Electoral College Elector for NY
Aren't you glad to know that your votes don't actually count and that Hillary Clinton is one of mere 538 people in the United States whose vote actually does count?
Hillary Clinton, Electoral College Elector
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 79 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Now KEN and BARBIE are PERMANENTLY ADDICTED to MIND-ALTERING DRUGS ...
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday October 29 2020, @06:30AM (23 children)
Elect an effective congress, and reduce the presidency to a strictly ceremonial role.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @01:45PM (14 children)
Doing that would reduce the separation of powers built into the constitution.
The unintended consequences of making congress the only one responsible for creating and passing new laws could be by far bigger and more damaging than the electoral college is argued to be. At least now congress does not get everything they want without push-back, nor does the president get everything they want without push-back.
Plus converting the presidency into a ceremonial role is similar to swatting a fly with a bazooka when the discussion was around replacing the electoral college with something else. The manner of electing the office being odd does not make the office itself invalid.
(Score: 1, Troll) by c0lo on Thursday October 29 2020, @01:54PM (3 children)
False. It will make the prime minister more powerful than the president.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:28PM
You're thinking about the wrong system...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2020, @12:49AM (1 child)
The US is not parliamentary. We have no "prime minister". And the russian troll F said nothing about replacing the president with a prime minister.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday October 30 2020, @01:56AM
This is why it's a Good Idea™ (grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:32PM (4 children)
You should examine the War Powers act(s). The separation of powers has already been severely damaged, with far too much power being held by the President. I would love to see the War Powers bullshit challenged, and sent to the Supreme Court. An originalist judge would strike down those powers quickly.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:58PM (3 children)
I agree with you that the President has too much power to start a war without Congress.
However, you are completely wrong about the War Powers Act.
War Powers Act [history.com]
The constitution says the President directs the military and the Congress declares war. It was one of those rules that was never written down that war must be declared if you want to direct the military somewhere. Truman was the first President to say nah to that and deployed troops to Korea without approval. Then of course the same shit happened for Vietnam.
The War Powers Act LIMITS the ability for the President to send troops without approval. It was passed because Vietnam was such a shitshow they didn't want it to happen again. It says things like if there's an emergency you can deploy somewhere but it needs to be approved by Congress within a certain timeframe.
There are definitely criticism about how effective it is.
But, strengthening it is the answer, not eliminating it.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:56PM (2 children)
Not very, eh? It couldn't keep us out of Afghanistan. And besides, now the government hires out to private contractors when they want to meddle.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @06:18PM (1 child)
The law says Congress needs to approve and they did. [wikipedia.org] So the law was effective we just need a better Congress.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday October 29 2020, @11:57PM
People have to want one.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:51PM (4 children)
The electoral college is fine. It's the electorate that's fucked up. I mean, look at who they put on the ballot. The electoral college didn't do that...
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:13PM (1 child)
There were like twenty five people on my ballot. You couldn't find a single one you liked?
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:26PM
I have already stated that I have given up on all my principles to move Trump and all of Trumpism out. I paid the ransom to the Party. Sure, I can stand alone, but for what?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2020, @12:57AM (1 child)
Yeah, just imagine how deranged the dems must have been to offer up Biden. The Biden who thinks he's running against George Bush...
Joe Biden Thinks He Is Running Against George W. Bush [conservativejournalreview.com]
One possibility is the dem elites who actually decide who they want to be the candidate, then go through the motions of a primary to fool the public, picked Biden because they knew they were not going to defeat Trump, so might as well offer up someone who it won't matter to have lose.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 31 2020, @04:40AM
Trump is still running against Hillary.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday October 29 2020, @01:53PM (4 children)
Meh, strict ceremonial is a bit wasteful - why do you need one?
Arbitration (e.g. like a dungeon master) and the limited power to dissolve an unruly parliament (e.g. one that cannot reach agreement in budget approvals or the like, blocking the executive) then call fresh elections would make sense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:04PM (1 child)
I think Americans just need to learn how their fucking government works and realize that the President doesn't, and shouldn't, have all these powers people expect him to wield.
He's just supposed to run the various branches according to the rules the Legislature writes.
It's the Americans that try to turn him into a king....
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:35PM
That is partly right. However, the executive branch was indeed given constitutional powers and authorities. The president was never intended to be a mere puppet, manipulated by congress. On the other hand, see my post above regarding war powers. No president should have the power to unilaterally invade somewhere.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:45PM
C'mon, the Brits have a queen. Let's dress our guys up too. More colors!
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:34PM
I don't want to have to vote three times a year because politicians can't get along. You can put that back where you found it.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DannyB on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:09PM (2 children)
I can't remember which TEDtalk explained this.
The founding persons* did not want to have a king. They struggled with what kind of title to give to the executive branch. What title could they choose that would not convey much sense of power. Because they DON'T WANT a king. They just got away from having a king and fought a war and stopped drinking tea.
Finally they determined the correct title: President. A person to "preside" over the executive branch, a mere "presider". That is a humble enough sounding title, because who would ever bow and scrape before a humble title like "The President of the United States".
*of any gender
If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:37PM (1 child)
This is also why George Washington is held in such high esteem - her could have easily become a king, but he didn't.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday October 29 2020, @07:15PM
You'll note, in my post you replied to, I did allow for the founders to be of any of the possible genders that were available choices at that time.
If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.