It has been brought to my attention, some states are taking steps to eliminate the ‘ELECTORAL COLLEGE”. Apparently the people trying to eliminate the Electoral College, either missed that day in school, or was asleep when the subject was being taught. You see the Electoral College was put in the constitution to protect smaller states from being RULED by the whims of the larger populated states. It is a safe stop; which is more necessary now than at the time of its placement in the constitution. Before you begin reading the main body of this post, I ask you to keep in mind these numbers. (Although the Electoral College isn’t perfect please consider these numbers). Then tell me who completely controls the “POPULAR VOTE”. California: 38,889,700 people. Texas: 30,978,754 people. Florida: 22,975,931 people. New York 19,467,232 people. Pennsylvania 12,951275 people. I am using numbers available for April, 2024. The total population of just these 5 states, (according to my calculator), 335,893,238 that is almost 336 MILLION PEOPLE. Now as for the other 45 states (again according to my calculator), 206,982,776 almost 207 MILLION PEOPLE. My point being with 5 states having 129 MILLION MORE PEOPLE THAN THE remaining 45 states. These 5 states have more than enough people to elect whoever they want not necessarily who is best for the entire country. This conundrum (to ME). Do I want a president I do not want or even have a say in? The Electoral College is a mechanism established by the United States Constitution in Article II, Section 1. It was intended as a compromise between those who advocated for the election of the president through a vote in Congress and those who believed it should be decided by a popular vote of qualified citizens. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors in total, which represent the 435 Representatives, 100 Senators, and three additional electors from the District of Columbia. To win the presidency, a candidate must receive at least 270 electoral votes. This system is not based on equal representation of individuals, but rather on equal representation of states. Now let’s consider your hypothetical scenario where just five most populated states control a presidential election. These states are California (55 Electoral Votes), Texas (38), Florida (29), New York (29), and Pennsylvania (20) as per the 2020 allocations. This adds up to just 171 electoral votes – still far short from the required majority of 270. Therefore, even though these states might have large populations, they alone cannot decide an election through popular vote due to our current electoral college system. However, if we were to shift to a direct democracy model or use only popular vote to determine elections, theoretically these states with high populations could indeed dominate national elections. This could lead to political imbalance and neglecting interests of less populous areas which often have unique socio-economic and environmental issues that require specific policy attention. If this were the case, citizens from less-populated states might feel that their votes don’t carry enough weight or their voice is not heard adequately in deciding national leadership. This could lead to certain degree of voter disillusionment or lower voter turnout among them because they may see their role as insignificant next to larger populace areas. This concern forms one of key arguments behind maintaining our Electoral College – it ensures all parts of country can have recognizable say in choosing our national leader irrespective of their population size. Furthermore, the electoral college system forces presidential candidates to seek support from a wider geographic base, instead of just focusing on densely populated urban areas. It maintains the balance of influence among states and encourages candidates to understand and respond to diverse needs of different states. So despite criticisms, many argue that maintaining the electoral college is an important tool in preserving our federal system and ensuring that all parts of the country have an equitable say in national elections. In conclusion: What am i missing? After all I am sure these lawmakers have a much better education than I do. OR, are they ??? What is their motive for taking away the voters rights, as IT IS possible that the votes cast by these 45 states are just a matter of going through the motions, allowing the residents to feel their votes count. Thank you. Artie Fischal P.S. Please feel free to leave me comments those who agree and those who don’t agree. Maybe I’ll learn something. Post Views: 163
Category: Foreign Aid
If Elected I Will: Promises Made by Politicians
Election time is here ! We can tell by the sprouting of signs in lawns, billboards, newspapers, TV and Radio ads. (which is, it seems at least one or two out three ads). They fall into three different catagories. One is telling you how bad a person their opponent is. The second is telling you what a terrific person the one who’s being told what a louse he is by his opponent. The Third is PROMISES, that are in truth what the politician thinks the people he represents want to hear. So, today let’s take a short look at how valid, or likely those freely strewn promises have of actually happening. It is really more complicated than what we see here; but this will give you somewhat of an idea how most of the things promised Won’t happen. I would much rather hear, “These are the things I WANT to do”. Rather than, “This what I WILL do, if elected”. Doesn’t that sound more truthful? So here we go. When politicians run for office, they often make a variety of promises to the electorate. These campaign promises are designed to align with their constituents’ values and concerns, and are intended to illustrate the candidates’ goals if they are elected. However, it is true that these promises sometimes extend beyond what the politicians themselves can personally deliver. Let’s look at some of the reasons why this is the case. 1. Separation of Powers: In many democratic societies, powers are divided among different branches of government. For example, in the United States, power is split between executive, legislative, and judicial branches. If a candidate running for an executive office (like President or Governor) makes a promise that requires legislation to be passed or changed, they will need cooperation from the legislative branch where lawmakers may not share their views or objectives. 2. Opposition: Politicians often face opposition from other elected officials who either have different views or might not want them to succeed for political reasons. This opposition can come from within their own party (intra-party) or from other parties (inter-party). This opposition might block or delay legislation needed to fulfill certain promises. 3. External Constraints: Sometimes events outside a politician’s control can hinder their ability to fulfill promises made during campaigns. The economy could enter a recession; there could be natural disasters; international events could demand time and resources–all these factors can divert attention and resources away from certain campaign promises. 4. Public Opinion: Public opinion can shift over time due to external factors or changes in societal attitudes which may make it difficult for politicians to keep certain campaign promises without risking public approval. 5. Constraints by Law and Constitution: Many countries have constitutions that place restrictions on what government bodies can do within their jurisdiction which may limit a politician’s ability to fulfill some election promises. Despite these constraints, it’s important for citizens in any democracy to hold elected officials accountable for their campaign pledges within these realistic limits. If a politician consistently fails to meet their promises without good reason, voters can express their dissatisfaction at the ballot box in the next election. An educated electorate is a key pillar of any healthy democracy, and understanding the real constraints politicians face can help voters make informed decisions about which candidates truly have their best interests at heart. Post Views: 153
Non-Politics View of Biden Presidency
As I have stated many times in my posts. I AM NOT REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT. I have no political allegiance. THERE IS NO ROOM FOR POLITICS IN GOVENMENT. My Observations during my life span is that POPULAR PRESIDENTS are the ones who do nothing UNPOPULAR PRESIDENTS are the ones who DO something. The last 4 years we had an unpopular president. (As seen by the MEDIA), Right or Wrong President Trump tried to do something. However he was faced by a Democrat packed HOUSE. Unlike any I have seen. They were SO disappointed of not SEATING Hillary Clinton, (which would have been a disaster for our Good Old USA. (My opinion). They never had time to do anything for “US”. The ONLY AGENDA on their 4 year shift; was to undercut the “REPUBLICAN” , who defeated their Dear Hillary. It didn’t matter if it were Donald Trump, or you, or I who defeated H.R. Clinton. The agenda would have still been the same. Undercut the person who won out over her. Now, don’t get me wrong. I did not agree with everything, our President said or did. But he TRIED to some good things. Only to meet opposition. In fact I would have voted for Biden; had he been the Democratic candidate rather than Clinton. This year was different. I found Biden to be somewhat INDECISIVE. It is MY OPINION The Democrats are using him as a pawn, to advance their Socialistic views. (As in Union Soviet SOCIALIST Republic). The “HOUSE”, has already began laying the foundation to remove Biden from office. Remember when the “PELOSI FAMILY”, was plotting to make it so “ THE HOUSE”, could declare the President “UNFIT “? My personally conducted “STRAW POLL” , came to the following conclusion: Biden is given at most 1 year as President, before the HOUSE begins the procedure to deem him UNFIT. Thereby achieving their immediate goal of a WOMAN PRESIDENT. I hope I am wrong. I hope Biden will wake up and see how the Democrats intend to use him, and actually accomplishes something. I hope I am wrong about the plot of the “PELOSI FAMILY”. That is HOW I SEE IT! Post Views: 120
Obama’s Administration Other Face
As most of you know, for years the war of State Vs Religion has been waged. With the leadership, or backing, however you see it; of the aclu, (Anti Christian Lawyers Union), God is slowly being removed from the USA. The USA was founded on a basis of “FREEDOM OF RELIGION” as I have stated in other posts. (See “Hope You Had A Happy 4th). Our current president (I use the lower case here, as I find it very hard to respect the man elected to lead us). Mr. Obama claims to be a Christian, but actions speak louder than words. (You have all heard that before). What brought about this posting? I was just made aware that, this administration which has had it’s share, or more, of anti Christian moves; HOWEVER, has given $770,000,000.oo to reconstruct Moslem Mosques, in the Middle East. Am I the only one who has a problem with this? This administration with a leader with Muslim ties, an administration who continues to back the loss of our freedoms, an administration that misinterprets, our Constitution, and insists on NO support of any kind of religion, will give this huge amount to support the Muslim religion in foreign countries. We are also supporting them by building their INTERNET system. This is fine with me. I just wonder what the rogue muslims, (note no capital here either, as I do not believe them to be devout muslims), will do with internet access. As an American, I have no problem with Muslims in general, just as I have no problem with the Jews. We all believe in the same GOD, we just have different views of our Messiah, (if you will). Do you see a the other face of our administration? No religion, in USA, Support religion in other countries. They justify this action as “….building foreign relations…” That Is How I See It find find find Post Views: 612
North Korea Hungry, Should USA Help
As most of you know the communist government North Korea, keeps threatening world PEACE. Now that government has been facing FLOODS, and LIVESTOCK DISEASE. North Korea has asked for food handouts. What do we know about food distribution in North Korea? We know the most important thing. When it comes to handing out the foods… It is ranking government members first, with their supporters… Average citizen only if there is something left. I understand their soldiers may eat only a little better than the average citizen. Should the United States of America, specially now with our own economic woes, many of our own either going hungry or barely able to find food, GIVE food to the enemy. My humanitarian side says “YES!” My practical side says “NO”! Practical side argument. Why give aid to our enemy, (or potential enemy, if that is more politically correct). Would we have given the NAZI government food while they were threatening our PEACE . We probably did. That was before my time. But it doesn’t make sense to feed North Korea with the circumstances we are in with them. We know more peaceful nations who need more food than we give them. Will the people of North Korea be told where the food comes from, so they may eventually overthrow the Communist regime, or will the North Korean government say..”Look we have taken care of you”. Humanitarian side argument. Should we let the average citizen, anywhere in the world starve as long as we have taken care of our own first. “NO”! BUT we can not help but see the need, and cannot stop the urge to help our fellowman. After all, did we not give aid to the U.S.S.R. during the COLD WAR. For most of us it will merely be an exercise of our conscience. We have no say what our government does in this situation, except by our proxies, our Senators, and Congressmen, (excuse me, to be politically correct, that should be Congressperson). As for me, I think we should give them food, with a stipulation that the food will be distributed by a group appointed by the UNITED NATIONS, consisting of the countries which contribute the food. The food should be given with MARKING of the donating country, so the people of North Korea, know where the food comes from. So they may some day see their government does not work, and eventually overthrow this communist regime. That Is How I See It. erely find find Post Views: 136