And this is how it ends...

[BPTactical]

http://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb19-042




The bill enacts and enters into with all other states joining therein the agreement among the states to elect the president of the United States by national popular vote (agreement). Among other provisions, the agreement:

[buffalobo]

https://youtu.be/owJJQgt_jgs

Bad juju.

[BushMasterBoy]

So it would make it easier for me to become president?

[Skip]

What this signals is that they know the state can flip. Odds are against it but taking this extraordinary measure out of the gate with a majority tells you what they fear.

This will, btw, cost CO billions in funding. We essentially no longer matter to the Executive. And it will corrupt our Congressional representation as they can't get anything done anyway.

Colorado is officially a territory of California.

[BPTactical]

We essentially no longer matter to the Executive.

Then why have representation i.e. Congressmen and Senators?

[Skip]

Then why have representation i.e. Congressmen and Senators?

When they are appointed by Democrats, some not even Coloradans(Bennett), it doesn't matter.

Why have a state? Just merge with California. They'd like our water anyway.

[wctriumph]

We are so screwed if the commies take over, civil war will destroy everything.

Better dead than red.

[Hummer]

So it would make it easier for me to become president?

It would make it easier for Michael Bloomberg or Jerry Brown to become president.

[Ridge]

It makes it easier for everyone.

I personally don't see a problem with this. If anything, this gives the conservatives in California and upstate New York more power, as they're no longer dragged along with their votes counting to the liberals because cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco or New York City get to speak on behalf of the entire state.

[Great-Kazoo]

It makes it easier for everyone.

I personally don't see a problem with this. If anything, this gives the conservatives in California and upstate New York more power, as they're no longer dragged along with their votes counting to the liberals because cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco or New York City get to speak on behalf of the entire state.

There are no conservatives in CA. They were declared an endangered species about 25 yrs ago. The remaining ones have been put in "sanctuaries" where they are closely monitored by gov agencies.




In the real world. It takes a Constitutional Convention to withdraw from the electoral college. Due to states basically rewriting it to suite their needs. Yet take a state like MT where they say you can own and mfg select fire guns w/out Federal approval. Then the left SCREAM!! how the states are undermining the federal .gov.


See the hypocrisy?

[Ridge]

There are plenty of conservatives. The problem is that since they are outnumbered overall by libs, the state gives all it's delegates to those city centers and the minority don't get any say.

https://www.ppic.org/content/images/PoliticalGeogFigure-4_web.png

32% of Californians are conservative. Another 25% are conservative on social policies, but liberal on fiscal.

https://www.ppic.org/publication/californias-political-geography/

[Great-Kazoo]

It makes it easier for everyone.

I personally don't see a problem with this. If anything, this gives the conservatives in California and upstate New York more power, as they're no longer dragged along with their votes counting to the liberals because cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco or New York City get to speak on behalf of the entire state.


There are plenty of conservatives. The problem is that since they are outnumbered overall by libs, the state gives all it's delegates to those city centers and the minority don't get any say.

https://www.ppic.org/content/images/PoliticalGeogFigure-4_web.png

32% of Californians are conservative. Another 25% are conservative on social policies, but liberal on fiscal.

https://www.ppic.org/publication/californias-political-geography/


Your second post contradicts the first. Heavy population centers will, w/out an electoral college, over rule any other voters wishes.

[BushMasterBoy]

It would make it easier for Michael Bloomberg or Jerry Brown to become president.

So can I still have a Space Force? Then I can just leave!

[Ridge]

Your second post contradicts the first. Heavy population centers will, w/out an electoral college, over rule any other voters wishes.

What I'm saying is that the population centers neutralize everywhere else, because states throw ALL their electoral votes at 1 candidate. With a direct democracy, everybody outside get their votes heard.

[Great-Kazoo]

What I'm saying is that the population centers neutralize everywhere else, because states throw ALL their electoral votes at 1 candidate. With a direct democracy, everybody outside get their votes heard.

BUT.............We're a republic, not a true democracy. Elections have Consequences. At this point in time. CO is about to feel those Consequences.

[roberth]

The Electoral College is only a problem when the communists lose an election, otherwise they're fine with it.

A nationwide popular vote is similar to what CO has now, Denver and Boulder communists get to pick the governor and all the other counties don't matter.

[roberth]

So can I still have a Space Force? Then I can just leave!

No, you get the re-education camp. I'll be sitting right next to you in commie class.

[Ridge]

BUT.............We're a republic, not a true democracy. Elections have Consequences. At this point in time. CO is about to feel those Consequences.

The Electoral College exists because in the 18th century it was impossible to count each individual vote in a timely manner across thousands of square miles. That isn't an issue in the digital age.

[Great-Kazoo]

The Electoral College exists because in the 18th century it was impossible to count each individual vote in a timely manner across thousands of square miles. That isn't an issue in the digital age.

Funny. I've heard something similar, regarding the 2nd Amendment.

[Ridge]

Funny. I've heard something similar, regarding the 2nd Amendment.

Where can I find these digital guns, and what type of ranges support them?

[Rucker61]

The Electoral College exists because in the 18th century it was impossible to count each individual vote in a timely manner across thousands of square miles. That isn't an issue in the digital age.

So, all the votes in the state were tallied, and the candidate with the most got the Electoral seat, and we sent that person to Washington because it was too hard to count all the votes in a state and send someone with that information to Washington?

[Great-Kazoo]

Where can I find these digital guns, and what type of ranges support them?

Glad you asked.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019/01/24/shot-2019-radetec-smart-glock-slide/

[Ridge]

So, all the votes in the state were tallied, and the candidate with the most got the Electoral seat, and we sent that person to Washington because it was too hard to count all the votes in a state and send someone with that information to Washington?

Considering delegate votes in primaries consist of people raising hands and counting those weeks ahead of the actual election, then those people traveling to the centralized polling place and voting there the day of the election, and then the report of those votes going to D.C... It's not like they were loading up paper ballots into carts and taking those to D.C.


Glad you asked.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019/01/24/shot-2019-radetec-smart-glock-slide/

Touche. Hopefully they can make something similar to a gun that doesn't look like it's made of legos.

[Bailey Guns]

The Electoral College exists because in the 18th century it was impossible to count each individual vote in a timely manner across thousands of square miles. That isn't an issue in the digital age.

I'm curious where you heard that reasoning?

After studying the electoral college and the Constitution in general I was under the impression it was established mostly as a compromise between having congress elect the president and a popular vote by "qualified" citizens. From what I've read they didn't seem to think it would be that difficult to count votes.

[ray1970]

The ship could be righted quickly if we just repealed the 15th, 19th, and 26th amendments.

[Bailey Guns]

It's not even that hard. All we really need are people who will be faithful to the Constitution.

[ScottR65]

It's not even that hard. All we really need are people who will be faithful to the Constitution.

Admin: is there a ?Like? option?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Great-Kazoo]

It's not even that hard. All we really need are people who will be faithful to the Constitution.

When the hollywood SAG is more outspoken that the elected D's they worship. I doubt it.


When R's cower and backtrack after being called a racist, never happen.

[ray1970]

It's not even that hard. All we really need are people who will be faithful to the Constitution.

Probably be easier to repeal those amendments I mentioned.

[Bailey Guns]

I didn't say it wasn't a fantasy idea. But it would still work.

[Aardvark]

"We, the people...". No more.

[Gman]

Welcome to mob rule, gentlemen.

[BushMasterBoy]

No, you get the re-education camp. I'll be sitting right next to you in commie class.

The space aliens are going to nuke us from orbit in 2021, so I need that rank.

[Bailey Guns]

The stupid-er/more left-leaning our population becomes, the more this nonsense is floated around as a good idea.

[Skip]

Welcome to mob rule, gentlemen.

And not even a mob of actual/real Americans.

Right now Libs are limited in their election hijinks; illegals, ballot farming, etc... The limitation is the number of EC votes they have in states they control.

With a raw popular vote, that limit is gone.

How does Colorado certify the popular vote in California? US? We don’t. And so a handful of people in several states determine who wins.

What’s that quote about “he who counts the votes?”

[OtterbatHellcat]

...and redistricting at will seemingly.

[BPTactical]

And we have how many years of this type of bullshit to look forward to?

[OtterbatHellcat]

Only as long as you want to put up with it.... eternity doesn't fit properly. Until ya die?...that one might work.

[StagLefty]

I tell friends all the time I'm glad I'm nearing the end of my life cycle and hopefully won't see the demise of the country but man we're close !!!!

[hollohas]

What I'm saying is that the population centers neutralize everywhere else, because states throw ALL their electoral votes at 1 candidate. With a direct democracy, everybody outside get their votes heard.Not even close to true. The electoral college is the exact opposite of what you're saying.

What the electoral college does is allow states with low populations to actually have a voice. With a direct democracy, states with low populations would NEVER have their voice heard. Ever. They simply wouldn't count anymore. They would be neutralized WITHOUT the electoral college. The population centers would neutralize even more areas if we were to move to a direct democracy, not less.

And there are actually two states that split their electoral college votes proportionally between candidates based on actual votes.

[TFOGGER]

With a direct democracy, basically Commiefornia and New England would dictate to the rest of the country, even worse than the current situation. States like Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, etc. would have even less voice than they do now. "Flyover country". What the Democrats don't realize is that this can cut both ways. Their party is currently on the ascendancy, but the tides could change. All that it would require is a major economic event or an attack by an outside actor on US soil while a democrat was in the White House to tip the scales the other way.

[Skip]

What the Democrats don't realize is that this can cut both ways.

They have 25-30M new voters to make sure that doesn't happen. California "motor voters" with no citizenship required to get a license. No one in CA is prosecuting illegals who vote. They aren't even looking into the ballot farms (dozens of voters registered at one apartment).

Look at the spread in the last few elections. Even ones the media declares "landslides" by EC counts are really only off by 2-5% with the popular vote. That's max ~6M people.

It's creating an outcome based on the nation without Federal oversight or standardization of voting regulations in the states. When CA certifies the popular vote they will say how many of their voters voted for the Democrat in the election. There is no limit to this number. CA currently has 55 electoral votes. They can fix the election however they'd like but can't tip the scales past their 55 electors.

I know the Founders were trying to fix the problem of disproportionate representation but they also limited the potential for election fraud with nation-wide popular elections.

[MED]

Not even close to true. The electoral college is the exact opposite of what you're saying.

What the electoral college does is allow states with low populations to actually have a voice. With a direct democracy, states with low populations would NEVER have their voice heard. Ever. They simply wouldn't count anymore. They would be neutralized WITHOUT the electoral college. The population centers would neutralize even more areas if we were to move to a direct democracy, not less.

And there are actually two states that split their electoral college votes proportionally between candidates based on actual votes.

This pretty much sums it up.

[BushMasterBoy]

Vote by computer. Use biometric authentication. Illegal voting is treason punishable by death. Execution live on Youtube. Way more fun than the 1880's.

What say ye?

[TFOGGER]

Vote by computer. Use biometric authentication. Illegal voting is treason punishable by death. Execution live on Youtube. Way more fun than the 1880's.

What say ye?

Great idea for ensuring the integrity of the vote(assuming the technical foundation of the biometrics is sound), but still promotes the tyranny of the mob. If we were to convert to a democracy rather than a representative republic, some threshold of "skin in the game" would be necessary to prevent people from voting themselves endless free shit at the expense of others, as such people are inclined to do. That is what brought an end to the Roman Empire, at least a couple hundred years before the Vandals and Visigoths...

[powerstroke79]

http://https://kdvr.com/2019/01/29/colorado-senate-passes-bill-to-essentially-eliminate-electoral-college/amp/ (https://kdvr.com/2019/01/29/colorado-senate-passes-bill-to-essentially-eliminate-electoral-college/amp/)

[OtterbatHellcat]

Execution live on Youtube.

Execution on live tv is no problem with me. I'd have it on, think of the advertising money opportunities.

Electoral college has a purpose as mentioned, but it's still messed up too. Instead of abolishing it altogether, come up with a better effing way.

[longrange2]

What’s that have to do with reloading? This is already being discussed in the general discussion forum. See “and this is how it ends” post

[OtterbatHellcat]

Dunno, man. The top of this page right now at this moment....SAYS "and this is how it ends".
"

[Eric P]

Congress still makes laws, so it wont be presidential "dictatorship". Checks and balances.

Congress just needs to pull back power they ceded to the executive branch. All rule making should be ratified by Congress before having the force of law.

[brutal]

Dunno, man. The top of this page right now at this moment....SAYS "and this is how it ends".
"

I'm guessing another thread got merged here and his post was not directed at you.

[Ramsker]

Imagine the hissy fit if a Republican managed to win the national popular vote but lost CO . . . I'm sure the dems would be fine with sleeping in that bed they made, right?

This is idiotic. Why would you agree to make your state essentially impotent?

[Bailey Guns]

Execution live on Youtube.

Execution on live tv is no problem with me. I'd have it on, think of the advertising money opportunities.

Electoral college has a purpose as mentioned, but it's still messed up too. Instead of abolishing it altogether, come up with a better effing way.

What's better than giving all states, and their populations, an equal shot at having their voices and opinions heard?

[Rucker61]

Imagine the hissy fit if a Republican managed to win the national popular vote but lost CO . . . I'm sure the dems would be fine with sleeping in that bed they made, right?

This is idiotic. Why would you agree to make your state essentially impotent?

If they still held all of the power, what would stop them from changing the law between election day and electoral vote day, especially if it changed the election results?

[Will1776]

The Republic died long ago

[Rucker61]

If they still held all of the power, what would stop them from changing the law between election day and electoral vote day, especially if it changed the election results?

Nevermind, they left themselves an out: "Permits a state's withdrawal from the agreement, except in limited circumstances;"

[Demodave]

Seems like a very simple way to install your Dictator.

Heck, I'll bet even the dead will vote for him.

[Lippy Laroux]

Just another reason the Demofelons don't want a wall. The illegals are counted in the Census and this can potentially add electoral college votes to sanctuary states. Even if they lose the fight to end the E college they can still pull out a victory with extra EC votes.

[Great-Kazoo]

Nevermind, they left themselves an out: "Permits a state's withdrawal from the agreement, except in limited circumstances;"

They've already what happens when the minority becomes the majority and uses Harry Reid's Nuclear option . They're the kids who take their ball and bat when they're close to losing the game.

[Zundfolge]

Imagine the hissy fit if a Republican managed to win the national popular vote but lost CO

I fully expect this to happen in 2020. Just like how Bush Jr won the EC in 2000 but lost the popular vote (and started this Democrat hatred of the EC) he won both the EC and popular vote in 2004. Trump is going to win the EC and Popular vote in 2020 and Colorado will likely go for whatever creature the Democrats run but be forced to give their Electoral votes to Trump.

This could be the thing that actually breaks the Democrat stronghold on Colorado because there will be massive infighting among D's after this happens and you'll see the Green party and other alt-left parties rise in popularity thus breaking apart the D party and making the R's much more competitive.

At any rate its going to be hilarious to watch.

[Bailey Guns]

This could be the thing that actually breaks the Democrat stronghold on Colorado because there will be massive infighting among D's after this happens and you'll see the Green party and other alt-left parties rise in popularity thus breaking apart the D party and making the R's much more competitive.

It would be nice if you were right but I don't see this happening at all.

[BPTactical]

Hmm, seems like "Voter Suppression" to me..

[FireMoth]

BUT.............We're a republic, not a true democracy. Elections have Consequences. At this point in time. CO is about to feel those Consequences.

Being a republic is a nice idea, but we reached a level of overarching federal power a long time ago, asserting federal control over state rights.
I understand a few chaps died over the argument. Bit over a half a miliion, if i recall.
Since that time, we may have kept the word republic in the national anthem, but have ceased operating as one

[avandelay]

Well, sounds like it's a done deal. If the conservatives ever take back power I hope they run a take no prisoners policy.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/431425-colorado-governor-will-sign-bill-aimed-at-bypassing-electoral-college?amp

The mental gymnastics they'll jump through to get the electors cast for the Dem IF a conservative wins the popular vote will be entertaining.

[Joe_K]

We need less voters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ChickNorris]

We need less voters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bwahahahaha

[ChickNorris]

Joe_K by chance are you male, over thirty & a property owner who pays more into the government than you take?

Im not in disagreement, just curious on the demographic.

[Joe_K]

Bwahahahaha

Our form of government was intended for a righteous and moral people, and those that had a stake in the success or failure of policies, laws, treaties etc. Equality of opportunity does not, cannot, and should not be misconstrued to mean equality of abilities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ChickNorris]

So the uninformed & young who are without a stake & transient shouldn't vote...

[Great-Kazoo]

Our form of government was intended for a righteous and moral people, and those that had a stake in the success or failure of policies, laws, treaties etc. Equality of opportunity does not, cannot, and should not be misconstrued to mean equality of abilities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No Valid U.S I.D. No voting.

One must also provide proof of citizenship, or born here or naturalized

[Joe_K]

So the uninformed & young who are without a stake & transient shouldn't vote...

Some of the Voting minimum standards I could support:
High School diploma or better
Ability to read/write
Be a citizen
Valid I.D.
Be 21 or older
Pass a Citizenship test
Tax payer
Gainfully employed
No convictions
Never committed to a mental institution
Pass a drug test
If a parent, be married to the mother/father and have a stable home life.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe_K]

Joe_K by chance are you male, over thirty & a property owner who pays more into the government than you take?

Im not in disagreement, just curious on the demographic.

Yes
No
Yes
Sometimes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TFOGGER]

Some of the Voting minimum standards I could support:
High School diploma or better-Yeah, probably
Ability to read/write In the English language
Be a citizen Yes
Valid I.D. Yes
Be 21 or olderResponsible adults of any age. Some would qualify at 16, others may never
Pass a Citizenship test Absolutely. It ain't that tough. One should know how our government works before being able to change it.
Tax payer Yes, skin in the game.
Gainfully employed Not so sure about this one
No convictions I am not in agreement. Once a sentence has been discharged, full rights should be restored.
Never committed to a mental institution Same as a conviction, if they're fit to be released back into society and meet the other criteria, why penalize them?
Pass a drug test Nope. Unless you mean ALL drugs, including SSRIs, prescription pain relievers, nicotine, caffeine, and alcohol. Voting while impaired should be prohibited, but if they meet the primary criteria, it's no business of the .gov what substances they choose to ingest.
If a parent, be married to the mother/father and have a stable home life. Nope. the .gov shouldn't be involved in regulating morality. Failure to provide for one's offspring is one thing, requiring marriage to vote is another entirely.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zundfolge]

Some of the Voting minimum standards I could support:
High School diploma or better
Ability to read/write
Be a citizen
Valid I.D.
Be 21 or older
Pass a Citizenship test
Tax payer
Gainfully employed
No convictions
Never committed to a mental institution
Pass a drug test
If a parent, be married to the mother/father and have a stable home life.



Yeah, Democrats tried that already in the south to keep blacks from voting so all that has been declared unconstitutional now.

[Joe_K]

Yeah, Democrats tried that already in the south to keep blacks from voting so all that has been declared unconstitutional now.

Wouldn?t be the first time something declared unconstitutional was undeclared. I?m aware of what happened in the south both during slavery, ?reconstruction?, Jim Crow, and the Civil rights movement. I just think we may have gone a bit too far in opening up who gets a say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Irving]

If we had ever closed the door to who could vote, we wouldn't be having this conversation right now as not a single one of us would be allowed to vote.

[Bailey Guns]

So, under Joe's criteria, a person who is physically disabled and can't work, even though they meet all the other criteria, would not be allowed to vote. And we're gonna put the .gov into the business or regulating a person's home/family life and tell us what is and isn't acceptable behavior.

There's a whole lot of disabled vets that wouldn't be able to vote if Joe was in charge. Isn't that ironic?

The reality is there's nothing wrong with the rules we have now. The problem is there are so many people who don't want to follow the rules.

[Joe_K]

So, under Joe's criteria, a person who is physically disabled and can't work, even though they meet all the other criteria, would not be allowed to vote. And we're gonna put the .gov into the business or regulating a person's home/family life and tell us what is and isn't acceptable behavior.

There's a whole lot of disabled vets that wouldn't be able to vote if Joe was in charge. Isn't that ironic?

The reality is there's nothing wrong with the rules we have now. The problem is there are so many people who don't want to follow the rules.

Like any system there would be gaps. The point was to limit decision making to people that are upstanding, productive citizens. With the points you?ve brought up it would also seem retirees/the elderly would be ineligible as well. I?d be willing to give the gainfully employed criteria up if I could get any 4-5 of the others enacted.

Do we want the unemployed, 20 year old Mom?s basement dwelling, mentally disturbed, meth addicted, in and out of jail bird, father of 3 children by 3 women deadbeat dad to vote?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scanker19]

Well, sounds like it's a done deal. If the conservatives ever take back power I hope they run a take no prisoners policy.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/431425-colorado-governor-will-sign-bill-aimed-at-bypassing-electoral-college?amp

The mental gymnastics they'll jump through to get the electors cast for the Dem IF a conservative wins the popular vote will be entertaining.

They won?t. Conservatives are pussies.

[Bailey Guns]

Frankly I'd rather just make a rule that says if you're a liberal/democrat/progressive/leftist/communist you can't vote and you can't run for office. That would be a lot easier.

[ChickNorris]

The trouble with Tribbles comes to mind...

Oh... and suffrage & poll tax.

[Irving]

Some of the Voting minimum standards I could support:
High School diploma or better
Ability to read/write
Be a citizen
Valid I.D.
Be 21 or older
Pass a Citizenship test
Tax payer
Gainfully employed
No convictions
Never committed to a mental institution
Pass a drug test
If a parent, be married to the mother/father and have a stable home life.


There was a time in my life when I had suggested a list similar to this. Life experience has taught me otherwise.

[Great-Kazoo]

Like any system there would be gaps. The point was to limit decision making to people that are upstanding, productive citizens. With the points you?ve brought up it would also seem retirees/the elderly would be ineligible as well. I?d be willing to give the gainfully employed criteria up if I could get any 4-5 of the others enacted.

Do we want the unemployed, 20 year old Mom?s basement dwelling, mentally disturbed, meth addicted, in and out of jail bird, father of 3 children by 3 women deadbeat dad to vote?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Since you're in the 30 and under age group where do you fall in this manifesto?

I personally don't want an under 40 emotionally fixated Tier 1 AR or nothing person to vote. See, it works both ways.

Now to suggest an unemployed , disabled person would not be eligible.
Which one of us will be going to the VA to tell those disabled vets. Sorry You lost your right to vote?


U.S, Citizen, Or naturalized one.

VALID State issued I.D

18 yrs old. If we're old enough to go to war. We're old enough to vote.
Which BTW: is one of them main ideas behind actually getting the under 21 yr old voting rights. Back before your time.

[cstone]

2016 estimated that 58% of eligible voters cast ballots.
2018 estimated that 47% of eligible voters cast ballots.

IMO it isn’t the number or demographic of citizens who are voting but the education of those citizens we should focus on. Only a deeply flawed indoctrination system within the government schools can explain the rise in support for socialism and progressive ideology. AOC is the example of what is being produced in our nation. Not only do people like her vote, but they advocate for their causes and they run for office. Idiocracy is slowly becoming reality and I fear that future much more than The Walking Dead. I wouldn’t want to be the lone survivor in either but in an Idiocracy future zombies starve.

Be safe.

[Joe_K]

Since you're in the 30 and under age group where do you fall in this manifesto?

I personally don't want an under 40 emotionally fixated Tier 1 AR or nothing person to vote. See, it works both ways.

Now to suggest an unemployed , disabled person would not be eligible.
Which one of us will be going to the VA to tell those disabled vets. Sorry You lost your right to vote?


U.S, Citizen, Or naturalized one.

VALID State issued I.D

18 yrs old. If we're old enough to go to war. We're old enough to vote.
Which BTW: is one of them main ideas behind actually getting the under 21 yr old voting rights. Back before your time.

I never suggested that disabled people should not be allowed to vote, I?ve met very few disabled people in my life that were unable to work at all and in hindsight stated that disallowing people that are unemployed/unable to work/between jobs shouldn?t be a disqualification to vote. Thanks for enlightening me with your insight and life experience.

I?m fine moving the Selective Service age up to 21, and still allow folks 17-20 volunteer.

P.S. I?m not sure what emotionally fixated means,I?ll have something new to check out at the public library using the Dewey Decimal system.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Great-Kazoo]

Some of the Voting minimum standards I could support:
High School diploma or better
Ability to read/write
Be a citizen
Valid I.D.
Be 21 or older
Pass a Citizenship test
Tax payer
Gainfully employed
No convictions
Never committed to a mental institution
Pass a drug test
If a parent, be married to the mother/father and have a stable home life.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I never suggested that disabled people should not be allowed to vote, I?ve met very few disabled people in my life that were unable to work at all and in hindsight stated that disallowing people that are unemployed/unable to work/between jobs shouldn?t be a disqualification to vote. Thanks for enlightening me with your insight and life experience.

I?m fine moving the Selective Service age up to 21, and still allow folks 17-20 volunteer.

P.S. I?m not sure what emotionally fixated means,I?ll have something new to check out at the public library using the Dewey Decimal system.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you're fine moving the selected service age to 21. Then you must agree those under 21 are not mature or responsible enough to buy a firearm?

[TFOGGER]

http://scontent.fapa1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/52924242_2505343122827991_2042417370571472896_n.jp g?_nc_cat=110&_nc_ht=scontent.fapa1-1.fna&oh=56623261e809f3834bc57d8aabb8d212&oe=5CE35896

[Joe_K]

If you're fine moving the selected service age to 21. Then you must agree those under 21 are not mature or responsible enough to buy a firearm?

No, no I do not. The act of voting is far more important than buying a firearm, driving a motor vehicle, or purchasing alcohol or tobacco.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CS1983]

I say we just realize how awful an idea a voting public is and go back to a single point of failure that can have its head lopped off.

[Skip]

Why isn't property ownership enough?

And I'm talking title (that word has historical meaning), not renting a house from the bank.

If a person is mature and capable enough at age 16 to own real estate, it makes him a net a taxpayer, and he should be able to vote. Some folks will be renters their entire lives = no vote.

[brutal]

Why isn't property ownership enough?

And I'm talking title (that word has historical meaning), not renting a house from the bank.

If a person is mature and capable enough at age 16 to own real estate, it makes him a net a taxpayer, and he should be able to vote. Some folks will be renters their entire lives = no vote.

You mean like a plantation owner?

[Joe_K]

Some people will hold that they support the Second Amendment as it was written, ratified, and intended in the 18th and 19th Century.

I do as well. Along with much of what the founders set into law post Our War for Independence. I am more of an originalist when it comes to our system of government and constitution.

There have been a few positive constitutional amendments since 1789, but several have been enacted and then interpreted to be things that may have served a fantastic ideal, but has proven to not have worked out as well as had been hoped.

And before anyone brings up the accusations, no, I?m not racist, no, I do not think slavery was ever morally acceptable, yes I support women?s suffrage, no, I don?t think the civil war being fought was a net value to our Republic.

Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Johnson, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, and LBJ were all way worse for our form of government than Bush, Clinton, Bush, or Obama combined.

Firemoth is right, we stopped being a real Republic a long time ago. Democracy is rotten to the core, fairness is a lie and is a poor excuse for dealing with the problems we face as a nation today.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skip]

You mean like a plantation owner?

No.

Having full title to real estate.

[Scanker19]

Do we want the unemployed, 20 year old Mom?s basement dwelling, mentally disturbed, meth addicted, in and out of jail bird, father of 3 children by 3 women deadbeat dad to vote?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. Yes, I do.

edit: that might be the most elitist, holier than thou, bullshit I’ve read in a long time.

[hurley842002]

edit: that might be the most elitist, holier than thou, bullshit I?ve read in a long time.

Doesn't surprise me after the BCA thread and a few others.

[Joe_K]

Yes. Yes, I do.

edit: that might be the most elitist, holier than thou, bullshit I?ve read in a long time.

Why?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bailey Guns]

Some of the Voting minimum standards I could support:
High School diploma or better
Ability to read/write
Be a citizen
Valid I.D.
Be 21 or older
Pass a Citizenship test
Tax payer
Gainfully employed
No convictions
Never committed to a mental institution
Pass a drug test
If a parent, be married to the mother/father and have a stable home life.

I'm curious if you would apply a similar set of "standards" to any of the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights? Should free speech, religious freedom, or freedom of assembly have a similar set of restrictions? If not, why not? Should we apply these "standards" to persons accused of a crime who need legal defense? "Sorry...no lawyer for you because you're not 21 or over and you're a student not gainfully employed. Suck it up, buttercup."

What if you got a ticket for No Proof of Insurance (a misdemeanor) and a court found you guilty? You're OK with your "right" to vote being taken away?

[Bailey Guns]

I'd also be very careful about asking for further government intrusion into your life. Specifically, passing a citizenship test. What are you going to do when some committee of government bureaucrats sits down and comes up with a test you can't pass? That's very similar to people who are so-called "pro-gun" people but who think the government should institute stricter training standards and recurring qualification for concealed carry permits.

Several things on your list of standards are going to require a massive amount of government bureaucracy to institute and manage...drug testing, citizenship testing, background checks, in home visits to determine a "stable" home life (good luck with that...especially as a gun owner who likes AR-15 rifles and posts on gun forums), literacy testing, etc... The last thing we need is more government interference in our lives.

You need to really think some of these things thru...not because any of this will really come to pass, but because if the government can restrict voting they can restrict anything else. Of course, it'll be for safety, security, the children, etc...and if you haven't really thought it thru then you probably really need to be careful what you wish for.

[Irving]

Joe, you might as well pledge allegiance to the crown. You're supporting the views of people who would like to prevent YOU from voting, you just don't realize it yet. :(

[Great-Kazoo]

Yes. Yes, I do.

edit: that might be the most elitist, holier than thou, bullshit I’ve read in a long time.

Hey dood. I played the elitist card a few post before you ;) He's under 30 and ready to restrict rights, raise voting age, along with gun restrictions. etc.

[Scanker19]

Why? Why? Becuase several of those aren’t even related to voting other than they were included in a discussion about voting. I think people that put pineapple on pizza shouldn’t be allowed to vote. See I can do it too. The rest are at best opinion based and subjective, and at worst two steps away from saying women and blacks wouldn’t be able to vote becuase, reasons.....?

I mean that’s a list of people you don’t like, that you don’t want voting. And nothing more. I’m sure you’ll have your reason and justifications as to why you don’t want them to, but I can replace any of them with the words women, the blacks, Mexicans, people under 5foot, and Dallas cowboys fans, and the “argument” (and I’m really using that word loosely) would still quote hold up.

Let’s keep in mind these rights as we call them aren’t granted by the government, or trump or Hillary or JoeK. They are and inherent part of being a human, granted by god or whatever you believe in, and PROTECTED by the constitution from people who would wish to strip those away. The best part about rights is you don’t have to agree with them. You don’t have to like a meth head (which by the way is a status offense and that’s not a crime in America) voting, but you damn well better be glad he can. It could be you next on the voting chopping block.

[Joe_K]

Hey dood. I played the elitist card a few post before you ;) He's under 30 and ready to restrict rights, raise voting age, along with gun restrictions. etc.

Under 30? Yes. I?m 29 1/2.

Restrict voting to people that would make good decisions? Yes.

Raise the voting age? Yes. In the 1700?s a 15 year old male was more than a Man than most 50 year olds today, still it was understood that until 21 you were probably not going to be fully mentally developed, have a stable home/family life, own property, or necessarily even care about the future. So yes, I?m in favor of raising the VOTING age BACK to 21. Kind of like how the people who started this grand experiment intended.

I have never, ever supported ANY restrictions of any persons right to purchase/possess a firearm for self defense. My views on firearm ownership depart most conservatives views. I want teenagers to be able to own machine guns.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe_K]

Why? Why? Becuase several of those aren?t even related to voting other than they were included in a discussion about voting. I think people that put pineapple on pizza shouldn?t be allowed to vote. See I can do it too. The rest are at best opinion based and subjective, and at worst two steps away from saying women and blacks wouldn?t be able to vote becuase, reasons.....?

I mean that?s a list of people you don?t like, that you don?t want voting. And nothing more. I?m sure you?ll have your reason and justifications as to why you don?t want them to, but I can replace any of them with the words women, the blacks, Mexicans, people under 5foot, and Dallas cowboys fans, and the ?argument? (and I?m really using that word loosely) would still quote hold up.

Let?s keep in mind these rights as we call them aren?t granted by the government, or trump or Hillary or JoeK. They are and inherent part of being a human, granted by god or whatever you believe in, and PROTECTED by the constitution from people who would wish to strip those away. The best part about rights is you don?t have to agree with them. You don?t have to like a meth head (which by the way is a status offense and that?s not a crime in America) voting, but you damn well better be glad he can. It could be you next on the voting chopping block.

Preventing drug addicted,mentally unstable, criminal dead beat Dad?s doesn?t really seem quite the same as preventing a Woman or a person of a slightly darker complexion than myself from voting.

I?m in favor of a Constitutional Republic, NOT a Democracy. What form of government are you in favor of? What we currently have? How?s that working out for us?

It was a Constitutional Amendment that allowed the right to vote for those under 21, it was/is not a God given birthright like the right to self defense. Why not just let Citizens of other countries vote in our nations elections? Why not 11 year olds? Felons? Committed mental patients?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Great-Kazoo]

Under 30? Yes. I?m 29 1/2.

Restrict voting to people that would make good decisions? Yes.


[facepalm] When you said 29 and 1/2 you sounded like my kid when she was |||| this old



Sounds EXACTLY like the RESIST crowd who feels HRC was robbed of her crown because 3 million more people voted for her. YET LOST the Electoral College

BUT, But..... i live on the east or west coast. We're more intellectual and educated than the deplorables of fly over country .
WE should be the ones making decisions the rest of the peons need to follow.



Define: Good Decisions.

I used a condom last date?

Made a full stop at a yield entrance ?

Signed a petition to allow only the smartest people to sign petitions ?

Oh yeah, spent more than $800 on an AR

[DDT951]

Preventing drug addicted,mentally unstable, criminal dead beat Dad?s doesn?t really seem quite the same as preventing a Woman or a person of a slightly darker complexion than myself from voting.

I?m in favor of a Constitutional Republic, NOT a Democracy. What form of government are you in favor of? What we currently have? How?s that working out for us?

It was a Constitutional Amendment that allowed the right to vote for those under 21, it was/is not a God given birthright like the right to self defense. Why not just let Citizens of other countries vote in our nations elections? Why not 11 year olds? Felons? Committed mental patients?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you realize that the progressives say that anyone who owns or wants to own guns are mentally unstable and dangerous? There is a reason the use the term "gun nuts". Nuts being that they are mentally unstable.

[Scanker19]

Preventing drug addicted,mentally unstable, criminal dead beat Dad?s doesn?t really seem quite the same as preventing a Woman or a person of a slightly darker complexion than myself from voting.

But's through the modern lens. One of the reasons we didn't want slaves voting is how could a person of color make a good decision (using the lens of the past) It's just as arbitrary. Someone saying they shouldn't vote because...... Just because you're on drugs doesn't mean that you make all bad choice. Just because you don't raise kids doesn't mean you don't have a say in your civic process.

I?m in favor of a Constitutional Republic, NOT a Democracy. What form of government are you in favor of? What we currently have? How?s that working out for us?
I think it is working fine. Could it be honed up a bit sure. Make states have an electoral college type of system so you avoid the problem NM has now where 29 out of 33 counties don't want something but they're still getting it. Or what Colorado is doing in this thread. It works fine. Trump was elected and didn't win the popular vote right?

It was a Constitutional Amendment that allowed the right to vote for those under 21, it was/is not a God given birthright like the right to self defense. Why not just let Citizens of other countries vote in our nations elections? Why not 11 year olds? Felons? Committed mental patients?
Again amendments don't allow and damn thing, they protect it since it wasn't specifically enumerated in the constitution. The 2nd amendment doesn't allow a damn thing. It disallows the government from restricting that right.
Well the argument could be made that the constitution applies to the people of the united states. We the People and such not WE the citizens... But it's a dumb argument and should be citizens. I'm in favor of felons voting. Why not? Is their time not served? I think those in violation of laws have the most say in the making of those laws. Hell I'm in favor of restoring gun rights to most non-violent felons too. You were military right? So in NM right now, If i were military, and i just got back from deployment from defending the nation, I could not give my 20 year old battle buddy a beer and it not be a felony. Some felonies are stupid.
As much as it pains me to say, I do support mental patients voting. I mean just because they're liberal doesn't mean they shouldn't get to vote to right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sent from my telegraph machine.....What hath god wrought.....?

[Bailey Guns]

After reading some of this crap I've changed my mind. There should be age restrictions on voting. Anyone who says "I'm xx 1/2" should be ineligible to vote.

[Great-Kazoo]

After reading some of this crap I've changed my mind. There should be age restrictions on voting. Anyone who says "I'm xx 1/2" should be ineligible to vote.

WE agree. Come on, did or did that not sound like someone's grandkid

I'm wondering if he's harboring some subliminal Cluster B traits

[Bailey Guns]

WE agree. Come on, did or did that not sound like someone's grandkid

I'll confess...I've said that before, too. When I was like 5....and 1/2.

[Joe_K]

For everyone?s peace of mind I?m going to bow out of this conversation. If that makes anyone feel that they won something than congratulations.

It?s 2019, and newsflash! Unpopular opinions remain unpopular. Have a good one gents.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Great-Kazoo]

It?s 2019, and newsflash! Unpopular opinions remain unpopular. Have a good one gents.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No Unpopular opinions like you suggest sound more left of center, we're smarter than everyone else, crap

[ChickNorris]

Joe_K. Holding oneself to a high standard is admirable. I see it.

Neo reactionaries by nature are not transient & I think that is the root of the point, yes?

[Scanker19]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwK_WOXjfc0

[Irving]

I think it's okay to try and change Joe's mind, but not okay to try and chase him off the board by bringing up everything he's ever said that you don't like and adding it to every future discussion. That's what wives and girlfriends are for.

[Delfuego]

Some of the Voting minimum standards I could support:
High School diploma or better
Ability to read/write
Be a citizen
Valid I.D.
Be 21 or older
Pass a Citizenship test
Tax payer
Gainfully employed
No convictions
Never committed to a mental institution
Pass a drug test
If a parent, be married to the mother/father and have a stable home life. Sweet. Lots of the mouth-breathers shopping at walmart meet this criteria. You ever pass a "Citizenship Test" or were you just born here? You would still bitch that "these people" that passed your little test didn't vote the way you wanted them to vote.

I don't think voting in the US works anymore. 2 party system is BS. Too many fringe fanatics on both sides. All our politicians represent is their own ego and wealth. French Revolution anyone?

[Scanker19]

I think it's okay to try and change Joe's mind, but not okay to try and chase him off the board by bringing up everything he's ever said that you don't like and adding it to every future discussion. That's what wives and girlfriends are for.

I didn't want him to go. I didn't even want to change his mind. I wanted to call him on his bullshit as I would expect others to do to me. If he or I or you were to changed their mind at the end on their own accord then that's good. I like difference of opinion, except when it's not mine. Hahahaha. But really this is the root of the problem no one wants to have these hard discussions or accept that they could be wrong. Then it turns into a sort of Out-group homogeneity effect shouting match.

Also voting is dumb and "if it made a difference they wouldn't let us do it..."

[Great-Kazoo]

I think it's okay to try and change Joe's mind, but not okay to try and chase him off the board by bringing up everything he's ever said that you don't like and adding it to every future discussion. That's what wives and girlfriends are for.

No one's chasing him off the board. or said GTF OUT! Some of us are vehemently disagreeing with the overall position he's taken . If this seems too harsh, perhaps those offended need to rethink what they post before doing so.

He's a nice guy, unfortunately the last 2-3 post have shown him to be (IMO) out of touch, with what i and others believe.

[Irving]

I was talking about throwing in the Tier 1 stuff from the other thread. His stance is indefensible as it is, no need to pile on from other topics.

[hollohas]

I was talking about throwing in the Tier 1 stuff from the other thread. His stance is indefensible as it is, no need to pile on from other topics.Irv, you've never said anything so dumb that your friends reminded you of it relentlessly? I sure have. It's not piling on. It good natured harassment.

[Irving]

I suppose if he wants to take his ball and go home then that's on him. You've successfully amended my opinion.

[wctriumph]

VOTING AT A POLLING PLACE MUST BE 18+ YEARS OLD WITH VALID GOVERNMENT ISSUED PHOTO ID AND MUST BE A CITIZEN OF THE USA.

People in jail or prison on felony convictions should not be able to vote until they serve their time and meet all after release conditions. People adjudicated as mentally incapable of interacting with society should not vote.

I don't have a way to stop mail in voter fraud.

[Bailey Guns]

I don't have a way to stop mail in voter fraud.

Get rid of democrats.