Get out and Vote

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe so....but...

The easiest way to address this issue is to make the electoral college votes from each state proportional to the votes cast for different candidates within that state. Winner takes all in any state is silly and not representative.
Click to expand...

It maybe so,...BUT...it is the state's choice. There are a couple of states that do NOT use a winner take all system for electoral votes.

AND, while it is rarely done, and a little known fact, each state's electors are not bound to follow the popular vote. They can, literally, vote any damn way they please.

A perfect system? No. Could it be inproved? possibly, BUT what you or I might consider an improvement can be someone else's idea of disenfranchisement.

Our founders never intended this nation to be a pure democracy, and with good reason. Far too much emphasis is given to democracy as a good thing, in and of itself. It's not. As the old saying goes, three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner is democracy.

Our Founders recognized that all to easily, pure democracy leads to mob rule. And today, with the instant transmission of information and ideas, it is even easier than it was a couple centuries ago.

They gave us a represetative REPUBLIC, for that very reason. All we have to do is keep it.

Sadly, it's a task far easier said, than done.
 
I have been in the ICU since Sunday and I called the County Clerk and they made sure a Ballot was delivered to my bedside this morning.

Andrew
 
We shall see. The PC "wisdom" imposed here is that it does not matter who sits in what seat and that there is no way things would get worse. I believe that we will see a huge demand for firearms, ammunition, and components like we have never seen before. I believe the federal judiciary will be "fixed" along with the SCOTUS and that executive orders will be issued that will go beyond anything ever imposed in history. I believe it does matter who sits where.
 
I am less concerned about legislation than about bench nominations.

Aside from bench nominations, it's hard to predict what comes next. Lame ducks often are willing to run risks they would not entertain, if they had to worry about re-election.

On the other hand, history has shown that many lame ducks were actually worried about creating a lasting legacy, and so actually moved more toward the center in their second (last) term.

So, while I'll press for legislation that supports RKBA, and push back against legislation that encroaches, I'm not going to get all worked up about election results unless something happens to make real problems seem more imminent.
 
Andrewsmith1 - my hat is off to you. That is going the extra mile, which I did not have to do.

Wife and I voted today at 1:00, 100% for NRA-approved candidates. Could not sleep for squat last night. Had to take a nap after voting. Tonight, now that it is too late for me to have any effect of any kind on all of this, I am limiting myself to jabbering away on Firing Line. I don't want to read or hear any "news" until tomorrow and I don't have any other blogs to go to. God help us. No offense to atheist shooters who voted right.
 
It is 12:30 am EST and the major TV networks are all declaring Obama the winner. I just can't believe that this man, who holds such contempt for our Second Amendment, has been re-elected. Unbelievable. This is a sad day for America.

"I don't believe that people should be able to own guns."

Barak Obama, as quoted to John R. Lott, Jr., PhD, while both were working at the University of Chicago Law School in 1996. From the book "Debacle", by Grover G. Norquist and John R Lott, Jr., John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Publisher
 
Not to veer too deeply into the political, but...

1) They may well be right, but they are still "calling" the election with several states in close heats, and with a significant percentage of uncounted votes - remember Dewey Defeats Truman.

2) Assuming the call proves correct, it's interesting to note that while this would be the fifth Presidential election where the Electoral College winner is not the popular vote winner, it will be the first time that scenario involves the incumbent winning. The previous four cases have all involved a new candidate winning the EC vote but not the popular.

3) The House will remain under one party's control, and the Senate under the control of the other. Regardless of who won, tonight, the ability of the President to ramrod policy through is simply not there. The bigger threat, if there is one, will lie in bench nominations.

4) Whoever wins, expect significant gridlock.
 
The House will remain under one party's control, and the Senate under the control of the other. Regardless of who won, tonight, the ability of the President to ramrod policy through is simply not there. The bigger threat, if there is one, will lie in bench nominations.
Click to expand...

  1. He doesn't need the House to appoint judges or sign treaties, just the Senate.
  2. I'm not sure Romney would have been all that much better.
  3. Our only hope after Tampa was for the Senate to go R (then the prez didn't really matter) and that's not happening.
  4. We are F'd.
 
In all probability, Obama will nominate two more judges to the US Supreme Court. Those nominees, will undoubtedly be hostile towards the Second Amendment. Individual liberty lost last night.
 
Rifleman, you assume the judges who retire (or are medically disabled) will be from our side of the fence.

If Ginsburg is replaced, it won't affect things (from an RKBA perspective).

Justices tend to try to avoid retiring when they think they will be replaced by those who would undo their decisions.

Just pray for the health of those Justices you would not want replaced by the current administration. Unless you are an atheist, in which case just keep your fingers crossed.
 
Justices tend to try to avoid retiring when they think they will be replaced by those who would undo their decisions.
Click to expand...
Many folks assume that a new Justice will immediately cause the reversal of the Heller and McDonald decisions. That's simply not the case.

First off, the Court has to be called upon to make a decision. They don't just hand down opinions: there has to be a case requiring the resolution of a constitutional question. I'm not exactly sure what kind of case would lead to a challenge of Heller.

Second, the Court has to be careful not to reverse itself in short order. Doing so casts their authority into doubt. They reverse themselves slowly, if at all. Consider the 60-year gap between Plessy and Brown v. Board of Education.

Now, can they prevent further progress forward? Yep. But I wouldn't worry about anything going south in the near future.
 
True, it may take a while.

Then again, Roberts was appointed while still relatively young, and likely to have two or three decades of potential time on the bench ahead of him.

Since then, Sotomayor was also relatively young when appointed.

I think this will become the new norm; if so, appointments are likely to have longer term effects. Still, Justices tend to try to remain on the bench until it is likely they will be replaced by somebody with a similar view of how things should work.
 
Still, Justices tend to try to remain on the bench until it is likely they will be replaced by somebody with a similar view of how things should work.
Click to expand...

Yes, very true, so where does this leave Kennedy?
 
"Many folks assume that a new Justice will immediately cause the reversal of the Heller"
Heller went 5-4 and Kagan and Sotomayor just make it the same. So if Kennedy gets replaced in the next fours years we are toast. It is naive to think otherwise. There will be no respect for precedent. International law will carry more weight. Continuous gun manufacturer backlogs will continue, and ammunition and component shortages will occur. And the executive orders are queued-up. It is way below average as they say.
 
There will be no respect for precedent. International law will carry more weight. Continuous gun manufacturer backlogs will continue, and ammunition and component shortages will occur. And the executive orders are queued-up.
Click to expand...
Can you cite sources for any of this?
 
No need to cite sources.

The voting is done, even if the tallying goes on.

What's done is done and we will move on from this point forward.

I'm closing this before the politics gets someone banned.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top