Where The Constitution Is Like The Bible And Contradicts Itself, Which Rules Prevail? The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who...

woodguru

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

Liberty Tree

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

You know nothing about the Bible, the Constitution, or the wisdom of the Electoral College.

ImLogicallyRight

Nice try, but still wrong. We are not a Democracy. We are a Republic. The Electoral College reflects that.

son of witless

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

Okay since you want to go down this path to doing away with the power of individual states over the majority of the whole country, why not take the next logical step ? Get rid of individual state primaries where the parties pick their nominee.

I happen to live in Pennsylvania and many times I get screwed over because by the time my state runs it's primary election one candidate has already locked up the nomination, making my primary vote powerless.

Why should states like Iowa have more power than my state ?

Liberty Tree

son of witless wrote:

Okay since you want to go down this path to doing ... (show quote)

Would you favor a national primary day? Just asking your opinion.

factnotfiction

ImLogicallyRight wrote:

Nice try, but still wrong. We are not a Democracy. We are a Republic. The Electoral College reflects that.

In reality, the US is a 'hybrid' with some policies and elections voted on democratically, usually local and state issues, and some, such as potus and some taxes and expenditures are voted on by representative elected democratically.

So if you claim to be right, then be right and tell the whole truth

PeterS

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

Since we are a secular nation I could care less about the bible. That said, if we were a true Democracy Hillary Clinton would be president and while I find that prospect better than the alternative the prospect of our largest population state always swinging the election I find a bit chilling.

All Hillary needed to do to be president was to hit the midwest and Penn a few times instead of completely ignoring them. That's why the electoral college was established--so candidates had to pay attention to all the states no matter how big or small.

And who's to say, maybe cons will become human beings and by doing so and attracting Hispanics, which are a natural fit, then states like Texas and California will be permanently conservative and Democrats will never win another election. No, keep the electoral college. Besides it's only a matter of years before Texas turns blue and cons will never win another election anyway--unless they decide to join the human race--which I doubt will ever happen...

Gatsby

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

Consider this: Were the president elected by direct vote, there would have been no winner in Nov, 2016.

Since no candidate won a majority of the popular vote, there would have to have been a run-off later.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

So, am I to suppose you want to repeal the 12th Amendment and you want every vote to be counted. In a nutshell, is that what you want? A true Democracy, one vote one person? It can not work.

I think, if you want every vote to count then a change needs to be made in how the candidate is nominated and selected to run for president and vice. Republicans use a straight popularity vote. In general the delegates vote as their respective primary or caucus voted. However, delegates are not bound by their caucus. If there is no clear winner, then revotes happen in the convention where candidates try to convince delegates to support them, which is when you see candidates drop out and votes change. For the most part Republicans follow the popular vote. Although, during the convention even a new candidate could be introduced and win.

Democrats have what are known as super delegates. These are Democratic party elites, about 600 of them and they can override the voting of normal delegates and of course popularity can be overridden. The super delegates allow the Democratic party elites to effectively appoint a winner or at least ensure someone tolerable to the elites wins. With no clear leader, the back room deals with super delegates means that they can nominate the person who they "feel" will push forward their agendas.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Gatsby wrote:

Consider this: Were the president elected by direct vote, there would have been no winner in Nov, 2016.

Since no candidate won a majority of the popular vote, there would have to have been a run-off later.

Consider this, had it not been for Democrat's super delegates....killary would have been running against McCain instead of Obama...it was the super delegates who overruled the popular vote. Where was the out cry for one vote, one person then?

Radiance3

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.
tps://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

======
Edited.

Radiance3

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

==================
The Founding Fathers were brilliant requiring electoral college be part of the deciding factor who wins the Office of the president and the Vice president.

One of the reasons was to allow all US states participate in the selection of the president and VP via the electors assigned in every state.

If popular votes can only decide the outcome of the presidential election, then perhaps only 2 or 3 states are given the power to decide. E.g. Most populated states of California, New York, and Chicago, or Florida could decide the results. These states of majority are under the democrats then the republican states and its voters are not represented and disenfranchised. In addition, the voters of those states when not represented are violated in their right to vote, their Amendment XV is violated.

A 270 or more electoral votes wins the presidency. There are 435 members of the lower house and 100 in the senate. 535 total electoral voters.

The district of Columbia is not part of the 50 states, residents have no representation in the Senate. The Twenty-third Amendment, adopted in 1961, entitles the District to the same number of electoral votes as that of the least populous state in the election of the President and Vice President

Rose42

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

The bible doesn't contradict itself. It is man that contradicts the bible.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

The Bible does not contradict itself..
The Constitution does not contradict itself.
People interpret what they read in different ways.
No one's vote is "taken away".
America is neither a secular nation nor is it a democracy.
America is a Republic founded on the moral principles of Christianity.
Our government is not America, and it is not a theocracy.
40% of Americans are conservative,
35% of Americans are moderate,
21% of Americans are liberal,
70% of Americans are religious.
21% of Americans have no religion,
3% of Americans are atheists,
5% of Americans are agnostic.
The 17th Amendment should be repealed.

Divine truth

woodguru wrote:

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itself very much, the bible a bit more. So those who believe in god, what do they believe when the bible sends mixed messages, which ones do people go by? Many go by the message that is what they want to believe, that fits their personal beliefs. One christian adheres to tenets of loving their fellow man and they have a tolerance for gays, others flip out about gays and latch onto words that are harsher about gays.

My point being the basic fundamental premise of a democracy is one person one vote, all votes being equal whether they be a black, white, hispanic, or muslim.

The concept of taking the power of their one vote away from people is anti constitutional to the core. Given the one person one vote basis there is a conflict of interest that needs to be sorted. Either say we are not a democracy by the people for the people or take a hard look at the very concept of what an electoral college is and what it's for, and determine whether that is more important than the core premise. The united states is the only country in the world that deviates from one person one vote, and it is an idiotic concept.

States have their sovereignty in singular state issues that the rest of the country can't dictate to them that their state government can set the rules on, the united states has an obligation to provide the same basic rights to everyone in the country concerning civil rights. Election rules need to be adopted that standardize rules and procedures that work so that states can't monkey with people's ability to vote the way several states are.

As pointed out by Hayes, since 1992 republicans have won the popular one time but had three presidents, if it were the other way the electoral would have been eliminated a long time ago. Republicans can keep their red states and do whatever they want for those states, but America is unfortunately a dem majority country and the rules need to favor that majority. This minority controlled country is destroying democracy to keep control.

https://dennismichaellynch.com/video-msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/

The constitution doesn't generally contradict itse... (show quote)

There isn't no Constitution in America, in words only, but not in the letter, spirit or application of the law.

In America the cult or the Satanic cult, international banker, Zionst Ashkenazi Jews, Homosexuality and feminist movement have hijacked the Constitution.

I wouldn't make this bold statement, without evidence to support it, or substantiate the truth herein stated.

The Bible and the Constitution contradicts itself, and have subjected the state of affairs to a ball of confusion.

Democracy is a fraud on its face, and the reality is Communist have been described as democracy and the Democratic Party activities is tanamount to barbarism, and terrorism.

What we call Democrats is really Communist or socialism, and democracy is tyranny terrorism, with activists judicial officers to protect them, in this madness and egergoius violations.

If there's exist the original Constitution, then the actions, behavior, attitude, disposition and thinking of our so-called leadership and public servant, would be reflective of the letter, spirit and law of the Constitution.

The founding fathers and drafters of the Constitution is turning over in their grave, because activists judicial Officers, are reinterpreting the Constitution to fix their sexual interest, and or desire.

Same sex marriage is a example that the Constitution don't exit, and it is fitting for others sexual interest and desire, and is reinterpreting, and not interpreted as the supreme law of the land.

When, a federal Magistrate can state in his arbitrary decision, that a individual don't have "a right to liberty, under Parole scam", the Constitution has lost its meaning of liberty.

New York State Parole scam is a homosexual scam, and recruitment initiative and Zionst design. If there was a living active constitution, I'll be a part of the body of Christ, and not in the body of Islam.