The judicial branch has, historically, been viewed as non partisan
Im not sure what your point is here. I will restate, yet again, that the EC was created for a few reasons, one of which is what you said, the other reason is that the founders didn’t trust the majority of citizens to make a sound decision. It was a safeguard against corrupt, manipulative candidates, and against an ignorant population.
Again, what is your point? Have I said anything that would dispute this?
By the way, states can’t veto anything. They can bring a case to federal court, if thats what you mean.
No I don’t think he cares what you think either. So opinions are like what?
No it is not! Its a fact. Did you miss the part that I told you I used to work in the industry to know this as a fact? This is common knowledge. Put your money where your mouth is! If you did a poll here, I would wager overwhelmingly a majority here would agree with that statement.
Right. But if you include social media, pundits, and MSM then overwhelmingly this is supported. It doesn’t take a rocket science to figue that part out.
Lastly, how can you call yourself a moderate, when it is obvious you are bias in your views that leans progressively socialist?
I overestimated your ability to have an intelligent conversation. Just because you say something is fact does not make it so, regardless of where you worked.
“Common knowledge,” based on the sources you commonly get your information from, maybe.
And i really don’t care what a poll from this site says. This is mostly a conservative bubble from what I’ve read. The only reason I’m hear is because I thought there could be some constructive conversations about the messed up state of our politics. If I’m wrong about something, I will admit it and change my mind. Your last reply, along with many other of your posts, has only convinced me that you are not willing to have a conversation with anyone you disagree with.
And, I never called myself a moderate, those are your words. I said i don’t fit into either party, which is true.
Here is more proof!
Well then you are not very well informed and I suggest you educate yourself on this subject matter. I also agree that maybe taking a poll on this site probably is not very accurate, but I just threw it out there as a small sample size. Believe what you want, but it is obvious you are biased on this point and I am just stating an opinion here, take it for what it is. Like I said in my opening salvo here, I go with facts, not terms like subjective to make a point.
That is not true. We just don’t agree on many things and so far you haven’t been able to convince me in your arguments that the things you believe in is better for the country. That is what having a discussion is about, exchange of ideas, or convincing each other in a mutual exchange of ideas what is better. So far it seems you want to get rid of the EC, have a socialist style of governance, and other things. I simply don’t agree and you haven’t really articulated why it would be better. So we can just agree to disagree, that shouldn’t be a problem, but you should at least be a little more honest and admit your views are not exactly in the middle, that you lean left in them. At least I can respect that! Don’t go all snowflake on me now! Lol.
Oh I am sorry. Judging from your statement what is one to glean from your words? Were you not inferring you are moderate with this statement? If you don’t fall on either side of the political spectrum, then what is it called if you are not a moderate then?
Lastly, I genuinely want to have a discussion. So I will invite you to come on this thread and put your ideas to the test. I have a open debate on Conservatism VS. Progressivism and you are welcome to defend your ideas here, and I think it would be fun. You seem to be an intelligent guy, so that is why I am extending the invitation to you. As you can see many liberals here are too scared to defend their ideas, and I wonder if you would champion the cause of Progressivism and expand on its ideology.
2 ways to amend the constitution.
- Congress.
- States.
Right.
Sotomayor and Kagen are so non partisan as well as most of the rest of the court.
Are you being factious with this statement?
1 Like
Seems valid reasons to keep the electoral college as ignorant still applies.
1 Like
Sarcasm run amok.
1 Like
I wanted to ask your opinion on Roberts. What the hell is his deal? Is he a liberal IYO? I can’t figure him out, especially after the healthcare fiasco, I have been suspicious of him ever since.
He actually evaluates most cases and votes with the constitution in mind. If you read his opinions they clearly show the thought behind the issue. When you look at many others they vote straight party line. He may be considered the swing vote.
The exception was the ACA where he tried to ensure the court was non partisan. His comment " if the people don’t want the ACA they can speak with the vote" which they did to no avail.
So do you consider him a constitutional conservative based on his opinions or more of a moderate leaning one?
Roberts has sided with the right in 87.5 percent of 5–4 decisions.
13 years as chief justice, Roberts has shown his brilliance and often struggles, under increasing criticism from all sides, to balance his loyalty to an institution with his commitment to an ideology.
I suspect he’s a constitutional conservative however he also is trying to keep the court in a non partisan light which moves some decisions more left than he would like.
I hardly consider Newsmax reliable, but ok.
I appreciate you wanting to have open conversations about issues, but some of your other posts make me suspicious. I will give you the benefit of the doubt, as you are being very civil here now.
Yes, i think the electoral college is an outdated, unfair system, but it is honestly not a major concern of mine. I did think the discussion was good though.
Socialist style of governance? If you mean Marxism or North Korean socialism, absolutely not! I guess we would have to get into specifics, but every modern, western government has some “socialist” programs and laws, in varying degrees.
I won’t go snowflake on you! I can take a little criticism. Anyways, im merely a cog, and probably not special. 
As far as labeling myself… i choose not to. If you want to label me, that is your choice.
As a matter of arguing for one thing or another… I have thoughts and beliefs about politics and the world, but I am not an expert on these things. I will argue my beliefs to the best of my ability and knowledge, but I am not here to convince anyone of what I believe. I’m here to exchange ideas. I have already learned a few things from this site. Hopefully, I will have some relevant ideas or facts to add to the discussion.
I was speaking of a few decades ago, not a few years ago
Edit:
You actually reinforced the point i was making, so we agree, i think.
I wont argue against that, although it failed last time. 
Actually the article I cited was “The Last Refuge” that used Newsmax as the source to give an opinion why this was happening. It gives some clear insights about Fox News motives that I tend to agree with. I also provided another video with Laura Logan, who actually was a liberal working the industry who expressed her opinion about the industry being overwhelmingly left.
No I don’t mean extreme, I mean Progressive that is steering to the extreme.
Well its hard to avoid labels, after all, it is the perils of language that identifies such distinctions.
Fair enough! I appreciate your honesty!
1 Like
Actually it worked as advertised, prevented tyranny of the majority in the cities.