We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.
Possibly. When Americans vote for racial separation, a fair number of them will have had to have actually voted for it (or interviewed on TV) or the electorate might look around at each other . . . I think they're (those few left at the very top, carrying a still beating white heart) expecting the voters to really vote for it.
Is not important who votes, comrade; is important who counts votes.
This helps explain how Gutierrez keeps getting elected in Illinois.
Well, this, and a gerrymandered district.
Just as slave owners wanted slaves to count as 100% of a person in the census, Democrats are happy to count illegals in the census. The motivation is the same, to give their group disproportionate representation in congress.
Slave owners did want slaves to count as 100% of a person in the census (who of course, would not be able to vote). Abolitionists wanted slaves to count as 0% of a person in the census. The 3/5 in the Constitution was a compromise between those two factions. Note that from the start a free black person was counted as 100% of a person in the census.
The best way to effect change in the system is to focus on your locality. Have to change it from the bottom up. While forces are trying to force change by pushing the whole thing over, we have to concentrate on strengthening the foundation. We can still 'vote' for who we want at the top whilst preparing for the collapse. It's easier to build a new house on a foundation than trying to put a foundation under a crumbling facade. Cheers
Mestizos from south of the border, illegally living and working in the United States, should be counted as, "Indians not taxed" as referenced in the Constitution, and therefore not subject for counting towards congressional representation or electoral college votes as set forth in the Constitution.
Of course, what are the odds the government will follow the Constitution?
The rotten borough effect.