TRUMP SEALS THE DEAL Unbound delegates put campaign over threshold for GOP nomination

[RetBobbyMI]

My heartfelt thanks to you both.

The majority of our elected officials are in it for themselves.  My father-in-law recently confronted our congressman about some of the things he said he planned to do, but never even tried.  FIL said," I gave you a large sum of money to help get you elected, but now it looks like you're one of those who were in it for the lifetime health care and $150K pension.  What do you say to that?"

The congresscritter just shrugged and walked away.

People in elected offices would have a whole different perspective of life if they have to serve in the military or as a first responder before they could hold office. It would also weed out those whimpy goody two shoes who think THEY know what's right for everyone else.

[Mesaclone]

People in elected offices would have a whole different perspective of life if they have to serve in the military or as a first responder before they could hold office. It would also weed out those whimpy goody two shoes who think THEY know what's right for everyone else.

Solution...constitutional amendment granting two votes in all elections to those who've completed honorable Military Service and/or Law Enforcement service.

A kind of "super" citizenship.

[RoosGirl]

I'd rather it go back to being just property owners.

[jmyrlefuller]

There was a little bit of it with Romney, but nothing like this year.

I remember being one of the last holdouts on Romney here. Never was I subjected to as much harassment over it then as I and others are now over Trump—although fortunately I'm not alone this time around.

[RetBobbyMI]

Solution...constitutional amendment granting two votes in all elections to those who've completed honorable Military Service and/or Law Enforcement service.

A kind of "super" citizenship.

There you go. I'm all in for that. I could just hear the liberals howl at that for being discrimitory.

[Cyber Liberty]

I'd rather it go back to being just property owners.

Me too.  No skin in the game, no vote.  We used to complain "No taxation without representation!"  Well, representation without taxation ain't no great shakes either.  It's a formula for rampant looting.

[Mesaclone]

Me too.  No skin in the game, no vote.  We used to complain "No taxation without representation!"  Well, representation without taxation ain't no great shakes either.  It's a formula for rampant looting.

Problem with that is that its too complicated trying to define "property". For example, does intellectual property count? Are we talking real estate only?

[RoosGirl]

Real property that is personally inhabited 183 days of the year.

[RetBobbyMI]

Problem with that is that its too complicated trying to define "property". For example, does intellectual property count? Are we talking real estate only?

[sarc] yeah but...
It will disenfranchise all those too lazy.
It will disenfranchise all those illegals in this country illegally [stated this way purposefully].
It will disenfranchise all those poor illiterate uneducated voters who only vote DemRat.
Could go on and on...

[Mesaclone]

Real property that is personally inhabited 183 days of the year.

Does that mean I have to ditch my beach house and live ONLY in the mountain cabin and my Desert retreat?

[RoosGirl]

Does that mean I have to ditch my beach house and live ONLY in the mountain cabin and my Desert retreat?

Yes. :|

I meant as opposed to living outside of the US.

[geronl]

Unless you are arguing that people not voting for their own party's nominee

The party's nominee identifies with the other party. Not that I care anymore.

The party has lost me.

[Cyber Liberty]

Yes. :|

I meant as opposed to living outside of the US.

Property owners are the only people I'm sure are paying taxes.  I don't want people who don't pay anything to vote on how tax money gets spent.  Parse that any way desired.   

[Cyber Liberty]

The party's nominee identifies with the other party. Not that I care anymore.

The party has lost me.

What party?  /s

[Hoodat]

Amendment XIV, Section 2 is what messes all this up.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv#Section_2

But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

This means that if a state were to limit its voters only to people who pay taxes, for instance, then their representation in Congress would decrease.  That is one of the reasons why states do not police their voter rolls.  The more voters, the more Congressmen.

[Cyber Liberty]

Amendment XIV, Section 2 is what messes all this up.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv#Section_2

But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

This means that if a state were to limit its voters only to people who pay taxes, for instance, then their representation in Congress would decrease.  That is one of the reasons why states do not police their voter rolls.  The more voters, the more Congressmen.

Sadly true.  The people tasked with running this thing are incentivized to run it improperly.

[RetBobbyMI]

Amendment XIV, Section 2 is what messes all this up.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv#Section_2

But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

This means that if a state were to limit its voters only to people who pay taxes, for instance, then their representation in Congress would decrease.  That is one of the reasons why states do not police their voter rolls.  The more voters, the more Congressmen.

But this can be easily offset with the repeal of the 16th Amendment on the power to tax individuals, and put the tax on the states, proportionally to its population.  That would sure cut off the sanctuary city syndrome.