Why NOT to vote Republican

[LDAHL]

Isn't the logical result of Federalism that we'll have fifty states all going their own way? Like the South can reinstate Jim Crow--if not outright slavery--and the Southwest can consider joining Mexico?

I think it means states can go their own way so long as they don’t violate the rules they agreed to when they ratified the constitution. I don’t think we require an all-powerful central government fine-tuning our lives for us as the only alternative to chaos.

[bae]

I think it means states can go their own way so long as they don’t violate the rules they agreed to when they ratified the constitution.

I think that was the whole point of the US Constitution in fact.

I don’t think we require an all-powerful central government fine-tuning our lives for us as the only alternative to chaos.

There seems to be a desire by some to treat states as simply quaint lines on a map, but clearly administrative districts incapable of dealing with their own affairs.

[JaneV2.0]

I think it means states can go their own way so long as they don’t violate the rules they agreed to when they ratified the constitution. I don’t think we require an all-powerful central government fine-tuning our lives for us as the only alternative to chaos.

Slavery was legal when the Constitution was ratified; huge cohorts of people were disenfranchised, etc.

[bae]

Slavery was legal when the Constitution was ratified; huge cohorts of people were disenfranchised, etc.

And then, as time moved along, we modified the Constitution, using the provisions previously-agreed-upon.

[JaneV2.0]

And then, as time moved along, we modified the Constitution, using the provisions previously-agreed-upon.

I'd like to believe it is "a living document."

[bae]

I'd like to believe it is "a living document."

Well, it contains within it the directions for modifying it, so, yes, of course it is.

It does not contain however any text suggesting "if you don't like what this says, you can just make up random stuff and run with it".

[Alan]

Slavery was legal when the Constitution was ratified; huge cohorts of people were disenfranchised, etc.

That's because the Constitution didn't address slavery as that was considered a states issue until it became an issue the Federal Government could use to punish the southern states. And even then the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to those states the Feds deemed to be "in rebellion".

I'm not sure why our Juneteenth celebrations are based upon the abolition of slavery in Texas when slavery was still legal in northern states such as New Jersey for an additional year or so afterwards. I can only surmise it's part of an ongoing effort to demean the south.

[LDAHL]

I think that was the whole point of the US Constitution in fact.



There seems to be a desire by some to treat states as simply quaint lines on a map, but clearly administrative districts incapable of dealing with their own affairs.

What I like about the constitution is that it devotes so much space to what the federal government can’t do, and the various checks it puts on various players to prevent the exercise of arbitrary power.

[bae]

What I like about the constitution is that it devotes so much space to what the federal government can’t do, and the various checks it puts on various players to prevent the exercise of arbitrary power.

But, at the end of the day, it's only a piece of paper, and people have to have a shared desire to live by it.

[LDAHL]

But, at the end of the day, it's only a piece of paper, and people have to have a shared desire to live by it.

I think that by and large they do. The internet and much of the media give a disproportionate voice to the crazier outliers. One might feel that there are millions seething over Roe or guns or fraudulent voters or rigged elections based on what we hear, but that’s not what I get from regular, unaugmented people.