Of course, playing around with any of this stuff always brings the risk of bricking your console.

It goes to show you: ‘you get into a tickle contest with a skunk, you get tinkle all over you,” Pelosi to her members after, per aide in room.

I can’t imagine how much worse this whole thing would be if Trump wasn’t a giant fucking moron.

History is going to judge GHWB. Not Tom Brokaw and Andrea Mitchell the morning of the man’s funeral. Why are we so worried about a week’s worth of rosy takes during the coverage of his death that we need to make sure there’s a half dozen posts about the bad shit he did?

It’s not anti-Christmas;

None of those amendments dictate how states must conduct elections

Article IV Clause 2, the 15th amendment, the 19th amendment, the 24th amendment, and the 26th amendment would disagree.

But representing the people isn’t and never was what the Senate was set up to do. They represent the states themselves. The problem is the way that the Senate has been run due to every other issue Dingell brought up.

Retroactively changing election results by gerrymandering after an election would 100% violate the constitution.

Lets be honest...Michael was NeverNotii running for President.

What if one of those states has some Republicans in power at that moment or even after the Republican loses but could still win the EC - can they just repeal the Interstate Voting Compact in that moment?

I’m arguing House representation needs to be tied to the population. Not Senate representation. I actually don’t have a problem with the way the Senate is set up in that its a check on the House.  For instance without it the ACA would have been repealed 100 times over.

Its in the Wikipedia link I posted.

They’re getting close...less than 100 electoral votes to go and 69 votes with pending legislation.

I think a better solution to the House representation issue is to set the minimum Representative to population ratio to the smallest state by population.

The essay is great, but any time someone brings abolishing the Senate my eyes can’t roll any farther back into my head. Its the non-starter of non-starters. You will never convince small states to hand over their check of the house, nor senators to vote themselves out of existence. Arguing to abolish the Senate takes…

Its gonna take more than unionizing. We need to mandate labor representation on corporate boards, change the tax code to benefit labor and re-investment, break up some companies that are too big, and change the business culture from one that only considers shareholders to one that considers stakeholders.

As a non-lawyer, I’ll be the first to admit that I haven’t the faintest idea what sort of 11th dimensional meta-chess President Donald Trump and his legal team are playing at these days.

I don’t think this criticism is very well thought out considering it was a reasonable answer to the question, and that the answer you wanted him to give was to a question that wasn’t asked.

Vote for the person you agree with. Thank you.