It would be the Utopia theory instead of the current Fubar theory at work. This is another reason why the Electoral College should be removed. The elitist few are the ones that have gotten America in this war, and overwhelming financial debt with the deficit. Your great, great, great grandchildren will certainly be thrilled to find out G.W.BUSH, and crew cashed in all of the credit during his 2000-2008 reign. The vote over immigration as an example is immaterial to what your question is referring too, but thanks for the enlightening results. Dictators (BUSH) always lead sheep that can't think for themselves, let alone vote.
2007-02-03 06:02:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
11⤊
0⤋
It is often said the Democrats and liberals like the fact that there are poor people on welfare, because it ensures them a constant base.
But as true or more true, than this old saw, is that Republicans like having immigrants come into the US and "live the American dream" (i.e. get special preferred treament loans you and I could never get to open a Subway sandwich shop). ...The thought being, supposedly, that it is a form of goodwill ambassadorship to the world, to the folks back home in India or wherever when people go to America and are treated like princes, compared to home.
No one ever does anything about the preferential treatment given to people from places like India or China when they come here. There is no way we could ever open a restaurant. But these penniless paupers from these nations get special loans and own 60% of the restaurants in our country. How's that?
2007-02-03 03:14:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by Heroic Gesture 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
There are some issues, historically, with what you suggest.
First of all, if you don't like how your representative is voting for you, vote him out. I do agree, however, that the common man just can't run for office like we would want to see.
Second, if we were ruled by majority vote, there would still be slavery and racism would be allowed.
2007-02-03 02:53:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I `vote yes on immigration,but I''m against amending the constitution for anything.I do agree with you about the corruption in govt.
2007-02-03 03:34:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by Streakin' Deacon 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I vote yes but the point is if we go to the people completely it will just go back to a small group. Because when u have so many people u can not really do anything so it just goes back to a small group representing the others again.
2007-02-03 02:52:27
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
this may be achieved as quickly as we initiate throughout!! write yet another shape,yet another bill of Rights,and so on,initiate downsizing The Federal Gov. beginning with the appropriate courtroom,then the indoors sales provider,the two residences of congress!! putting in term limits of two yrs for all elected politicians,in spite of what workplace, Their income being capped at $a hundred.000 a 365 days and paying their very own scientific coverage,and retirement reward may be granted upon achieving age sixty two,no longer getting a unfastened trip upon leaving workplace!!! those being applied,might bypass an prolonged way in direction of correcting what's erroneous with u.s.!!
2016-10-01 08:55:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by eylicio 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
You can't be serious. And do you really think that if you didn't have a representative goverment there wouldn't be any corruption?? And what would your suggestions be to get people to agree when it's obvious they can't even stand united as a country?
2007-02-03 03:22:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by Brianne 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
So if the majority of us feel We will be better off with us having your money and you being our slave, that would be OK with you???
2007-02-03 02:57:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
What do you mean by legal majority?
2007-02-03 02:51:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
My vote is no because you'd never get anything done.
2007-02-03 02:51:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋