America is done, illegals will soon be able to vote

a reply to: Sillyolme

Why would we give areas with more illegals electorates based on non citizen population?


Especially if only the citizens vote counts.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: thesaneone

Do you know what an electorate is?

. all the people in a country or area who are entitled to vote in an election.

Yes I do, do you know how to comprehend the article that you posted?

Apparently not.

a reply to: thesaneone

I'm comprehending it 100% fine.

Keep at it though.

a reply to: onequestion

No. Go read. Come back when you've read up on the electoral college, the electorates and who is eligible to vote in a presidential election.
You have a lot to tackle but you'll be better informed afterward.

No shame. Go get it. No time like an election year to get familiar with the whole process.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: thesaneone

I'm comprehending it 100% fine.

Keep at it though.

Keep at what??



This is nothing new, every election cycle the same sensational stories come out and people go nuts.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

they shouldn't even be here in the first place, hence the name illegal. They have no right to be counted among the electorate.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Sillyolme

Why? Why are they counting them for electorates?

Because we live in representative democracy. When elected you do not just represent the needs of the people who voted for you, you look out for the needs of the people in your district. Just because children, felons, immigrants etc, can not vote does not mean they do not count.

What makes the title even more silly is that the ruling changed nothing. It struck down a challenge on the way things have always been done. I am not sure where your confusion comes from.

a reply to: onequestion

America reached its point of no return in 2012. You're just watching the ship sink now.

a reply to: onequestion

I gave you a link. Read it.
Or thispeople.howstuffworks.com...

Here's a video
www.google.com... bw&usg=AFQjCNG3EKlZKQXlvc4VqlrsG3RcJP4BKw

ATS is a tough crowd in the political forums. Good thing is you will completely understand this article by time this thread is done. Good luck

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: onequestion

So districts aren't partisan biased towards a partisan direction that isn't representative of the people that live there. By the way, this also applies to felons, people not registered to vote, children, and other people who don't vote. Not just immigrants. Though you spinning it to apply solely to illegals is rather sensationalist.

This is the point that clarified it really quickly for me. They're counting The Population, not the population of "American Citizens, 18 years of age and older, who are not convicted felons, who have chosen to register to vote."

Voting Statistics

From the above link, formatting wasn't working well with external link tag:
Total number of Americans eligible to vote 218,959,000
Total number of Americans registered to vote 146,311,000

US Population

US Population is currently around 324,000,000. That means 55% of people can't or don't vote - it doesn't mean they should not be represented.

ETA: To clarify, I'm supporting KrazyShot's position here, the additional information is intended to help the OP and anyone misled by such alarmist propaganda to discern the obvious reality from the silly notion of America being "done."

They aren't voting, but I do see this as a problem although not specifically because of the illegals.

Why do we count ineligible voters for purposes of determining a district for congressional representation?

Think about it.

Let's say you have population A and population B. They are comprised of equal numbers of people. However, for various reasons, population A is 51% voter eligible and population B is 61% voter eligible. At this point, population B now has a numerical advantage in the number of people who can vote meaning that if they all vote, any one person's vote in population B is less important overall in determining the outcome of population B.

But it also means that the result for population B is more authentic because more of the people in population B can actually represent themselves at the ballot box. Almost half the people in population A have no legal voice in the outcome for their district. It will just be assumed they agree. Imagine now that only 40 to 30% of that district can legally vote ...

It also means that you are weighing the votes of relatively few people (the smaller percentage who can legally vote in population A) as equal against the larger number of votes of the people in population B, further disenfranchising the single vote of a voter in a district with more legal voters.

And of course, we can also learn from the last time this sort of voter trick was tried - the Antebellum Old South when the slave owners wanted to count their non-legal for voting slaves for purposes of determining congressional representation so that the slave owning south could stock the House of Representatives with slave-sympathizing Representatives who would vote for slave-sypathetic legislature.

That argument went like this:

Blacks can be counted for purposes of determining population in a district. So a slave owner with 50 slaves wanted to count them as residents. But, they could not legally vote. Only, of course, the slave owner could. So whose views do you think those elected candidates would endorse and represent?

This led to the 3/5 clause in the COTUS.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Then please explain to me what an electorate is?

Please quote the EXACT text that says that non-voters can vote now. Otherwise this will continue to remain a fail thread.

a reply to: MrSpad

You look out for the needs of legal citizens first and foremost.

Politically empowering illegal immigrants is not what this country needs.

a reply to: ketsuko

Blame the southern states demanding 3/5ths counting for the non-voting slaves they owned.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Where does it say that?

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Where does it say that?

It's your thread title for crying out loud!

America is done, illegals will soon be able to vote

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

Blame the southern states demanding 3/5ths counting for the non-voting slaves they owned.

You have a very poor grasp of history.

The southern state wanted 100%. The 3/5 clause was what they got. It was the best that could be managed given the makeup of congress at the time since the north did not have clear enough majority to force their will.

The real truth to why they wanted this lawsuit to survive. In Texas 80% of the white population is > 18 years old. While 50% of the Hispanic population is greater the 18 years old. So if this way of counting were to take place in Texas Hispanic representation would decrease and move to older whites.

originally posted by: onequestion

Civil rights groups said forcing states to change their method of constructing districts would have damaged Latino political influence.

Did you read the article?

Why do they have political influence?

Please tell me how I didn't read the article right again.