Election statistics question

originally posted by: PorkChop96

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

"Even though there is now anti-slavery stuff in the Constitution, you still have the 3/5ths compromise dictating the numbers in Congress, the Senate, and the Electoral College."

Show us some exact examples of the 3/5ths compromise dictating the numbers in Congress, the Senate, and the Electoral College. Stop deflecting. Show us your points in exact terms. 😀

Show us where a number of counted population was reduced to 3/5 in any State.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

The clause does not specifically use the term "slavery", it refers instead to the rather ambiguous "other persons". As the clause has not been removed, it can be used by anyone trying to redefine what "other persons" might possibly mean, and to disenfranchise them of their electoral rights.

Incorrect, this is how it actually reads:

" ...the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

Tell me, what state in the United States still has slavery?

Going by the 13th Amendment, every state in the US still has 'slavery' and 'involuntary servitude' for anyone convicted of a crime.

But Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, that we were previously discussing does not specify "slavery" as the condition to which the 3/5ths compromise applies.

It leaves it rather vaguely defined as applying to "all other persons" who are not "free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years" and It also quite specifically applies the 3/5ths compromise to "Indians not taxed", who are excluded from the exclusions. (why would anyone write such a bizarre double-negative criterion into something that is supposed to be supreme over all other national and state law?)

The 14th removes slavery (well, almost),

How does it "almost" remove slavery?

Apologies, my previous post contains a typo which I can no longer edit to correct. It should have referred to the 13th Amendment, not the 14th.

The 13th (anti-slavery) amendment has an exception. The specific text (with my emphasis) says:

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction"'

This exception might be entirely reasonable for some types of serious crime, but it means that slavery and involuntary servitude (which are different to incarceration) still apply to American citizens who have committed some sort of crime (state or federal, and possibly the crime could be quite trivial. For instance, Trump could be enslaved - he fits the criteria of the clause, as he does have a conviction).

As most of the world now has laws against slavery, it is interesting to note that those other countries do not have exceptions where slavery and involuntary servitude are all OK.

but the 3/5ths compromise is still just waiting for a tyrannical enough government to implement it against some subset of the North American population.

Hmmm, almost as if we have another amendment in our constitution that ensures we have the capabilities to keep a government from doing that.

What oh what could that be? hmmmmmmmm

Yes, please show me where the US Constitution prevents the misuse of Constitutional law itself, in a tyrannical oppression of citizens. (You know, that 'lawfare' stuff that the right-wing media are always going on about)?

Because law enforcement agencies are vital to tyrannical rule, and they always stick to the letter of the law when they crack down on citizens for the slightest potential infractions (Waco, Ruby Ridge, The Bonus Army, Wikileaks, etc, etc..).

You don't have to quote the whole text, just post the Amendment, Article, Section and Clause, and we will be able to read it.

a reply to: chr0naut

Going by the 13th Amendment, every state in the US still has 'slavery' and 'involuntary servitude' for anyone convicted of a crime.

Again, slavery does not exist in the US. Nobody owns another human being in the United States.

Yes, we have "involuntary servitude" but even that is not necessarily involuntary. In the US, you know that, if you commit a serious enough crime you will end up in a prison that has work programs. So if you commit the crime, you are volunteering to do the work.



Man you seem to have 2 brain cells fighting for third place these days, them elections results must have your little panties in a twist.

Let me ask you this again and see if I can make it a little bit easier for you to read and understand, seems to be an issue for you.

What constitutional amendment gives the people of the US the ability and power to fight back against a tyrannical government? Let me give you a hint, it's the one that you are so dead set against because "we don't need guns in my country" yet you are already the victim of a tyrannical government. You just refuse to see it that way.

a reply to: putnam6

Information about that, it's only accurate if the voter rolls are upkept. Meaning, purged of deceased and those who moved.

In other words, it's not accurate until audited.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: chr0naut

Going by the 13th Amendment, every state in the US still has 'slavery' and 'involuntary servitude' for anyone convicted of a crime.

Again, slavery does not exist in the US. Nobody owns another human being in the United States.

Yes, we have "involuntary servitude" but even that is not necessarily involuntary. In the US, you know that, if you commit a serious enough crime you will end up in a prison that has work programs. So if you commit the crime, you are volunteering to do the work.

Modern slavery in United States

Man you seem to have 2 brain cells fighting for third place these days, them elections results must have your little panties in a twist.

Let me ask you this again and see if I can make it a little bit easier for you to read and understand, seems to be an issue for you.

What constitutional amendment gives the people of the US the ability and power to fight back against a tyrannical government? Let me give you a hint, it's the one that you are so dead set against because "we don't need guns in my country" yet you are already the victim of a tyrannical government. You just refuse to see it that way.

It is your perception that this situation all happened just after the latest vote?

In truth it has existed for decades, at least, way back to the ratification of the Amendments.

a reply to: chr0naut

I think my IQ dropped 30 points from reading that piece of garbage.

Not only was that a 15 minute long read of word salad, Kamala would be proud, it never even comes rights out and says what the source considers to be "modern slavery". Let alone that it says it in almost every single sentence in the "article", sometimes more than once per sentence.

You do realize that human trafficking is illegal in the United States right? Most of which comes from the southern border, thanks Biden/Harris.

Labor groups in prisons are paid for working, yeah it's not much but they are paid to be there. Which is really saying a lot since I, as a taxpayer, am paying for them to be in prison in the first place. But, then again, if they hadn't committed their crimes to be in prison, they wouldn't be in a labor group to begin with. But we all know that will be ignored by you and those that share your idiotic agenda.

It is your perception that this situation all happened just after the latest vote?

You are putting words in my mouth that I never said, typical. If it went back further than this current election you would have brought it up sooner, would you have not? Or is this just a random hill you chose to die on because you need the attention?

In truth it has existed for decades, at least, way back to the ratification of the Amendments.

"true" slavery existed back when the Amendments were ratified, but slavery was abolished in 1865. All other forms of slavery are illegal.

Since you chose this hill to die on, what are you doing to combat human trafficking in the US? What are you doing to ensure asylum seekers are not turned away at our southern border? What are you doing to ensure that the right steps are taken to ensure people coming across the southern border of the US are who they say they are and are here for the reason they say they are?

Oh that's right, you don't even live here. You aren't doing a damn thing about it. Typical keyboard warrior.