USA - США - SAD

Daï Djakman Faré wrote:muceni obama nije mogo da progura mericka garlanda 9 meseci pre isteka mandata a ovaj ce da progura kroz svog picka a les ruth bader se nece ni ohladiti

Erős Pista wrote:Pa naravno da hoće. Teroristička banda, a ne stranka.

buffalo bill wrote:Demokrate nude imaginaciju bolje države od juče.

buffalo bill wrote:Demokrate nude imaginaciju bolje države od juče.

buffalo bill wrote:U toj imaginaciji se delom i krije njihova trenutna opčinjenost tzv institucijama, dekorom i pristojnitijem. Tramp im je tu pomutio pamet.

...
Evenings began with champagne and opera playing in the Ginsburgs’ Watergate apartment; dinner was prepared by Justice Ginsburg’s husband, Marty, who some years served venison or boar from my father’s post-Christmas hunting trip
...

BIDEN: “It’s estimated that 200 million people will die, probably by the time I finish this talk.”

pic.twitter.com/RE97unjgH6

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) September 20, 2020

buffalo bill wrote:U toj imaginaciji se delom i krije njihova trenutna opčinjenost tzv institucijama, dekorom i pristojnitijem. Tramp im je tu pomutio pamet.

rumbeando wrote:

BIDEN: “It’s estimated that 200 million people will die, probably by the time I finish this talk.”

pic.twitter.com/RE97unjgH6

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) September 20, 2020

If a candidate receives an undisputed majority of the Electoral College votes, he or she is the winner. With the exception of the elections of 1800, 1824, and 1876, this is how our presidents and vice-presidents have been chosen (with an asterisk for Vice Presidents Ford and Rockefeller, who were chosen through the nomination and confirmation process of section 2 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment—Ford to fill the seat left vacant when Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned in disgrace, and Rockefeller to replace Ford when Ford became president after Richard Nixon resigned facing impeachment).
But if no candidate receives a majority of the Electoral College votes, then the election for president is thrown into the newly elected Congress—which under the Constitution takes office on January 3 and, under the Electoral Count Act, convenes to count the electoral votes on January 6. The House of Representatives selects the president from among the top three vote-getters for president in the Electoral College. Each of the fifty states, whatever its population, gets one vote, and, under the Twelfth Amendment, “a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.” The Senate selects between the two candidates for vice-president who received the most electoral votes.
If those processes fail and we get neither a president nor a vice-president (who then serves as president), we turn to the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, passed pursuant to Congress’s authority under section 2 of the Twentieth Amendment. The Speaker of the House of Representatives, if he or she is eligible to be president (which requires being at least thirty-five years old and a “natural-born Citizen” who has lived in the United States for fourteen years), can resign from Congress and “act as President.” If the speaker is ineligible or unwilling, the act then turns to the president pro tem of the Senate, and one after another to the members of the cabinet, in order of the seniority of their departments.
With me still? Now come the problems. They start, as Douglas points out, with a challenge to democratic legitimacy that inheres in the very structure of the Constitution: the possibility that a candidate will lose the popular vote but nevertheless obtain a majority in the Electoral College. Social scientists have estimated that under current conditions, there is a one-in-three chance that a popular-vote loser will nonetheless win the electoral vote. And for demographic reasons, that chance skews more heavily in favor of Republicans than Democrats. So far in the 2000s, this mismatch has happened in two of the five elections: in 2000, Al Gore got roughly 500,000 more votes than George W. Bush, but Bush garnered 271 electoral votes to Gore’s 266 (with one D.C. elector abstaining in protest); in 2016, Hillary Clinton received 2.87 million more votes than Trump but lost in the Electoral College 304–227 (seven electors—two pledged to Trump and five to Clinton—voted for other candidates). Particularly in a nation as politically polarized as contemporary America, it is a real question how many such elections the people will accept before they demand fundamental change to the way a president is selected.

Erős Pista wrote:https://jacobinmag.com/2020/09/supreme-court-socialists-ruth-bader-ginsburg-death