Thread: President of the US of A

Originally Posted by Brenngun

I tend to agree that most of the average people supporting Trump do feel this way. Unfortunately in order for the country to be hijacked by a "ruling class" it would have had to have been in possession of the general populous at some point. This has never been the case. It was never envisioned by the founding fathers. Alexander Hamilton stated that very clearly in the Federalist Paper 68 when he wrote

"It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any pre-established body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture.

It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass..."

Sounds like a blueprint for a ruling class to me

Why would the founders separate from the ruling class of England just to turn around and create a ruling class in America? Makes no sense.

In fact "All men are created equal" is not a declaration to create a ruling class, but one abolishing all classes.

Originally Posted by honedright

Why would the founders separate from the ruling class of England just to turn around and create a ruling class in America? Makes no sense.

In fact "All men are created equal" is not a declaration to create a ruling class, but one abolishing all classes.

You really think all men are created equal? When they wrote that they forgot to include all the exceptions that existed then and continue today in one form or another. It was just creative writing to fit the theme of the document.

They certainly did intend to create a ruling class. They had no intention of putting the fate of the Government in the hands of the common folk. It's one of the reasons Senators were to be appointed not elected.

It's very common when a group flees a country for a variety of reasons and establishes their own colony often times the first thing they do is put restrictions on others almost as bad as what they had to deal with in the "old country". You can start with the Pilgrims.

Originally Posted by honedright

Why would the founders separate from the ruling class of England just to turn around and create a ruling class in America? Makes no sense.

You're right none of it makes sense yet there it is in black and white. If you believe the founding fathers were all truly an bunch of altruistic nice guys just wanting everything for everybody equally you should know their own words don't bare this out. The Federalist Papers are as clear a road map to a ruling class as the nose on anyone's face.

Originally Posted by honedright

In fact "All men are created equal" is not a declaration to create a ruling class, but one abolishing all classes.

On face value this declaration would seem to support what you're saying but why then write a document (Federalist Paper 68) that would completely ignore this statement when determining the process by which the most powerful person in the country is selected? Could it be the old bait and switch? The majority of people in 1787 couldn't read much past the second paragraph of the Constitution so you might as well start it with a bang. That way joe the plumber might not notice the complete F#&k over he gets 50 pages later.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

Who was it PT Barnum who said "A sucker is born every minute"? If you believe Trump is for the little guy I've got a bridge to sell you.

And obviously Hillary is the stand up gal for the poor folk......hmmmmmmmm.

So the left has been griping about the 1% for the last eight years and then along comes Hillary the Queen of Wall Street and now they can't get enough of her ??? Clearly their are no existing "fat Cat" rich on the left side and even his Royal arrogance King "O" is poor and when he leaves office will live a quiet life of humble poverty.......... Fickle !!

Originally Posted by Nightblade

So the left has been griping about the 1% for the last eight years and then along comes Hillary the Queen of Wall Street and now they can't get enough of her ??? Clearly their are no existing "fat Cat" rich on the left side and even his Royal arrogance King "O" is poor and when he leaves office will live a quiet life of humble poverty.......... Fickle !!

That's different. It wouldn't be fitting for those in leadership roles and it wouldn't be reflecting the honor that their service deserves to have a leader live in poverty. Actually, it's good for others that are in poverty to have something to aspire to. And certainly it's much better to have one dedicated to social causes live lavishly than a 1%.

Sorry, I just recently reread Animal Farm and it was time to read it to the kids.

Chrisl

Jesus was a leader who lived in poverty.
I don't aspire to be anything like our politicians
And as far as having current dear leader dedicated to social causes...... Matter of opinion.

Well crooked Hillary said Bill and her left the white house broke. Maybe that is why she stole what she did on her way out. How any semi intelligent person could honestly vote for her is way beyond my scope of intellect or lack thereof. I apologize if I offended anyone. If I did could you honestly tell me why she would earn your vote? Besides loyalty to the party.

My honest problem is that I don't believe Hillary or Donald deserve my vote.

Originally Posted by Utopian

My honest problem is that I don't believe Hillary or Donald deserve my vote.

Utopian I respect that. That is what I have done for the last 2 elections. Not vote that is.