3 ms·

Color me embarrassed. Thanks for pointing this out.

• CamperBob2 7y ago
  The effect would be the same. We would end up with a country of, by, and for the red states, for better or worse. It would be much better to focus on enforcing the existing Constitution, than to write a new one that would also end up being ignored when it proves the least bit inconvenient to the government. The world is full of "democratic" countries with lofty-sounding constitutions.
  • javagram 7y ago
    3/4 of the states are not “red states”. Look at the composition of the Senate. Each state gets 2 senators, but there are only 53 republican senators, not 74-76 as one would expect if 3/4 states were solid red. In reality the country is divided enough that no wholesale rewriting of the constitution would ever be possible in the current political climate either way, using the amendment mechanism. Hence the importance of using the SCOTUS to reinterpret it one way or another instead...
    • CamperBob2 7y ago
      3/4 of the states are not “red states”. Look at the composition of the Senate. Each state gets 2 senators, but there are only 53 republican senators, not 74-76 as one would expect if 3/4 states were solid red. I strongly disagree with your definition of "red states," given the electoral-vote map from the last Presidential election. In any case, my point is that rewriting the Constitution would have no beneficial effect anyway, because we'd just continue to ignore it.