Message from @Edward
Discord ID: 469329027740598293
I'm working on my saturday Video
So I just realized today isn't the call in show...
For what it's worth, I woke up thinking it was monday.
Just in-case @Matt Christiansen runs out of stories
Do we still have to do the <#231936127378915328> at 6:50?
🆙 | **SpenserR leveled up!**
yes
who's ready boyz?
I know I'm ready because I'm using an MVMT watch 😉
did you buy it with Birch Gold??
I put it as a decoration on my BlueApron meal
don't get any of the sauce on your Boll and Branch Sheets
don't want anyone to try and steal them, so I had to close my Blinds.com
BLONDE IS HERE!!!
YA BOI CHAR IS in watching the call-in show for once
How do you call in
roll call
FIGHT ME
In the Patreon list - Any idea why?
Do you guys think the 17th Amendment should be repealed?
Eh, not really...
What do you suggest to replace it??
I'm at a hard no, but I'm willing to hear the argument
My thought is that the states should decide how representatives are chosen. I think having state legislators pick a representative would encourage people to pay more attention to and maybe participate in their state elections.
You don't think that'd lead to cronyism?
It could. But states governments work like the federal, right? So couldn't the houses hold a vote or something, so that it's not one person picking?
The problem is that you'd have to hold states to account.
@CrystalWhiteMustang is absolutely right, if New York State decided to just appoint, there's no federal statute to prevent that
as pointed out, that would be cronyism
the 17th streamlines the process and protects more authoritarian states like New York and California from just picking who they want and to hell with the will of the people
it also makes freshman politicians viable. While I don't agree with her policies, and I know she represents a different chamber, let's use Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as an example
AOC just primaried a sure thing representative. In New York. Which is almost unheard of. Think about some upstart in the same boat that would make an attempt to do the same to an open senate seat
While I don't think that superceding Article 1, or 10A is a good idea....both of which the 17th is technically in violation of, I do see the merit, especially considering that it's a federal seat
and it also prevents the states from changing the rules in order to suit a particular agenda, much like the DNC did in 2016, and after as well
My thought is if the politicians in the state practice this kind of cronyism or change the rules to fit their agenda, wouldn't it be an unpopular move with the citizens of the state? Wouldn't it hurt their election changes when elections come up? Or am I giving the population too much credit?
*changes = chances
On a lot of occasions, you're giving populations too much credit, unfortunately. Los Angeles is still going to be a magnet for aspiring actors, Seattle for Hipsters, New York for yuppy businessmen, Massachusetts for historians, and all of them for heritage reasons. You'll chase off a few more rigid people, but for the most part the populations will be complicit
That's a part of the reason there has been so much push for federal overreach from the left, so people don't have to vote with their feet