The US Census Under Trump
 

Lie, cheat and steal. The mantra of Trump and t'Rrumpublicans everywhere.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...aking-news-bar

I can only read the headline since I don't subscribe but are you saying undocumented people should be included in the census and if so why?

https://www.census.gov/programs-surv...stitution.html



""The U.S. Constitution empowers the Congress to carry out the census in "such manner as they shall by Law direct" (Article I, Section 2). The Founders of our fledgling nation had a bold and ambitious plan to empower the people over their new government. The plan was to count every person living in the newly created United States of America, and to use that count to determine representation in the Congress.""




Limit populations to limit representation!;)

Basically, yes, because that's what the constitution says. Article one section 2, makes the number for allocating representatives "the whole Number of free Persons." It does not say citizens, it says persons.

Remember at the time citizenship and those who voted were of 18th century norms. Men and of land owning in nature.

True, but the census is not a count of voters, it has nothing directly to do with voting. It is a count of population, for purposes of apportioning representation and taxes. As quoted above, the word is 'persons,' not 'voters.'

Agreed, just stating this was set forth in a different time with different norms. The population was to reflect the population as a whole. At he time there were many who could not vote yet needed representation! Women and slaves for one. Slaves states were the ones pushing to have a full accounting of population at the time.

Because, just like the 2nd amendment, it's a product of a different era. If you don't like it, you probably don't like the 2nd, either. :rolleyes:

But it's clear from all your posts that you really don't understand a thing about our constitutional republic...

How does it help proportion representation and taxes?

......deleted

How many grades did you finish? Just curious.

Hint - It's in the Constitution.

Here Waggs, plenty of free classes at top universities via Coursera. Go, learn, find out what it’s like to be educated, vs spouting worthless, uneducated opinions.

https://www.coursera.org/courses?query=constitution

Apportioning representatives:

1. Get the popullation numbers for each state, and the total population number, from the census.

2. For each state, figure what percentage their population is of the total. For example, if the total is 320 million, and Virginia has 10 million, then 10 million divided by 320 million is .03125, or 3.125%. (That was just a number out of the air for Virginia, don't know what it is really without looking it up....)

3. There are 425 congressional seats. We just firgured out that Virginia is entitled to 3.125% of them. So .03125 * 425 = 13.28 Virginia would get 13 seats.

4. repeat for all the states.

Note: it actually a bit more complicated than this, because each state gets a minimum of 1 seat, even if their population is very small. Giving those states 1 each leaves fewer seats for the rest to divide up. But what I said above is the basic idea.

Taxes: don't know of any taxes in modern times that are apportioned based on population. But grants FROM the Federal government to the states are. There is money for unemployment, for roads, for lots of things. So it a state misses getting some people counted, that costs them money.

So do you think illegal immigrants should be able to to help decide how many representatives a state has or how many tax dollars they get?

I'm not an uneducated fool. I ask certain questions to get an idea where the other poster is coming from. Obviously you and Bob can't understand that.

Yes. The reasons have been explained to you ad nauseum. You simply don't want to accept the answer, due to your racism and hatred of "the other". Sad little Trumpkin you are.

So based on that all states should become sanctuary states, take as many illegals in as possible to raise the population to get as many representative votes as possible. Then that state has more power in presidential elections even though the illegals can't even voice their opinion in the poles. So in essence the illegals are just being used for more state power.

See where I'm going with this?

Are they persons?

I'd say sanctuary cities are just trying to be humane in the face of an inhumane, impossible immigration system. Thinking the population effect is the point is just paranoid.

The immigration system should be fixed.

Yes, you're following Hitler straight to hell.

Yes!


I have two solutions to illegal immigrants. If enacted would self deport the problem


1) Any and all businesses who hire them is seized, impounded. All assets confiscated.

2) Any and all who rent to sell to, shelter have the same fate. Seizure of property and assets.



Nowhere to work or live will leave.


Right now their is a reason they are here. Plenty of those who one one hand support them by employing and renting. Then complain about the problem.

Yes they are person's but to me don't fall under "the whole number of FREE persons". If they are here illegally then they technically are not a citizen and not free.

The slave states were a driving force in having ALL of the population counted!

Obviously to gain more power to the weight of the people who can vote. The same reason sanctuary cities want illegal immigrants counted.

You in favor of the Electoral Collage deciding the President over a majority vote??

I'm not 100% on that one. Haven't decided for myself if we should have the electoral college or not. It is based on the majority though.

The citizens vote on the reps and sens then, the ec puts their votes twords the majority vote in most cases. Nebraska and Maine are the only states that will split ec votes based on district and maybe all states should go that way. The ec does give more election power to lower populated states which as a whole may be the way to go so that say new York and California don't entirely decide the election.

How do you feel on it?

Main problem with the EC is it overweighs the voteS of low population states, since even the smallest get 3 EC votes. In Wyoming each electoral college vote represents under 200,000 people. Other extreme is California, that only get one vote for every 718,000 people. Scarfing up all the low-population rural states is how Trump won in 2016 with less that a majority of the vote.

The EC is out dated IMO.

Was brought about to equalize the slave states and rural areas with the urban.

Much like giving each state two senators no matter the population.


Is there a good fix?
Doubt it!

Please provide a link to this analysis since it contradicts what I read in The Guardian (70k votes in three states) and WaPo (100k votes in four states) back in 2016 is why Trump won.

BTW, if Clinton had won it would have been with less than a popular vote majority too.

Seriously?

This kind of nonsense.

Good God.

Why do you think what I said and what you said contradict each other?

Are you claiming that the mainstream press did not fully report why Trump won the EC?

Or you could just share the analysis that supports your claim. A link to a reliable source article works for me.

There are lots of reasons why. When the final margin is 70 or 100 thousand votes, any cause you may suggest will likely have enough weight to flip it.

But the big point remains. Trump got within shooting distance of the prize by stacking up lots of the 'cheap' EC votes. That is, the ones from rural low-pop states. Here, optical analysis should be enough.

https://www.270towin.com/historical_maps/2016_large.png

Correct, Trump won more of your rural small EC vote states than Hilz. Pretty sure the GOP was doing this pre Trump. Rural = red while big city = blue, your big point notwithstanding.

The 2016 election turned on 100k votes in four states. What varied perceptions caused these 100k to vote Trump? Your guess is as good as mine.

If you boil it down to the states with just 3 ec votes trump won 5 and Hilary won 4 so it can't be blamed on just the smallest states.

After 'Egregious' Violation, Judge Orders Census To Count Through Oct. 31 For Now

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/02/91922...oct-31-for-now

Donny's minions keep breaking the law. Thankfully, the courts are still populated with judges who smack them down.

Good news.