By Nick Moseder August 14, 2022
What's up, ladies and gentlemen? Guys, I wanna make another video about this ten times bigger than the mules' story that was revealed at 'The PIT'
Catch every show here: https://www.redvoicemedia.com/category/nick-moseder/
Check out my latest PREMIUM video below. Not a PREMIUM member yet? Check it out for only $1 https://redvoicemedia.net/nick
Save 66% Off MyPillow Using Promo Code: NICK https://www.mypillow.com/nick
Save $150 On Your 3 Month Emergency Food Kit! https://mypatriotsupply.com/pages/rs-repdig-nick-moseder?rfsn=1750310.2a7b74&subid=Nick.Moseder
All of my links can be found here👇🏻 https://instabio.cc/NickMoseder
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.
I wouldn’t mind a popular vote to elect the President and Vice president, if only the “winner takes all” option is declared ilegal. In other words, if the democrat candidate gets 54% of the vote, his electoral college will get 54% of the electors; and the Republican candidate will get 46% of the electors. Now that would be a real “popular vote”. But the popular vote under the “winner takes all” rule would be undemocratic. Why? This option would protect the sovereignty of the “body politics” of each State. Other wise, the popular vote under the “winner takes all” would cancel the sovereingty of the people of the States and would end the US of A as we know it.
We must understand that the US of A Consitution created a Union of Citizens of the several States. It is the inhabitants of the States that belong to the Union, not the States as political institutions. So, a popular vote must include all the Citizens of the several States – what is called the “body politics.” So, a popular vote would require the majority of citizens, not of States as with the “winner takes all”formula.
Now let’s see if under this suggestion the Democrats are willing to pursue a “popular vote!”
What Nick got all hyped about is close to a nothing-burger…
Having access to the poll workers info has nothing to do with changing votes during an election. Having access to when I schedule my training session does give them (? CCP) access to the voters data base or the votes during or after an election based on what Nick said above. Now if there is another program that deals with votes and voter database…that would be a different matter.
I did not see a way to edit my comment…
“my training session does NOT give them (? CCP) access to the voters…”