- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
While congress can impeach a president, it is very rare and has only happened twice in the 44 presidents we have had (excluding our current president because he has no officially been impeached). To impeach a president it would require his or her own party to turn against them. (Call me out in the hall if you would like me to elaborate some more ;))
It would be impossible for large republics to elect representatives that know and can accurately express how the people feel. But in a smaller republic it would be easier for the representatives to express the feelings of the people due to there being a smaller amount of people for you to represent. And that is the point of a representative, correct? someone who will express how you feel. Brutus 1 states, "it is impossible to have a representation, possessing the sentiments, and of integrity, to declare the minds of the people".
as an anti-federalist, I feel as if the supremacy clause is too powerful. It grants the central government’s courts more power than state courts. It also allows congress to not only put courts in Washington, but also anywhere they deem “necessary and proper”. This would render the state courts useless. Brutus 1 states, “ these courts will eclipse the dignity, and take away from the respectability, of the state courts.”
as an anti-federalist, I feel as if the necessary and proper clause is way too powerful. It is vague and states, “a power to make all laws, which shall be necessary and proper, for carrying into execution, all powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the united states...entirely to abolish the state legislatures”.(Brutus 1) This shows how this clause could allow congress to do anything that they see fit even abolish state courts if they sought it necessary.
Anti-federalist feel as if a standing army is not needed nor do they have a place in our states. Because this standing army could be used to intimidate our independent states into something that we do not agree with. Brutus 1 states, “ standing armies are kept up to execute the commands of the prince or the magistrate, and are employed for this purpose when occasion requires: But they have always proved the destruction of liberty”.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!