[tomschlick]

Then change it through amendments.

However you likely wont be able to because not enough people agree with you to do so. Our constitution was made to be specifically hard to change unless a vast majority agreed. That's a feature, not a bug. If a change can't be agreed upon at the national level it should stay at the state / local level.

> It should, however, cause people who voted for this (hypothetically dead or disabled or otherwise incapacitated) politician to see themselves as the piles of shit they are.

Case in point, it protects us from reactionary changes based on vitriol like this instead of substance.

[rswail]

Or unless enough state legislatures vote for a constitutional convention, in which case, all of the constitution is up for grabs.

Whether the population of those states wants the change is irrelevant if the legislature votes for it (even if they lose the next election).

[growlNark]

> Then change it through amendments.

Doesn't really matter when the amendments go through the same electoral structure. I.e. if the electoral structure weren't fucked, there would be recent amendments worth discussing.

Or else everyone really does want to live in a capitalist shithole where people don't have any rights worth speaking of aside from ownership of property.