10072 pts ยท September 10, 2017
This space intentionally left blank.
need the important information - how's the wi-fi, is breakfast included, and do they have late checkout? I'm not there for the view.
I'm understanding more than you- you can't get past slavery which it was not centrally about.
3/5s was beyond slavery. It was control of federal goverment
ratification required protecting the large groups in play - large/small, North/South.
3/5s was compromise to split power between North and South. Slavery was part of it, also general power balance of states &fed government.
still had a Civil war, but the 3/5s was to keep US alive, not slavery.
in fact only chance for abolition is exactly what happened - North continued to gain power/South weakened then finally had majority.
3/5s was for national survival, not about keeping slavery going. Slavery was going to exist past the ratification point no matter what.
South would have never signed on, and slavery would have continued past the lifetime of the US at that point.
you're conflating 'accurate' with 'the way I want the power balance to have been with the North in charge to destroy slavery'
You are starting with the namecalling and trying to claim 'I am right! Everyone agrees with me'. That's weak.
3/5s was about survival of US, not about 'keep slavery forever'. It was a compromise to get both groups to sign on.
The old US would have split, with South or individual states becoming countries. South would have legal slavery.
case 1) North does not ratify. case 2) South does not ratify. Both cases = no Constitution, no US long term
1) all blacks count as population, South owns House and Presidency. 2) no blacks count, North owns House/Senate/Pres and abolishes slavery
nope. It was created to get the majority of states to ratify. A Constitution without it would have 2 results:
More namecalling - you do that when you get very uncertain. Assuming in normal life as well?
waah 'I'm right! It's obvious'. You failed and know it. Historians don't agree with anyone 100% - trying to claim that is BS
so you are not seeing the 2 cases and think that somehow the Constitution would exist with North in 100% control.
there is no case of Constitution without blacks being counted in some way - South would not ratify.
case 2 - no 3/5s in Constitution, South has lock on House and Presidency.
you keep trying to claim that 3/5's 'gave South undue power'. 2 cases - no new Constitution, South keeps legalized slavery & US fractures.
more namecalling. Without the 3/5s the blacks would all either all count or not at all. I'm not having to keep up - you are the one behind
so you keep explaining incorrectly.
South wanted all blacks counted because they would be able to prevent any emancipation - they would own House and Presidency.
without the 3/5s, there would have been no Constitution, and the South would have likely become its own country with legalized slavery.
geez. You think that the Constitution would have existed without the 3/5 clause. 3/5 gave a balance between the two.
without ratification, Constitution would have failed, and US would have probably fractured into separate countries.
So 3/5s was compromise - gave South some of the population, gave North exclusion of some. Was to get states to ratify.
number of House seats and Electoral College votes. If excluded, North would have more. Both sets (N & S) had to agree to ratify.
need the important information - how's the wi-fi, is breakfast included, and do they have late checkout? I'm not there for the view.
I'm understanding more than you- you can't get past slavery which it was not centrally about.
3/5s was beyond slavery. It was control of federal goverment
ratification required protecting the large groups in play - large/small, North/South.
3/5s was compromise to split power between North and South. Slavery was part of it, also general power balance of states &fed government.
still had a Civil war, but the 3/5s was to keep US alive, not slavery.
in fact only chance for abolition is exactly what happened - North continued to gain power/South weakened then finally had majority.
3/5s was for national survival, not about keeping slavery going. Slavery was going to exist past the ratification point no matter what.
South would have never signed on, and slavery would have continued past the lifetime of the US at that point.
you're conflating 'accurate' with 'the way I want the power balance to have been with the North in charge to destroy slavery'
You are starting with the namecalling and trying to claim 'I am right! Everyone agrees with me'. That's weak.
3/5s was about survival of US, not about 'keep slavery forever'. It was a compromise to get both groups to sign on.
The old US would have split, with South or individual states becoming countries. South would have legal slavery.
case 1) North does not ratify. case 2) South does not ratify. Both cases = no Constitution, no US long term
1) all blacks count as population, South owns House and Presidency. 2) no blacks count, North owns House/Senate/Pres and abolishes slavery
nope. It was created to get the majority of states to ratify. A Constitution without it would have 2 results:
More namecalling - you do that when you get very uncertain. Assuming in normal life as well?
waah 'I'm right! It's obvious'. You failed and know it. Historians don't agree with anyone 100% - trying to claim that is BS
so you are not seeing the 2 cases and think that somehow the Constitution would exist with North in 100% control.
there is no case of Constitution without blacks being counted in some way - South would not ratify.
case 2 - no 3/5s in Constitution, South has lock on House and Presidency.
you keep trying to claim that 3/5's 'gave South undue power'. 2 cases - no new Constitution, South keeps legalized slavery & US fractures.
more namecalling. Without the 3/5s the blacks would all either all count or not at all. I'm not having to keep up - you are the one behind
so you keep explaining incorrectly.
South wanted all blacks counted because they would be able to prevent any emancipation - they would own House and Presidency.
without the 3/5s, there would have been no Constitution, and the South would have likely become its own country with legalized slavery.
geez. You think that the Constitution would have existed without the 3/5 clause. 3/5 gave a balance between the two.
without ratification, Constitution would have failed, and US would have probably fractured into separate countries.
So 3/5s was compromise - gave South some of the population, gave North exclusion of some. Was to get states to ratify.
number of House seats and Electoral College votes. If excluded, North would have more. Both sets (N & S) had to agree to ratify.