Indeed the origination clause suggests the founders anticipated disagreement w/in congress @Profepps
-
-
Replying to @AaronWorthing
I don't know how anyone claiming knowledge of the const could say the founders did not dissipate disagreement between the branches
@Profepps2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @AaronWorthing
@AaronWorthing "I find it stunning" trope is condescension, not argument;you have of course misstated argument. Not stunning, happens a lot.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AaronWorthing
.
@AaronWorthing Well, sir, if you care, you didn't "come off" as condescending. You were condescending, and without proving any warrant.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AaronWorthing
Now, do you want to talk about my attitude? Or do you want to prove me wrong?
@Profepps4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AaronWorthing
@AaronWorthing@Profepps Well, Prof., it sure didn't take long until two PARTIES did emerge--with two FF's: Demo-Republ. vs. Federalist.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Darth_Spurious
@bbenamati Yes, and if you want proof they didn't see parties coming, check out Article II and the electoral system.5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@bbenamati The two parties emerged by 1796, and were full-grown by 1800,
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.