Alexander Hamilton laid out his case for the Electoral College in Federalist No. 68, written in 1788 to convince the public to ratify the U.S. Constitution. He called the system "if not perfect, ... at least excellent," arguing that it achieved a delicate balance between popular rule and informed deliberation. A Filter Against Demagogues and Populism Hamilton worried that the general public could be manipulated by candidates using "talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity". He argued that while the "sense of the people" should shape the choice, the final decision was best entrusted to a temporary, deliberative body of electors—individuals chosen by their peers who possessed the "information and discernment" required to select a qualified leader. A Defense Against Corruption and Foreign Interference To prevent corruption, foreign powers, or domestic political factions from bribing electors, Hamilton argued the system's design contained key safeguards: • No official ties: Federal officials and sitting congressmen were barred from serving as electors to prevent conflict of interest. • Separated locations: Electors would meet in their respective states on the same day rather than all together in one national location, making it nearly impossible for foreign agents or cabals to coordinate widespread bribery. •. Transient status: Electors were chosen solely for this single task and disbanded immediately afterward, leaving no permanent body to corrupt over time. Preserving the Separation of Powers Hamilton strongly opposed letting Congress choose the president. He believed that if a president relied on Congress for re-election, the executive branch would become subservient to the legislative branch. By using an independent, temporary body of electors, the president remained independent of Congress while still being tied to the public. Preventing National Unrest Hamilton argued that direct national popular elections for a single powerful office would cause widespread civil unrest and "convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements". Decentralizing the vote across individual states aimed to keep the political temperature manageable.

https://youtube.com/shorts/2K01nQoWKIo?si=HlrsyjD9sBCu-xlf

Hello from New Jersey USA 🇺🇸 🤠

4 - August 1, 2026 I see Trump's behavior equivalent to him being on a Trampoline, despite his age. One jump he is up next he is down and so it continues till the bottom of the trampoline tears, and he falls to the ground and all settles. It is definitely time for the tear so that the others can do their work without the oscillations of up and down.

1 - August 1, 2026 'Zero-trust’ pact forces Netanyahu to pull troops out of Gaza and keep workers for terror group in government Hamas has agreed to give up its weapons. In a moment many thought would never come, Donald Trump announced late on Thursday that the terror group had agreed with the Board of Peace to a staged handover that is contingent on a withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) from Gaza. Existing Hamas-run governance structures in the Strip – and, to an extent, the police – will remain in place, ready for takeover by a transitional government. On the face of it, it is a good deal for Hamas. It forces Israel to stop bombing, and it potentially allows the terror group to keep weapons in Gaza for the time being, albeit not under its direct control. With an election looming, it is also not a great look for Benjamin Netanyahu to be seen withdrawing troops from Gaza. But there are many key details to be ironed out, and potential for Israel to derail implementation if it sees fit. Israel shall fully complete, without delay, all remaining commitments under Sharm Sheikh Protocol, particularly the cessation of military operations as detailed in annex (1). Hamas and the Palestinian factions shall complete the cessation of all military operations in accordance with Sharm Sheikh Protocol and the Peace Plan. Mr Trump’s original 20-point plan demanded the end to military operations, including aerial and artillery bombardment. In other words, “stop bombing now”. Since then, the IDF has killed more than 1,000 Gazans, many of whom are children. We do not know how many of the dead were Hamas terrorists, but either way, the original deal did not allow Israel to launch strikes against activity it deemed suspicious.