正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Levin wrongfully claims the electoral college had nothing to do with slavery: The Electoral College is a brilliant invention, but it had nothing to do with slavery and slave owners. What happened? When the states came together to fight the British — right after Independence Day on July 4...

Acyn's profile picture

Acyn

769,216 subscribers

136,018 次观看 • 2 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

教育新闻政治
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Downey: And you know why the electoral college really works is because it forces both political parties to try to court moderate voters in swing states. Blow: 48 of the 50 states have a winner take all electoral college system, there is no reason to go into a state that you know you're going to lose, or that you know that you already have. So none of those people get campaigned to at all. Downey: They can leave the state.
2:29

Downey: And you know why the electoral college really works is because it forces both political parties to try to court moderate voters in swing states. Blow: 48 of the 50 states have a winner take all electoral college system, there is no reason to go into a state that you know you're going to lose, or that you know that you already have. So none of those people get campaigned to at all. Downey: They can leave the state.

Acyn

189,327 次观看 • 3 个月前

Elon Musk: “The reason I went so hardcore for Trump was because, to me, this was a fork in the road. If they had another four years, they would legalize enough illegals in the swing states to make the swing states not swing states, they would be blue states. Then they would win the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. And then they will keep importing more illegals to cement that outcome. Basically what happened in California. It would have been the end. That's why I went so hardcore for Trump. I invite people to do their research. The more they do their research, the more they will see that what I'm saying is absolutely true.”
1:27

Elon Musk: “The reason I went so hardcore for Trump was because, to me, this was a fork in the road. If they had another four years, they would legalize enough illegals in the swing states to make the swing states not swing states, they would be blue states. Then they would win the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. And then they will keep importing more illegals to cement that outcome. Basically what happened in California. It would have been the end. That's why I went so hardcore for Trump. I invite people to do their research. The more they do their research, the more they will see that what I'm saying is absolutely true.”

Mars University

64,522 次观看 • 18 天前

ELON MUSK: “The reason I went so hardcore for Trump was because, to me, this was a fork in the road. If they had another four years, they would legalize enough illegals in the swing states to make the swing states not swing states, they would be blue states. Then they would win the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. And then they will keep importing more illegals to cement that outcome. Basically what happened in California. It would have been the end. That's why I went so hardcore for Trump. I invite people to do their research. The more they do their research, the more they will see that what I'm saying is absolutely true.”
1:27

ELON MUSK: “The reason I went so hardcore for Trump was because, to me, this was a fork in the road. If they had another four years, they would legalize enough illegals in the swing states to make the swing states not swing states, they would be blue states. Then they would win the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. And then they will keep importing more illegals to cement that outcome. Basically what happened in California. It would have been the end. That's why I went so hardcore for Trump. I invite people to do their research. The more they do their research, the more they will see that what I'm saying is absolutely true.”

DogeDesigner

4,666,688 次观看 • 2 个月前

🚨Governor DeSantis pitches Federal Balanced Budget Amendment to Kentucky Legislature. Kentucky will be the 29th of 34 States needed to send the Amendment back to the States for ratification. “We're $38+ TRILLION in debt and it is escalating very quickly every day. We now spend more on interest just to service the debt than we do on national defense, and those numbers are going to escalate as some of these bonds have to be refinance in the future. I'm proud to be a Republican. This is not a Democrat problem, or this is a bipartisan debt problem. So Florida has obviously certified this. 28 States in total have. We've got a couple more that we think will happen relatively soon. Kentucky hopefully would be one of those. The reason I'm here is because I don't think Congress is going to fix itself. I think the incentives up there are such that we're likely to continue more of the same. There's a culture that's developed. There's a muscle memory that's developed. And you can't just say elect new people and all of a sudden they're going to fix it because here's the deal. Even if somehow we did elect new people and they did fix it, the next Congress can come in and undo it. And so unless you have changes, permanent constitutional changes to the incentive structure in Congress, you are not going to solve this problem. And the question is, how much more can you go into debt before we have a major debt crisis? I mean, at some point. Reality is going to bite, and I think the U.S. has been able to get away with this longer just because we're the best bet in town. Whatever problems we have, a lot of these other countries have other problems. But so why would you guys want to be involved at the state level? Because that's what our founding fathers envision. This is America's 250th anniversary of independence, and obviously it took them a decade or so to fashion a Constitution. But when they created the Constitution, they believed that the states were the most important units of government. They were creating a federal government, but it was limited and enumerated to certain tasks. There were local governments created by the state governments, but ultimately was the states that created the federal government and that ratified the Constitution. So they saw the states having a very, very important role. What about with constitutional amendments? Well, I think we just think muscle memory is, well, yeah, Congress proposes these amendments. You need two thirds of each house. They can propose it, and then it goes to the states for ratification. That's one way to propose it. The other way to propose it is via the states with Article V, and you have two thirds of the state certified. A proposal can be fashioned, and then it can go to the states for ratification. The founders knew that Congress could be the problem. So they obviously wanted to provide a mechanism for we, the people working through our states to be able to institute the reforms that would be necessary. We have the power to do it in our states. Many states have stepped up, and obviously I think Kentucky would be a great, great candidate to join the movement to prevent Congress from bankrupting this country. And if we can do that, that'll be one of the best things these states have ever done.”
6:12

🚨Governor DeSantis pitches Federal Balanced Budget Amendment to Kentucky Legislature. Kentucky will be the 29th of 34 States needed to send the Amendment back to the States for ratification. “We're $38+ TRILLION in debt and it is escalating very quickly every day. We now spend more on interest just to service the debt than we do on national defense, and those numbers are going to escalate as some of these bonds have to be refinance in the future. I'm proud to be a Republican. This is not a Democrat problem, or this is a bipartisan debt problem. So Florida has obviously certified this. 28 States in total have. We've got a couple more that we think will happen relatively soon. Kentucky hopefully would be one of those. The reason I'm here is because I don't think Congress is going to fix itself. I think the incentives up there are such that we're likely to continue more of the same. There's a culture that's developed. There's a muscle memory that's developed. And you can't just say elect new people and all of a sudden they're going to fix it because here's the deal. Even if somehow we did elect new people and they did fix it, the next Congress can come in and undo it. And so unless you have changes, permanent constitutional changes to the incentive structure in Congress, you are not going to solve this problem. And the question is, how much more can you go into debt before we have a major debt crisis? I mean, at some point. Reality is going to bite, and I think the U.S. has been able to get away with this longer just because we're the best bet in town. Whatever problems we have, a lot of these other countries have other problems. But so why would you guys want to be involved at the state level? Because that's what our founding fathers envision. This is America's 250th anniversary of independence, and obviously it took them a decade or so to fashion a Constitution. But when they created the Constitution, they believed that the states were the most important units of government. They were creating a federal government, but it was limited and enumerated to certain tasks. There were local governments created by the state governments, but ultimately was the states that created the federal government and that ratified the Constitution. So they saw the states having a very, very important role. What about with constitutional amendments? Well, I think we just think muscle memory is, well, yeah, Congress proposes these amendments. You need two thirds of each house. They can propose it, and then it goes to the states for ratification. That's one way to propose it. The other way to propose it is via the states with Article V, and you have two thirds of the state certified. A proposal can be fashioned, and then it can go to the states for ratification. The founders knew that Congress could be the problem. So they obviously wanted to provide a mechanism for we, the people working through our states to be able to institute the reforms that would be necessary. We have the power to do it in our states. Many states have stepped up, and obviously I think Kentucky would be a great, great candidate to join the movement to prevent Congress from bankrupting this country. And if we can do that, that'll be one of the best things these states have ever done.”

Chris Nelson 🏝️🇺🇸

366,207 次观看 • 7 个月前

Kalshi is caught between states telling it to stop and the CFTC telling it to keep going "What do you do here if you're Kalshi? You have states like Minnesota and New York that I've told you about in the past, multiple other states telling you to cease operation. Then you have the CFTC, of one Mike Selig, coming over the top rope and telling you that you have to continue offering these services to customers in those states, even though those states are telling you that you cannot" "So this order keeps Kalshi operating in New York, but it certainly does not resolve the underlying lawsuit or the underlying turf battle that we've had constantly" "This is not a crypto story, but it's a huge story about how the states and the federal government will behave when it comes to regulation, which informs what we may see in a world with no Clarity Act where the regulators are effectively in charge of what happens with crypto. This is states versus the federal government at a level we haven't seen in a long time, and it's about control of an entire new category of financial markets"
1:00

Kalshi is caught between states telling it to stop and the CFTC telling it to keep going "What do you do here if you're Kalshi? You have states like Minnesota and New York that I've told you about in the past, multiple other states telling you to cease operation. Then you have the CFTC, of one Mike Selig, coming over the top rope and telling you that you have to continue offering these services to customers in those states, even though those states are telling you that you cannot" "So this order keeps Kalshi operating in New York, but it certainly does not resolve the underlying lawsuit or the underlying turf battle that we've had constantly" "This is not a crypto story, but it's a huge story about how the states and the federal government will behave when it comes to regulation, which informs what we may see in a world with no Clarity Act where the regulators are effectively in charge of what happens with crypto. This is states versus the federal government at a level we haven't seen in a long time, and it's about control of an entire new category of financial markets"

The Wolf Of All Streets

27,722 次观看 • 1 个月前

Phillip: The budget request has nothing to do with the conditions on that ship. HIs job is to run the defense department with the budget it has today. And so with the budget that they have today, he advised the president to go into a war. And here we are with our munitions depleted, we have ships that are out to sea for historic amounts of time. What is the explanation for that? Lyman: I didn't hear a single concern about munitions being depleted when Joe Biden was sending them to Ukraine Phillip: Republicans complained all day long about Ukraine buying munitions from the United States… but how can you do that and then ignore the fact that that this war that we are fighting right now has, in fact, depleted our munitions. Lyman: Iran is a direct threat to the United States versus Ukraine, we’re fighting a proxy war against a nuclear power with Russia. That's a big difference.
2:02

Phillip: The budget request has nothing to do with the conditions on that ship. HIs job is to run the defense department with the budget it has today. And so with the budget that they have today, he advised the president to go into a war. And here we are with our munitions depleted, we have ships that are out to sea for historic amounts of time. What is the explanation for that? Lyman: I didn't hear a single concern about munitions being depleted when Joe Biden was sending them to Ukraine Phillip: Republicans complained all day long about Ukraine buying munitions from the United States… but how can you do that and then ignore the fact that that this war that we are fighting right now has, in fact, depleted our munitions. Lyman: Iran is a direct threat to the United States versus Ukraine, we’re fighting a proxy war against a nuclear power with Russia. That's a big difference.

Acyn

44,791 次观看 • 1 个月前

Mark Zuckerberg paid $500 million dollars during the 2020 election in Swing States and “captured the county clerks and the Secretaries of States in these states” to ensure they were flooded with ballot drop boxes “What happened in the 2020 election?l “Oh, I think it was rigged” “Mark Zuckerberg investing $500 million in a Get Out the Democrat vote campaign. And they focused on the, on the swing states, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona. They focused in, what they did is they basically did what I would refer to as agency capture. They went in and they captured the, the county clerks and the secretaries of States in these states. They basically said, we have a get out the Vote campaign program, and if you will implement it exactly the way that we say that you must implement it. We will give you massive amounts of money to run your elections, But if you do not run it the way that we say, then we can claw all that money back. Well, think about it, if you're a small county in Wisconsin and you get $300,000 from Mark Zuckerberg's Foundation to make sure that there are drop boxes in your, in your Democrat heavy areas, — if you do not carry out, you take that money, you sign that contract and you do not do exactly what that foundation said, you were gonna have to use public money to pay it back, you most likely would've ended up in prison.” So flood our swing states with drop boxes they can put unlimited amounts of fraudulent mail in ballots in or we will throw you in prison…. Mark Zuckerberg can NEVER be trusted. He rigged the 2020 election “That's just one example of the way that the election was rigged. The Mark Zuckerberg money was huge.”
2:03

Mark Zuckerberg paid $500 million dollars during the 2020 election in Swing States and “captured the county clerks and the Secretaries of States in these states” to ensure they were flooded with ballot drop boxes “What happened in the 2020 election?l “Oh, I think it was rigged” “Mark Zuckerberg investing $500 million in a Get Out the Democrat vote campaign. And they focused on the, on the swing states, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona. They focused in, what they did is they basically did what I would refer to as agency capture. They went in and they captured the, the county clerks and the secretaries of States in these states. They basically said, we have a get out the Vote campaign program, and if you will implement it exactly the way that we say that you must implement it. We will give you massive amounts of money to run your elections, But if you do not run it the way that we say, then we can claw all that money back. Well, think about it, if you're a small county in Wisconsin and you get $300,000 from Mark Zuckerberg's Foundation to make sure that there are drop boxes in your, in your Democrat heavy areas, — if you do not carry out, you take that money, you sign that contract and you do not do exactly what that foundation said, you were gonna have to use public money to pay it back, you most likely would've ended up in prison.” So flood our swing states with drop boxes they can put unlimited amounts of fraudulent mail in ballots in or we will throw you in prison…. Mark Zuckerberg can NEVER be trusted. He rigged the 2020 election “That's just one example of the way that the election was rigged. The Mark Zuckerberg money was huge.”

Wall Street Apes

407,912 次观看 • 1 年前

Trump: I said to Scott, I said to Howard, cancel all deals with India and Pakistan. They're not trading with us because they're in a war. They call back, what do we do? I said, look, you want to have trade with the United States. It's great, but you want to go and start using nuclear weapons on each other. We're not going to allow that. And they both agreed.
0:36

Trump: I said to Scott, I said to Howard, cancel all deals with India and Pakistan. They're not trading with us because they're in a war. They call back, what do we do? I said, look, you want to have trade with the United States. It's great, but you want to go and start using nuclear weapons on each other. We're not going to allow that. And they both agreed.

Acyn

777,438 次观看 • 1 年前

John Ibbitson explains clearly to CBC's Natasha Fatah that the US would not take kindly to the blocking of a sale of Canadian manufactured armored vehicles to the US department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) "Well, first of all, if you're going to make the stuff and sell the stuff, then you just can't sell it to nice countries." "And secondly, if you thought we were in trouble with the United States over tariffs and annexation, of threats and the like with the Trump administration, and we then refused to sell military equipment into the United States because we had decided the United States was a major human rights abuser, you wouldn't have seen nothing like what we would get from the United States as a result of that decision." Breakenridge "As John says, that would implode the relationship with the US Government." John Ibbitson Rob Breakenridge
1:29

John Ibbitson explains clearly to CBC's Natasha Fatah that the US would not take kindly to the blocking of a sale of Canadian manufactured armored vehicles to the US department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) "Well, first of all, if you're going to make the stuff and sell the stuff, then you just can't sell it to nice countries." "And secondly, if you thought we were in trouble with the United States over tariffs and annexation, of threats and the like with the Trump administration, and we then refused to sell military equipment into the United States because we had decided the United States was a major human rights abuser, you wouldn't have seen nothing like what we would get from the United States as a result of that decision." Breakenridge "As John says, that would implode the relationship with the US Government." John Ibbitson Rob Breakenridge

cbcwatcher

60,610 次观看 • 9 个月前

Elon Musk: I'm a proponent of smaller government, not bigger government. “I'm a proponent of smaller government, not bigger government. So, if somebody's a proponent of more government programs and bigger government, and they see, hey, DOGE is cutting all these government programs, then they'll be fundamentally opposed to that because they just think the government should do more things. I guess that's just a fundamental ideological opinion. But my frank opinion of the government is that the government is just like the DMV that got big, okay. So when you say, like, let's have the government do something, you should think, do you want the DMV to do it?” Interview with CBS News, May 27, 2025
0:41

Elon Musk: I'm a proponent of smaller government, not bigger government. “I'm a proponent of smaller government, not bigger government. So, if somebody's a proponent of more government programs and bigger government, and they see, hey, DOGE is cutting all these government programs, then they'll be fundamentally opposed to that because they just think the government should do more things. I guess that's just a fundamental ideological opinion. But my frank opinion of the government is that the government is just like the DMV that got big, okay. So when you say, like, let's have the government do something, you should think, do you want the DMV to do it?” Interview with CBS News, May 27, 2025

ELON CLIPS

1,280,907 次观看 • 1 年前

Is it too much to ask for a conservative debate partner who sticks to the truth for the whole hour? I tried to throw this man some rope when he said the Electoral College wasn’t rooted in racism. Take the word “rooted” off the table — surely you’re not saying the Electoral College had NOTHING to do with slavery. He then said exactly that, so I had to school him on national TV. Thanks, my girl … for calling it. #WhatDidYouLearnInSchool
1:50

Is it too much to ask for a conservative debate partner who sticks to the truth for the whole hour? I tried to throw this man some rope when he said the Electoral College wasn’t rooted in racism. Take the word “rooted” off the table — surely you’re not saying the Electoral College had NOTHING to do with slavery. He then said exactly that, so I had to school him on national TV. Thanks, my girl … for calling it. #WhatDidYouLearnInSchool

Charles M. Blow

24,330 次观看 • 3 个月前

Elias: There are two possibilities here. The first is that the Postal Service and Donald Trump know that this can’t be done. And that’s actually the point. That’s not a flaw. That’s a feature. Because what they want—what Donald Trump wants—is for states to fail at achieving what it is the Postal Service told them to achieve. So that Donald Trump will then be able to say that the states disregarded this regulation, the states were, you know, were rife with fraud, whatever it is, right? So, like, in some ways, they want this to not be a smooth process for the sake of pointing that out, that when Democrats win control of Congress, they can point to that. The second is that Donald Trump’s going to somehow just declare that, well, you know what, if states can’t do it, then no one can vote by mail.
1:25

Elias: There are two possibilities here. The first is that the Postal Service and Donald Trump know that this can’t be done. And that’s actually the point. That’s not a flaw. That’s a feature. Because what they want—what Donald Trump wants—is for states to fail at achieving what it is the Postal Service told them to achieve. So that Donald Trump will then be able to say that the states disregarded this regulation, the states were, you know, were rife with fraud, whatever it is, right? So, like, in some ways, they want this to not be a smooth process for the sake of pointing that out, that when Democrats win control of Congress, they can point to that. The second is that Donald Trump’s going to somehow just declare that, well, you know what, if states can’t do it, then no one can vote by mail.

Acyn

56,264 次观看 • 1 个月前

Jamieson Greer: "Minister LeBlanc went back to Ottawa, and they spoke with premiers, spoke with the PM. And when they came back, they had some additional views. They had some additional requests. They had some additional things that were too much for the United States."
1:01

Jamieson Greer: "Minister LeBlanc went back to Ottawa, and they spoke with premiers, spoke with the PM. And when they came back, they had some additional views. They had some additional requests. They had some additional things that were too much for the United States."

Scott Robertson

117,201 次观看 • 1 个月前

Reporter: What do you make of Republicans saying that Virginia— AOC: Wah wah wah. We have asked Republicans for 10 years to ban partisan gerrymandering. And for 10 years, Republicans have said no. Republicans have fought for partisan gerrymanders across the United States of America. And these are the rules that they have set. And so if the Republican Party wanted to start this, they did this in North Carolina. They drew out three Democratic members of Congress in North Carolina. They did it in Texas. What they’re just mad at is that they have been accustomed to a Democratic Party that rolls over, doesn’t fight, and takes everything sitting down. And what they’re mad at right now is that we are here in a new day. And we have been asking the Democratic Party to stand up and fight, and now they did—and now the Republican Party doesn’t like the fact that they are fighting against someone who actually will stand up for the American people. So if Republicans decide that they would like to revisit a ban on partisan gerrymandering, I welcome them. We have the bill right here to end this all today. But they don’t want to, because they like pursuing and continuing to enact an unfair electoral landscape. And so we have an obligation to defend ourselves.
1:34

Reporter: What do you make of Republicans saying that Virginia— AOC: Wah wah wah. We have asked Republicans for 10 years to ban partisan gerrymandering. And for 10 years, Republicans have said no. Republicans have fought for partisan gerrymanders across the United States of America. And these are the rules that they have set. And so if the Republican Party wanted to start this, they did this in North Carolina. They drew out three Democratic members of Congress in North Carolina. They did it in Texas. What they’re just mad at is that they have been accustomed to a Democratic Party that rolls over, doesn’t fight, and takes everything sitting down. And what they’re mad at right now is that we are here in a new day. And we have been asking the Democratic Party to stand up and fight, and now they did—and now the Republican Party doesn’t like the fact that they are fighting against someone who actually will stand up for the American people. So if Republicans decide that they would like to revisit a ban on partisan gerrymandering, I welcome them. We have the bill right here to end this all today. But they don’t want to, because they like pursuing and continuing to enact an unfair electoral landscape. And so we have an obligation to defend ourselves.

Acyn

2,716,349 次观看 • 5 个月前