2 hours ago, Kz! said:

So taxes have only been raised by a politician once in your entire lifetime and it was Trump that did it? Honestly, this post is a great example of how disconnected the male liberal is from reality. You probably genuinely believe that, too.

Income tax, absolutely. The fact that you don't know that says a great deal.

They F'ing suck so bad. Can’t get sheet canned fast enough.

1 hour ago, VanHammersly said:

They F'ing suck so bad. Can’t get sheet canned fast enough.

Someone else proposed diverting the funding to local law enforcement instead of ICE. It's part of why I laugh when everyone mentions how the DNC needs to "elect a moderate" and "reach across the aisle". The people at the top of the party recently are appeasing milquetoast moderates that get wrecked by populist dopes who unify behind a catchphrase.

1 hour ago, DEagle7 said:

Someone else proposed diverting the funding to local law enforcement instead of ICE. It's part of why I laugh when everyone mentions how the DNC needs to "elect a moderate" and "reach across the aisle". The people at the top of the party recently are appeasing milquetoast moderates that get wrecked by populist dopes who unify behind a catchphrase.

I’ll never understand why they don’t just look at the way the right plays politics and just do it that way. They don’t even have to be particularly creative. Just do the same thing but towards your goals. They create boogeymen out of your side, create boogeymen out of theirs. They sheet on your voters, sheet on theirs. You have to play the Reps game relentlessly and play it even dirtier than they play it. It’s the only thing that works.

Just a reminder that she was right all along…

21 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Just a reminder that she was right all along…

Yeah but she’s Indian and said she’s black, or black and said she’s Indian, I can’t remember, but it was very important.

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

Yeah but she’s Indian and said she’s black, or black and said she’s Indian, I can’t remember, but it was very important.

Don’t forget her weird laugh. Sure you might get shot in the head by masked secret police if you set foot outside your house, but at least we have a president who never laughs. Small price to pay.

On 1/20/2026 at 8:10 PM, It Hurts said:

Loonier by the minute

Probably would be easier if they just stopped letting her walk around with buckets of blood.

MAGA lecturing on the "disrespect of our institutions" is high comedy.

1 hour ago, Gannan said:

MAGA lecturing on the "disrespect of our institutions" is high comedy.

Everyone knows the best way to honor and respect the institutions is to pardon the criminals that beat cops with flag poles and then smeared feces on the walls of the Capitol.

Thought this was kind of funny.

More threats on the President’s life, that’s what’s next

2 minutes ago, The_Omega said:

More threats on the President’s life, that’s what’s next

Holding NSDAPs accountable like we did in the 40s. He’s got my vote

3 hours ago, The_Omega said:

More threats on the President’s life, that’s what’s next

On 8/16/2025 at 5:30 PM, JohnSnowsHair said:

You idiots realize this is a right wing author who specifically invited a radical leftist to discuss radical ideas?

Not that it matters because actually digging in to what the article discusses is far less important than sharing it ad nauseum in the political subforum of an NFL football teams unofficial message board.

Eh, I've heard a lot of leftists bish about how the states have equal representation in the Senate and it completely Fs over the big states, while they fail to mention the proportional representation of the House, and anytime you try to counter them its all about how it was a system set up by slave owning white men.

The far left and the far right are so brain dead as to keep playing tug of war on the same rope since the end of reconstruction. The far-left narrative about the government being formed by slave owning white men is a pushback against the lost cause narrative tropes, the relevant one being that Virginia alone won the Revolution and everyone else was along for the ride.

Only the far left is too illiterate for soft sciences more complicated than sociology, so instead of easily destroying the meritless lost cause arguments made, they just pivot to ish on the founders, never mind the fact that representation by membership was advocated by northern largely non-slave owning states, and the compromise was brokered by another largely non-slave owning state, and that the representation by population that the leftists themselves want was actually what the slave owning white men wanted in the first place.

They've also been murmuring for a few years about packing the court, and they've been riding EC abolishment since 2000. Never mind that only the Constitution itself is more politically significant and revolutionary than the successful implementation of the EC.

12 hours ago, Bill said:

Eh, I've heard a lot of leftists bish about how the states have equal representation in the Senate and it completely Fs over the big states, while they fail to mention the proportional representation of the House, and anytime you try to counter them its all about how it was a system set up by slave owning white men.

The far left and the far right are so brain dead as to keep playing tug of war on the same rope since the end of reconstruction. The far-left narrative about the government being formed by slave owning white men is a pushback against the lost cause narrative tropes, the relevant one being that Virginia alone won the Revolution and everyone else was along for the ride.

Only the far left is too illiterate for soft sciences more complicated than sociology, so instead of easily destroying the meritless lost cause arguments made, they just pivot to ish on the founders, never mind the fact that representation by membership was advocated by northern largely non-slave owning states, and the compromise was brokered by another largely non-slave owning state, and that the representation by population that the leftists themselves want was actually what the slave owning white men wanted in the first place.

They've also been murmuring for a few years about packing the court, and they've been riding EC abolishment since 2000. Never mind that only the Constitution itself is more politically significant and revolutionary than the successful implementation of the EC.

wow that's a deep pull (my post was back on August lol)

the House is proportional, and honestly has a somewhat better track record of being responsive in passing legislation - for good or bad - relative to the Senate.

the saving grace in the Senate is the filibuster, but it's also been too broadly used at this point. more legislation dies in the Senate than the House, in part due to disproportional representation and largely due to the filibuster.

so what has happened is we have a Congress that does nothing, because it's so hard to pass legislation, and voters have no real recourse outside of electing a crazy executive willing to push the boundaries.

I've never been on board with killing the filibuster, but at this stage to make Congress relevant I think we may have to. if nothing else, if/when MAGA passes stupid and unpopular legislation, the voters will be able to bounce them. Then maybe Congress will remember that it has a job to do, and voters will start punishing them for doing their jobs badly.

I don't know if that's a better path at this stage. but it was how the system was intended to work.

1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

wow that's a deep pull (my post was back on August lol)

the House is proportional, and honestly has a somewhat better track record of being responsive in passing legislation - for good or bad - relative to the Senate.

the saving grace in the Senate is the filibuster, but it's also been too broadly used at this point. more legislation dies in the Senate than the House, in part due to disproportional representation and largely due to the filibuster.

so what has happened is we have a Congress that does nothing, because it's so hard to pass legislation, and voters have no real recourse outside of electing a crazy executive willing to push the boundaries.

I've never been on board with killing the filibuster, but at this stage to make Congress relevant I think we may have to. if nothing else, if/when MAGA passes stupid and unpopular legislation, the voters will be able to bounce them. Then maybe Congress will remember that it has a job to do, and voters will start punishing them for doing their jobs badly.

I don't know if that's a better path at this stage. but it was how the system was intended to work.

Ah lol. I hardly come into this thread so I didn't check the date.


I think one of the best things we could do is to jack up the size of the house. I think only having 435 gives the fringes more power. Make congress like 1600 reps, it drowns out the loonies, makes it more accessible to normal decent people, etc.

The one thing I've done a full 360 on is term limits. I used to think they'd be great, but down in Florida where at the state level they have them, the state legislature is ineffective as hell. They just take their marching orders from The Gov and dont have a mind of their own. Having a legislature with a leash on it being led is the last thing this country needs.

1 hour ago, Bill said:

Ah lol. I hardly come into this thread so I didn't check the date.


I think one of the best things we could do is to jack up the size of the house. I think only having 435 gives the fringes more power. Make congress like 1600 reps, it drowns out the loonies, makes it more accessible to normal decent people, etc.

The one thing I've done a full 360 on is term limits. I used to think they'd be great, but down in Florida where at the state level they have them, the state legislature is ineffective as hell. They just take their marching orders from The Gov and dont have a mind of their own. Having a legislature with a leash on it being led is the last thing this country needs.

I also don't think term limits will necessarily help. you end up getting a rotating door of n00bs who know they have only one or two terms to worry about, and as you say they'd just take their marching orders.

jacking up the size of the house would also help combat gerrymandering, I would think.

logistically though I think you end up having a more remote governance model. the practical aspect of having 1500+ persons in one chamber would mean only some could be physically present, but we'd need some way of gathering votes without physical presence. either that or we build a new chamber specifically for the house that's the size of a HS football stadium.

2 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I also don't think term limits will necessarily help. you end up getting a rotating door of n00bs who know they have only one or two terms to worry about, and as you say they'd just take their marching orders.

jacking up the size of the house would also help combat gerrymandering, I would think.

logistically though I think you end up having a more remote governance model. the practical aspect of having 1500+ persons in one chamber would mean only some could be physically present, but we'd need some way of gathering votes without physical presence. either that or we build a new chamber specifically for the house that's the size of a HS football stadium.

Unless they redid the mezzanine level to expand it out to make it like a two decked auditorium.

One benefit would be that a rep wouldn't be on a bunch of subcommittees. Have each rep only be on one committee, and you'd figure the big league committees would be sat with the more tenured reps.

2 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I also don't think term limits will necessarily help. you end up getting a rotating door of n00bs who know they have only one or two terms to worry about, and as you say they'd just take their marching orders.

jacking up the size of the house would also help combat gerrymandering, I would think.

logistically though I think you end up having a more remote governance model. the practical aspect of having 1500+ persons in one chamber would mean only some could be physically present, but we'd need some way of gathering votes without physical presence. either that or we build a new chamber specifically for the house that's the size of a HS football stadium.

Just as a thought experiment, I ran some calculations for 1500 seats based on the 2020 Census.

PA would be 59 seats. Here's an AI generated image of what PA's congressional map could look like.

33 minutes ago, Bill said:

Just as a thought experiment, I ran some calculations for 1500 seats based on the 2020 Census.

PA would be 59 seats. Here's an AI generated image of what PA's congressional map could look like.

Looks like a ad to support Autism.

11 hours ago, Bill said:

Ah lol. I hardly come into this thread so I didn't check the date.


I think one of the best things we could do is to jack up the size of the house. I think only having 435 gives the fringes more power. Make congress like 1600 reps, it drowns out the loonies, makes it more accessible to normal decent people, etc.

The one thing I've done a full 360 on is term limits. I used to think they'd be great, but down in Florida where at the state level they have them, the state legislature is ineffective as hell. They just take their marching orders from The Gov and dont have a mind of their own. Having a legislature with a leash on it being led is the last thing this country needs.

Dude. We can’t get 435 remotely competent people, and you think going to 1,600 is a good idea?