January 4, 20223 yr 2 hours ago, Dave Moss said: To be honest a lot of Americans are done with democracy. I was telling TEW he didn’t seem interested in American-style democracy even before Trump came along. Some people just want to watch the world burn… you people must understand, you vote for your legislature. That is democracy. It doesn't then matter if the legislature votes for president. You had your vote when you voted for your local rep Just now, Dave Moss said: I have no idea what you’re advocating for… The reason people wanted the 17th Amendment was to make our political system less corrupt. I’d have to think taking elections out the hands of voters in Presidential elections would create the same problem we used to have with the U.S. Senate. We didnt have facebook and social media before. In any case, I think that's just an idea that didnt turn out as well as they had hoped when they passed it
January 4, 20223 yr 14 hours ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: you people must understand, you vote for your legislature. That is democracy. It doesn't then matter if the legislature votes for president. You had your vote when you voted for your local rep We didnt have facebook and social media before. In any case, I think that's just an idea that didnt turn out as well as they had hoped when they passed it Land votes for the legislature. In Pennsylvania, for example, the people mostly live in Philly and Pittsburgh. Very few people live in Pennsyltucky but they have more representation overall. Similarly, more people live in California than live in the Dakotas, Montana, and Idaho combined but have 2 senators compared to compared to 8. This is the scam republicans exploit. If people's votes counted instead of vast empty land where a few scattered bible thumping, gun toting lunatics live, this country would look very differently. This is why abortion is being outlawed even though the majority is pro choice. This is why corporations don't pay taxes even though the majority of people think they should. 66% of Americans think health care costs are a problem, this is why nothing gets done to solve it. Only one republican presidential candidate has won the popular vote in the last 30 years. We all know why you want the legislatures to decide, just admit it. It's the only way republicans can win. We know exactly what you're saying...
January 4, 20223 yr 49 minutes ago, Gannan said: Land votes for the legislature. In Pennsylvania, for example, the people mostly live in Philly and Pittsburgh. Very few people live in Pennsyltucky but they have more representation overall. Similarly, more people live in California than live in the Dakotas, Montana, and Idaho combined but have 2 senators compared to compared to 8. This is the scam republicans exploit. If people's votes counted instead of vast empty land where a few scattered bible thumping, gun toting lunatics live, this country would look very differently. This is why abortion is being outlawed even though the majority is pro choice. This is why corporations don't pay taxes even though the majority of people think they should. 66% of Americans think health care costs are a problem, this is why nothing gets done to solve it. Only one republican presidential candidate has won the popular vote in the last 30 years. We all know why you want the legislatures to decide, just admit it. It's the only way republicans can win. We know exactly what you're saying... Let me see if I can explain this to you, in case you missed civics. Pennsylvania has elected to go with a bicameral legislature. The lower house is based upon population. The upper house is based upon land. There is a valid reason to give some consideration to land. People form communities of like minded people, and there is always going to be a certain extent to which they ideally would prefer to be left alone to govern themselves, perhaps even as their own separate miniature democracies. However, all that being said, a true autarky doesn’t really work, and peoples from different regions have to cooperate to some degree. As such, there is a certain recognition that a small community and a large community have differing needs and the larger one should be due some recognition for the fact that they are so large. The compromise, which everyone agreed to when everyone signed the PA constitution unifying all of your counties, was to not allow a law to pass unless it passes both the landed and popular representation inherent in each of the two houses. All you have to do, if you want more votes, is to get out of the city and experience and immerse yourself in country living. After a while, you may find yourself voting Republican
January 4, 20223 yr Democrats can win in this system, but they can’t do it by using all of the miscellaneous liberal pc bs clown world tactics also, nobody can reason with a mob, but with effort you can reason with however many legislators there are in the US. and by the way I would be willing to compromise and make the presidential election a straight popular vote of all of the members of every lower house of every state. No dividing by 50 or anything. 🤔 Utah would be an issue because they’re unicameral I think
January 4, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: Let me see if I can explain this to you, in case you missed civics. Pennsylvania has elected to go with a bicameral legislature. The lower house is based upon population. The upper house is based upon land. There is a valid reason to give some consideration to land. People form communities of like minded people, and there is always going to be a certain extent to which they ideally would prefer to be left alone to govern themselves, perhaps even as their own separate miniature democracies. However, all that being said, a true autarky doesn’t really work, and peoples from different regions have to cooperate to some degree. As such, there is a certain recognition that a small community and a large community have differing needs and the larger one should be due some recognition for the fact that they are so large. The compromise, which everyone agreed to when everyone signed the PA constitution unifying all of your counties, was to not allow a law to pass unless it passes both the landed and popular representation inherent in each of the two houses. You don't need to explain anything, you're wrong when you try to most of the time anyway. You embarrassed yourself with that horrific recollection of the events of Bush V. Gore and when you tried to make the case for democracy being excluded from the constitution. I'm well aware of how the system works. You were the one who proposed changing it. I'm simply saying I know why you want to change it, so your side can win. This is typical of the republican party. They want a soviet style system where the party chooses the country's leaders, not the people. It's not surprising (to those of us who know your body of work when you posted under a different name) that you are advocating for such 2 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: Democrats can win in this system, but they can’t do it by using all of the miscellaneous liberal pc bs clown world tactics Republicans could win in the system I'm advocating for if they could actually get people to vote for them, but they can't.
January 4, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, Gannan said: You don't need to explain anything, you're wrong when you try to most of the time anyway. You embarrassed yourself with that horrific recollection of the events of Bush V. Gore and when you tried to make the case for democracy being excluded from the constitution. I'm well aware of how the system works. You were the one who proposed changing it. I'm simply saying I know why you want to change it, so your side can win. This is typical of the republican party. They want a soviet style system where the party chooses the country's leaders, not the people. It's not surprising (to those of us who know your body of work when you posted under a different name) that you are advocating for such Well two can play that game. I know why you want to get rid of the electoral college… so you can win except your idea of victory is being able to bask in the glory of an election win. My idea of victory is having a country that’s a great place to live for everyone
January 4, 20223 yr 8 minutes ago, Gannan said: You don't need to explain anything, you're wrong when you try to most of the time anyway. You embarrassed yourself with that horrific recollection of the events of Bush V. Gore and when you tried to make the case for democracy being excluded from the constitution. I'm well aware of how the system works. You were the one who proposed changing it. I'm simply saying I know why you want to change it, so your side can win. This is typical of the republican party. They want a soviet style system where the party chooses the country's leaders, not the people. It's not surprising (to those of us who know your body of work when you posted under a different name) that you are advocating for such Republicans could win in the system I'm advocating for if they could actually get people to vote for them, but they can't. I need to know his other name
January 4, 20223 yr 12 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: Well two can play that game. I know why you want to get rid of the electoral college… so you can win You're arguing that your idea of "unfair" elections is just as morally righteous as the argument to have "fair" elections because someone other than you would benefit. Absolutely wild stuff.
January 4, 20223 yr 10 minutes ago, Boogyman said: I need to know his other name @Gannan Yeah who do you think i was? you guys think I was solz… injured_reserve
January 4, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, mayanh8 said: You're arguing that your idea of unfair elections is just as morally righteous as the argument to have fair elections because someone other than you would benefit. Absolutely wild stuff. I don’t understand philosophically how you can say objectively or even consistently that a nationwide popular vote of everyone with a pulse is either morally or economically superior to any other way of determining law. There’s several possibilities, I’m arguing for one, you another, but how can anyone whichever system they support really say theirs is the best? Usually people use their reason don’t they?
January 4, 20223 yr Quote Stefanick on impeaching Biden: 'Anything is on the table when we are in the majority' No. 3 House Republican said focus of a GOP-led House should oversight, making sure members pass legislation to secure border "once and for all" Now there's the Republican Party that I remember. Doing their best to blow a sure thing. If you're intending to go down the impeachment path, stfu and win the election first, because the country is kind of tired of it, and not necessarily going to show up to vote if that's your selling point.
January 4, 20223 yr 13 minutes ago, The_Omega said: Now there's the Republican Party that I remember. Doing their best to blow a sure thing. If you're intending to go down the impeachment path, stfu and win the election first, because the country is kind of tired of it, and not necessarily going to show up to vote if that's your selling point. I would love to know what the grounds for impeachment are, other than he had the audacity to win an election.
January 4, 20223 yr 50 minutes ago, Talkingbirds said: What’s next, death for some. We were told from really smart and well educated people in CVON that covid only kills the obese and elderly. Now I don't know what to believe.
January 4, 20223 yr Just now, we_gotta_believe said: We were told from really smart and well educated people in CVON that covid only kills the obese and elderly. Now I don't know what to believe. FBI plant?
January 4, 20223 yr You never know if people have some other underlying health issue. Or maybe she’s that statistical anomaly that is relatively young and healthy and died anyway. I assume these posts are for condolence purposes and not to dunk on them. We publicly celebrate the lives of many people who die and who have done far more heinous things than not vaccinate themselves.
January 5, 20223 yr Author 7 hours ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: I don’t understand philosophically how you can say objectively or even consistently that a nationwide popular vote of everyone with a pulse is either morally or economically superior to any other way of determining law. There’s several possibilities, I’m arguing for one, you another, but how can anyone whichever system they support really say theirs is the best? Usually people use their reason don’t they? You're changing the argument.
January 6, 20223 yr Con pundits are attacking Ted Cruz for speaking up about Jan. 6, defending Capitol Police, and calling it a "terrorist attack".
January 6, 20223 yr Back the blue. Except GOP failed to pay respect to the Capitol Police officers who died protecting them one year ago during Jan. 6 insurrection. All of them, except Liz Cheney and her father. https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1479156132769841155?s=2
Create an account or sign in to comment