2 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Lol, the reason that it hasn't been codified is basically because of the filibuster, which is a legislative mechanism enabling minority rule, as is the Electoral College. Maybe you should learn how our government works. And the reason that the Court has the votes to overturn it is because of Republican chicanery that gave the minority outsized influence.

As far as fascism goes, I've studied these topics in depth. You need to hit the books, it might open your eyes. But I doubt it, you seem committed to the ostrich role.

You edited your post!  And you complain of not arguing in good faith?

Just now, BBE said:

You edited your post!  And you complain of not arguing in good faith?

 

What did I edit? I might've added something in there, but I didn't change any part of the argument. You're really grasping at straws, you little whiny b|tch.

Just now, TEW said:

The GOP Party Leadership does not like Trump. None of the consultants like Trump. Literally no one in any kind of entrenched position within the Party likes Trump.

And yet, they would 100% cave to whatever he wants, because his voting block is the loudest/most influential.  It's not even a question.  They'd nominate one non-Trump candidate, their voters, talk radio show hosts, etc. would respond and they'd immediately cower to his influence.  They'd be terrified of the possible revolt.

See your edited quote above.  You have "studied extensively".

 

Your ad hominems are laughable.  Please tell me more.

1 minute ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

What did I edit? I might've added something in there, but I didn't change any part of the argument. You're really grasping at straws, you little whiny b|tch.

You removed your tyranny of the minority quip because it plainly displayed your hypocrisy .

4 minutes ago, TEW said:

It’s absolutely democracy. It’s the people voting. You don’t get to say it’s not democracy because you don’t like the outcome.

just because people are voting doesn't make it a democracy. in closed primaries only select voters are eligible. it's literally just parties picking who is actually going to run in a general.

I know where you think you're going, but your overall argument is nonsensical. they're not running for an elected office in a primary, they're running for the privilege of running for elected office. that's not democracy.

Just now, BBE said:

See your edited quote above.  You have "studied extensively".

 

Wow, you're one dumb motherf***er. You told me I needed to "learn the definition of fascism," but when I told you that I've studied it, it really got your panties twisted. You're such a joker.

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

And yet, they would 100% cave to whatever he wants, because his voting block is the loudest/most influential.  It's not even a question.  They'd nominate one non-Trump candidate, their voters, talk radio show hosts, etc. would respond and they'd immediately cower to his influence.  They'd be terrified of the possible revolt.

Cave to whatever he wants? Did you pay attention to his presidency?

He campaigned as a nationalist and we got tax cuts. Who caved to who?

1 minute ago, BBE said:

You removed your tyranny of the minority quip because it plainly displayed your hypocrisy .

 

Um, that was JohnSnow that said that line, try to keep up.

But he's right, I've used that term in the past, and we absolutely are running headlong into tyranny of the minority.

Just now, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Wow, you're one dumb motherf***er. You told me I needed to "learn the definition of fascism," but when I told you that I've studied it, it really got your panties twisted. You're such a joker.

I might aspire to be reduced to having to teach high school.

Your definition of fascism is your own construct.

Just now, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Um, that was JohnSnow that said that line, try to keep up.

But he's right, I've used that term in the past, and we absolutely are running headlong into tyranny of the minority.

Actually you stated it right after your filibuster complaint.

Just now, JohnSnowsHair said:

just because people are voting doesn't make it a democracy. in closed primaries only select voters are eligible. it's literally just parties picking who is actually going to run in a general.

I know where you think you're going, but your overall argument is nonsensical. they're not running for an elected office in a primary, they're running for the privilege of running for elected office. that's not democracy.

They’re literally taking votes to determine an outcome.  

Again, you don’t get to pretend it’s not democracy because you don’t like the outcome. This IS Democracy. 

1 minute ago, TEW said:

Cave to whatever he wants? Did you pay attention to his presidency?

He campaigned as a nationalist and we got tax cuts. Who caved to who?

  Right, TEW.  Trump isn't very influential within the Republican Party.  

Just now, VanHammersly said:

  Right, TEW.  Trump isn't very influential within the Republican Party.  

What legislation did he pass?

5 minutes ago, BBE said:

Your definition of fascism is your own construct.

 

I pity whatever professor spoonfed you such a narrow-minded and misconstrued understanding of fascism 

4 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

  Right, TEW.  Trump isn't very influential within the Republican Party.  

The majority of his "endorsed candidates" have lost/are losing.  This is a very good thing.  Now just get rid of MTG and Cawthorn and the discourse will become less adversarial.

 

Edit: Rick Scott can go his merry way as well.

1 minute ago, TEW said:

What legislation did he pass?

Very little.  He was really sheety at his job.

But as far as firing up the Republican base and shaping his party the way he wants it?  I've never seen anyone more effective.

1 minute ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I pity whatever professor spoonfed you such a narrow-minded and misconstrued understanding of fascism 

I mean words have meanings that get published in texts that do not approach your overly broad definition of supported by n-1 and I dislike it so it must be fascism.

Just now, VanHammersly said:

Very little.  He was really sheety at his job.

But as far as firing up the Republican base and shaping his party the way he wants it?  I've never seen anyone more effective.

Right. Now what DID pass?

1 hour ago, vikas83 said:

So we get a "fairer" system (in your opinion), but an even more dysfunctional government?

That's not a win. That's more MTGs and Cawthorns.

The issue with all liberal priorities is the same -- trying to find cute ways to circumvent the Constitution, or complaining about doing things that are hard. It's supposed to be hard...but it can be done. 

Yup

Funny how the solution is always to move towards their socialism…

rocker you are part of the problem, not the solution. Until you can grasp that, all you are lobbying for is making things worse

3 minutes ago, TEW said:

Right. Now what DID pass?

Yes, I get that he passed tax cuts, which, for some strange reason, you think he didn't want to pass.  

2 minutes ago, BBE said:

I mean words have meanings that get published in texts that do not approach your overly broad definition of supported by n-1 and I dislike it so it must be fascism.

 

This argument amounts to "Just because our government is not currently under the control and made in the image of fascists, there is no fascism going around." Call it whatever brand you want, but it's creeping authoritarianism. You won't recognize the threats to our republic until its too late and the authoritarians are already in control. Ignorance really is bliss.

3 minutes ago, BBE said:

The majority of his "endorsed candidates" have lost/are losing.  This is a very good thing.  Now just get rid of MTG and Cawthorn and the discourse will become less adversarial.

 

Edit: Rick Scott, Lauren Boebert and Matt Gaetz can go their merry way as well.

FYP

5 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Very little.  He was really sheety at his job.

But as far as firing up the Republican base and shaping his party the way he wants it?  I've never seen anyone more effective.

Sounds like obama

Just now, Alpha_TATEr said:

FYP

Thank you.  I missed those two.

3 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

rocker you are part of the problem, not the solution. Until you can grasp that, all you are lobbying for is making things worse

 

I'm part of the problem by saying that we should get the structure of representation back in line with how it was in 1787? Weird coming from an originalist like you, but ok.