Nuclear Option

[ZeroJunk]

Jus wondering if you guys think Harry Reid was shortsighted when he abolished the Senate tradition on many appointees ?

[nailer]

What tradition?

[Tom Joad]

I'm for preserving the filibuster. Always have been.

But they should have to Filibuster for real.

Like Jimmy Stewart did in Mr. Smith goes to Washington.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6UbYHCkoZs

[donquixote99]

I think Zero's blather is maybe supposed to mean that the nuclear option was already shot off by the Democrats, so the Repubs can do away with the filibuster, and it's not on their head?

[ZeroJunk]

I think Zero's blather is maybe supposed to mean that the nuclear option was already shot off by the Democrats, so the Repubs can do away with the filibuster, and it's not on their head?

Surely you are not that stupid, or maybe you are.

Harry Reid stopped it over Obama appointments being held up.

Lot of people predicted it could come back to bite him in the ass.

If you actually have sense enough to watch the news all of the appointments Trump is making only need 51 votes not 60 regardless of filibuster.

I don't think that is the case with Supreme Court justices, but the lesser courts and other positions that have to be voted on need a simple majority.


Thank Harry Reid moron.

[Rajoo]

Surely you are not that stupid, or maybe you are.

Harry Reid stopped it over Obama appointments being held up.

Lot of people predicted it could come back to bite him in the ass.

If you actually have sense enough to watch the news all of the appointments Trump is making only need 51 votes and cannot be filibustered.

I don't think that is the case with Supreme Court justices, but the lesser courts and other positions that have to be voted on need a simple majority.


Thank Harry Reid moron.

So why is Don 'stupid' for mentioning what you yourself claim?

[ZeroJunk]

So why is Don 'stupid' for mentioning what you yourself claim?

So, since Harry Reid started it now it is on the Republicans head ?

Are they supposed to start it back now ?

Help me understand.

[Rajoo]

So, since Harry Reid started it now it is on the Republicans head ?

Are they supposed to start it back now ?

Help me understand.

He said, it's not on their head, meaning the Republicans. I suspect that a lot of us were opposed when the Dem's used this option.

[ZeroJunk]

He said, it's not on their head, meaning the Republicans. I suspect that a lot of us were opposed when the Dem's used this option.

Gotcha.

[nailer]

Gotcha.

No, they got you. :)

[ZeroJunk]

No, they got you. :)

Yep.


You know the next one is going to be a move to abolish the electoral college by the left. And, despite what happened in 2000 and this year it is quite possible that in the long run a Republican has better odds in the popular vote since the Democrats get 100% of the electoral votes fairly reliably in the largest states with some variable percentage of the popular vote.

[bobabode]

No, they got you. :)

Good one Robert, I think... but that's par for the course with you.

[Boreas]

Yep.


You know the next one is going to be a move to abolish the electoral college by the left. And, despite what happened in 2000 and this year it is quite possible that in the long run a Republican has better odds in the popular vote since the Democrats get 100% of the electoral votes fairly reliably in the largest states with some variable percentage of the popular vote.

I know that for right wingers political advantage is all that counts but I'd be willing to risk political advantage for the sake of fairness. There's nothing fair about a 'democracy' in which loser gets a couple million more votes than the winner.

[Pio1980]

Jus wondering if you guys think Harry Reid was shortsighted when he abolished the Senate tradition on many appointees ?

Didn't seem to matter for an appointment to the Supremes by a POTUS the 'Pubs want to see fail.
I don't necessarily want to see the demagogue in waiting fail, I just don't expect much at all out of this admin of a positive legacy.


Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[ZeroJunk]

I know that for right wingers political advantage is all that counts but I'd be willing to risk political advantage for the sake of fairness. There's nothing fair about a 'democracy' in which loser gets a couple million more votes than the winner.

They argued about that when it was originally designed. Hamilton wanted a balance between the popular voters rights and states rights as he described in the Federalist Papers.

Fair is relative I suppose. Is it fair for a handful of counties in a handful of states to tell the majority of states and counties what to do.

[Boreas]

They argued about that when it was originally designed. Hamilton wanted a balance between the popular voters rights and states rights as he described in the Federalist Papers.

Fair is relative I suppose. Is it fair for a handful of counties in a handful of states to tell the majority of states and counties what to do.

Why should someone in North Dakota's vote count more than someone's in California? We're long past federalism and the artificial measures, like the 3/5 rule, aimed at making all the member states equal.

[ZeroJunk]

Why should someone in North Dakota's vote count more than someone's in California? We're long past federalism and the artificial measures, like the 3/5 rule, aimed at making all the member states equal.

Because people in California might as well be on a different planet as people in North Dakota.

Not so much different than people in North Dakota being ruled by England.

[Pio1980]

Because people in California might as well be on a different planet as people in North Dakota.

Not so much different than people in North Dakota being ruled by England.

Nor should England or California be ruled by North Dakota.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[bobabode]

Because people in California might as well be on a different planet as people in North Dakota.

Not so much different than people in North Dakota being ruled by England.

You've obviously never seen Kern county, California or most of the San Joaquin valley for that matter.

[barbara]

You've obviously never seen Kern county, California or most of the San Joaquin valley for that matter.



That's right.
A lot of California is red. The blue parts are concentrated in the Bay Area and LA.

My husband is a fourth generation Californian and his dad was involved in politics back in the late fifties and early sixties. Husband insisted that California was very much republican back then and I didn't believe him until I googled the political history of the state. He was right.

[Pio1980]

My bro lives in Visalia as a retired acedemic and active with Dem politics. Pretty much a blueberry in a crabapple orchard.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Boreas]

Because people in California might as well be on a different planet as people in North Dakota.

Not so much different than people in North Dakota being ruled by England.

Okay, make it Texas then.

[Wasillaguy]

You've obviously never seen Kern county, California or most of the San Joaquin valley for that matter.

Kernville!
I used to run the "powerhouse" section of the Kern 3-4 times a day in my inflatable. Then back to the campground for steaks and beers. Love that place.

[Dondilion]

Sanctuary cities will continue to load the electoral college system in the Repubs favor.

[Dondilion]

Good one Robert,

He is very good. I believes he enjoys doing it.

Not someone you like to have on your civic committee.

[Tom Joad]

I know that for right wingers political advantage is all that counts but I'd be willing to risk political advantage for the sake of fairness. There's nothing fair about a 'democracy' in which loser gets a couple million more votes than the winner.

The Electoral college favors Republicans as it gives the rural states with smaller populations more electoral votes relative to their populations. .

For example, Wyoming, population 584,000, 3 electoral votes. That's one electoral vote per 195,000 people. (yes, I'm rounding these numbers).

California 38.8 million population, 55 electoral votes. That's one electoral vote per 705,000 people.

Unfortunately, in order to be able to understand this, one would need to be able to comprehend grocery store arithmetic at the 4th grade level, and that's well beyond your abilities ya frickin moron. .

[donquixote99]

Sanctuary cities will continue to load the electoral college system in the Repubs favor.

How so?

[Tom Joad]

Sanctuary cities will continue to load the electoral college system in the Repubs favor.

No, see my post #26.

The highly populated urban areas are fucked by the electoral college.

That's why Trump was able to win the electoral college while losing the popular vote.

[nailer]

He is very good. I believes he enjoys doing it.

Doing what? Playing tennis, top down driving, reading, listening to music, being an audionerd, meals with friends ...

Not someone you like to have on your civic committee.

Pretty much always got a B in the creating a good/effective working environment rating category. We were trying to actually get things done though. :D

[Pio1980]

Doing what? Playing tennis, top down driving, reading, listening to music, being an audionerd, meals with friends ...



Pretty much always got a B in the creating a good/effective working environment rating category. We were trying to actually get things done though. :D

Living life as a 1930s matinee idol romantic comedy character. Effective escapism for hard times.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Boreas]

The Electoral college favors Republicans as it gives the rural states with smaller populations more electoral votes relative to their populations. .

For example, Wyoming, population 584,000, 3 electoral votes. That's one electoral vote per 195,000 people. (yes, I'm rounding these numbers).

California 38.8 million population, 55 electoral votes. That's one electoral vote per 705,000 people.

Unfortunately, in order to be able to understand this, one would need to be able to comprehend grocery store arithmetic at the 4th grade level, and that's well beyond your abilities ya frickin moron. .

Were you talking to me or to the other frickin moron?

[nailer]

Living life as a 1930s matinee idol romantic comedy character. Effective escapism for hard times.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

:D:D

I just might have unintentionally intentionally choose those because I left a few out and changed the order while typing. :)

[nailer]

Were you talking to me or to the other frickin moron?

He wasn't talkin to me cause I already know it.

We need a representative government. Who on this forum doesn't believe this?

[Boreas]

He wasn't talkin to me cause I already know it.

We need a representative government. Who on this forum doesn't believe this?

And so do I.

People in the minority are always looking around for "alternatives" to representative democracy.

[Tom Joad]

You've obviously never seen Kern county, California or most of the San Joaquin valley for that matter.

So what?

There are Blue counties in Alabama just like there are red ones in California.

In fact, from the election results you can readily see that Alabama is as Democratic as California is Republican.

Even slightly more so.

Clinton got 35% of the vote in Alabama, Trump got 33% in California.

http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president

[ZeroJunk]

Were you talking to me or to the other frickin moron?

A moron is a moron I suppose. Wear it.