Jump to content

DC statehood

Nice Guy Eddie

By Nice Guy Eddie
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Poor representation in existing states is still representation, correct? The lack of federal protection in the Old West was granted through statehood, correct? American citizens living on US soil asking for equal representation isn't fucking "whining." Goddamn.

Now, I understand and can agree that outsiders getting involved in this fight may be in favor of it for pure political reasons. But, at its most basic level, politics is about power and, in this case, empowering people to have a say in Congress is still the right thing to do. The fundraising thing I'm sure can take care of itself, especially in DC.

That last bolded line is just you being an asshole by intentionally distorting the situation and waving away the point being made about the history of a building consensus on this issue.

If it was just about giving people representation in Congress, it would have already been done when D.C. was solidly Democrat, and the Congress was solidly Democrat.  Plenty of 2-year instances of that over the last 250 years.  For the last 50 of those years, there's another reason why D.C. hasn't been given statehood during Democrat reign.  Nobody is asking those questions.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12846

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Lobo said:

If it was just about giving people representation in Congress, it would have already been done when D.C. was solidly Democrat, and the Congress was solidly Democrat.  Plenty of 2-year instances of that over the last 250 years.  For the last 50 of those years, there's another reason why D.C. hasn't been given statehood during Democrat reign.  Nobody is asking those questions.  

Who cares? None of that changes that 700,000 people have no representation in this country. We can do it now. It’s the right thing to do. Period.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6908

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Lobo said:

If it was just about giving people representation in Congress, it would have already been done when D.C. was solidly Democrat, and the Congress was solidly Democrat.  Plenty of 2-year instances of that over the last 250 years.  For the last 50 of those years, there's another reason why D.C. hasn't been given statehood during Democrat reign.  Nobody is asking those questions.  

Ways of discriminating that were acceptable in the 50’s are no longer acceptable today. Can you imagine a woman being denied credit today without her husband’s okay? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)

And it was the right thing to do the few dozen other times it was tried as well.  My only question is what makes this time so special?  the White House would prefer it, the other states don't seem to mind, the courts likely wouldn't block it.  So why not now?  What's keeping it from happening?  The flow of money.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll bet all I can borrow that by the end of the first Biden term...not only will D.C. not be a state...it won't have even been a votable issue.  Not because of the filibuster.  But because of how Red and Blue Senators in swing states would become adrift.

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12846

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Cool. Maryland can gain some population. 

Why? You literally can’t explain any reason why they shouldn’t become a state other than it hurts your team. Let us know when you come up with a reason for the positions you take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fattyflattie

fattyflattie 4636

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Why? You literally can’t explain any reason why they shouldn’t become a state other than it hurts your team. Let us know when you come up with a reason for the positions you take.

Because if the representation is sooo important as you claim, it would likely be easier and faster that way.  But that’s not the end goal, is it?  You can be honest here. I don’t like it because one way, you want it a certain way because of something else.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29401

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Lobo said:

If it was just about giving people representation in Congress, it would have already been done when D.C. was solidly Democrat, and the Congress was solidly Democrat.  Plenty of 2-year instances of that over the last 250 years.  For the last 50 of those years, there's another reason why D.C. hasn't been given statehood during Democrat reign.  Nobody is asking those questions.  

Well, based on that quote I provided, we certainly know that race was a part of the shitty treatment it was getting in the 1930s. We also know that more powers were gradually afforded DC after the Civil Rights Era, but I'm sure there were plenty of retrograde, racist hangers-on in the Democratic Party, like Byrd, who probably weren't exactly enthusiastic, if not outright hostile, to the concept of America having its first black majority state. That shift of southern conservatives to the GOP took a solid three decades up into the 1990s for that to fully gel, which brings us to our modern view of the two parties.

How long has the Democratic Party been fully in charge of the legislative and executive branches since the mid-1990s? No doubt the ball was dropped at some point, but as Satchel pointed out a few posts up, even Obama didn't have a filibuster-proof Senate to get everything done that he would've liked in the face of obstruction by Mitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45497

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Ok so should we just play the same game?  D’s will never effectively get the Dakotas and WY and MT because they are not trying to court those voters.  Stupid.  

They absolutely are and should. Especially with the environmental policies. Wyoming, ironically, is the only state where the Antiquities Act does not apply, but I would bet that no one there is sad that the Grand Tetons are protected.  Montana is leaning more blue than I think most people are willing to admit. The GOP is playing a stupid game and betting that these people are as stupid as the Deep South. I would also bet that they are not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12846

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Because if the representation is sooo important as you claim, it would likely be easier and faster that way.  But that’s not the end goal, is it?  You can be honest here. I don’t like it because one way, you want it a certain way because of something else.  

How would it be easier or faster? Maryland hasn’t said they will accept DC in their state. And if they become part of Maryland are we taking away those three electoral votes or moving them to Maryland? I want it a certain way because Americans should be represented. I want more states, more reps, whatever gets people more of a voice in their government. I’d like PR to be a state as well and they likely won’t vote D.
So yet again you support denial of rights to certain Americans that aren’t on your team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

Folks, I'm not opposed to it.  Just pointing out some historically obvious shit.  I think the most pragmatic path is to redraw a chunk of it back into Maryland and not much skips a beat.  If I were a loyal Democrat, I'd be all over that as a compromise because it would strengthen the voting base in Maryland which---if some of you don't know---is pretty fucking red outside of the areas immediately around D.C.  Now you bring in 400K loyal blue voters to shore up Governor and Senators.  Then...bide your time for a demographic shift that seats enough Senators to break filibuster (if you haven't already done it by rules votes before that)...in 10-20 years to vote the rest of D.C. into Statehood with its own 400k person base.  That's A way to do it, not THE way.  Just throwing out ideas.  I just like the geographical and historical challenge of this idea.  The rest of panacea chasing bullshit based on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29401

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Folks, I'm not opposed to it.  Just pointing out some historically obvious shit.  I think the most pragmatic path is to redraw a chunk of it back into Maryland and not much skips a beat.  If I were a loyal Democrat, I'd be all over that as a compromise because it would strengthen the voting base in Maryland which---if some of you don't know---is pretty fucking red outside of the areas immediately around D.C.  Now you bring in 400K loyal blue voters to shore up Governor and Senators.  Then...bide your time for a demographic shift that seats enough Senators to break filibuster (if you haven't already done it by rules votes before that)...in 10-20 years to vote the rest of D.C. into Statehood with its own 400k person base.  That's A way to do it, not THE way.  Just throwing out ideas.  I just like the geographical and historical challenge of this idea.  The rest of panacea chasing bullshit based on?

I get it, and none of this is a personal attack on you. Your ramblings can sometimes get annoying, but I still like you nonetheless. Part of the issue with MD, as I pointed out, is that they may not want DC. And, I agree, it's sort of weird to have an actual city-state but, in essence, that's sort of what Rhode Island already is and for all practical purposes so too is Nevada. Fuck, Wyoming, the Dakotas, and Montana are states without even any real cities.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

No because you are the victim here. Just like all your fellow republicans.

Hey Jim, are there any pictures of you wearing blackface at an old Christmas party for your law firm? A lot of times when these things first come to light, other old stuff starts popping up. Might want to get out in front of it. Don’t worry, you’ll be forgiven here. 

Edited by GRHorn
  • Fuck You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, bolverk said:

I get it, and none of this is a personal attack on you. Your ramblings can sometimes get annoying, but I still like you nonetheless. Part of the issue with MD, as I pointed out, is that they may not want DC. And, I agree, it's sort of weird to have an actual city-state but, in essence, that's sort of what Rhode Island already is and for all practical purposes so too is Nevada. Fuck, Wyoming, the Dakotas, and Montana are states without even any real cities.

 

Ramblings?  It's 400 circular posts here about D.C. becoming a state without a modicum of historical or forward-thinking insight. 

How can you say that after all we've been through?  I offered to get you transit papers into upstate New York using my trucking company as a front to say you needed to come in to help us with supply chain logistics so you could see help your daughter with her move during restricted Covid-19 movements.  It was our Rick Blaine-Victor Laszlo moment.  You ungrateful bastard! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29401

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Ramblings?  It's 400 circular posts here about D.C. becoming a state without a modicum of historical or forward-thinking insight. 

How can you say that after all we've been through?  I offered to get you transit papers into upstate New York using my trucking company as a front to say you needed to come in to help us with supply chain logistics so you could see help your daughter with her move during restricted Covid-19 movements.  It was our Rick Blaine-Victor Laszlo moment.  You ungrateful bastard! 

My forward-thinking insight would be to redraw all the damn state boundaries, but I don't know how many would support that platform. My gut says that you would absolutely support that proposition however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, bolverk said:

My forward-thinking insight would be to redraw all the damn state boundaries, but I don't know how many would support that platform. My gut says that you would absolutely support that proposition however.

Meh, all the provinces/states/districts of every other country have the goofiest fucking shapes, why shouldn't ours?  Sure we have lots of right angles out west...but it's that a sign of progress?  You have 50 sub-federal entities, you're gonna have some rivers and some t-squares.  Cost of business, I say.  Plus, you can't just draw yourself into equal portions.  Montana is beautiful and Oklahoma is ass ugly.  Why does one have so many more people than the other?  It's not the borders?  It's what's inside that counts.  

I'm not that all-in on D.C. as a state, I'm not that all-in on redrawing a huge chunk of them into Maryland and keeping a true(r) D.C. after that.  I'm just saying ONE pragmatic solution that could actually have a decent fucking chance of happening is to do the redraw, hold for 10-20 years, then get the full-on D.C. vote into statehood.  It checks more boxes (including the solidifying of Maryland as more blue than red, 'cause it ain't right now).  Sure there's that one poll that says Maryland doesn't want more of D.C. until you remember how Maryland state taxation works.  Narrator:  Shit be wacky up in here.  It's just money, not votes.  Nothing mind-bottling.  

Plus, y'all listen to my plan...we get a fucking new season of the Wire after this all shakes out.  Under y'all's naive ideology, we just get some new season of 'Scandal' where Olivia Pope uses her influence to make D.C. part of Nova Scotia.  

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Willfully Horn

Willfully Horn 7915

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

We’d like to hold power forever so it’s important now.  Not important enough for Obama to do something about, but it is now.  And we’ve cared FOREVER.  Cool. 

The election of 2016 altered the political landscape. Surely you remember all the talk of norms being bulldozed.

Plant ice, harvest wind.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16860

Posted
Posted

We need to gerrymander states too. I am tired of being lumped in with west texas idiots. They should join Oklahoma above ground level. The part below belongs to the remainder of Texas. Beaumont sounds French and can fuck off to join Louisiana. NE Texas is practically Arkansas.
We will keep El Paso sort of like Berlin.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VRHorn

VRHorn 718

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Haven’t had a beer in several weeks. Just don’t like hypocrisy.  If @Johnny Sackposted that he’d be banned.  Hell anyone who trends right.  But in this particular corner, it was not only ignored but excused.  Pretty weak. 

Go ahead and search "Dennis Prager" and read that thread, sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bateshorn

Bateshorn 9905

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Js1 said:

We can tell you’re not all-in on DC as a state. DCers who were born there, grew up there and raise families there don’t want to live in Maryland of be part of Maryland. 

Conservatives call for retrocession in Maryland would have merit if they weren't so busily screaming that DC residents don't deserve representation.  Like many things with the modern GOP, they had a viable alternative, but took a shit on it in an effort to ball wash "working class Americans." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29401

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

If that's the case, how many states can we kick out of the union for not being properly brought in?  This seems like a good excuse to kick out the Dakotas, for instance.

Or maybe even his own home state, which mighta oughta be retrocessed back into Virginia.

But, of course, his "constitutional" worries are taken care of in the language that was passed so that a federal district would still exist, but it would only cover the mall and surrounding federal buildings. Moreover, the Constitution itself which discussed a federal district says it should be no more than 10 square miles. DC today is 68 square miles and is presumably unconstitutionally too large.

Methinks he protests too much because he'll no longer be important to the current Democratic majority in the Senate.

Fuck this guy.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...