Jump to content

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

markstanco

By markstanco
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 13k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

oh, and to add, let's offer up a 'comparable' analogy reversal and see how it fits.  who's the aoc of the right?  jim jordan?  matt gaetz? this is basically like if there was a huge earthquake he

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

some people see 99% and consider that absolutism.  i am one of those people. this is not your wife grabbing your cell phone that you left in the other room.  this is not a quick favor.  this is a

RomaVicta
RomaVicta

Yes, of course. She is the only woman or woman of color the left right (edit) focuses their ire on. There are no other examples. Great point. It's really all intellectual and rational. And usually ver

Posted Images

elfenix

elfenix 34332

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yeah, but you don't know why it exists.  Hint:  slavery

Quote

Mr. MADISON. If it be a fundamental principle of free Govt. that the Legislative, Executive & Judiciary powers should be separately exercised, it is equally so that they be independently exercised. There is the same & perhaps greater reason why the Executive shd. be independent of the Legislature, than why the Judiciary should: A coalition of the two former powers would be more immediately & certainly dangerous to public liberty. It is essential then that the appointment of the Executive should either be drawn from some source, or held by some tenure, that will give him a free agency with regard to the Legislature. This could not be if he was to be appointable from time to time by the Legislature. It was not clear that an appointment in the 1st. instance even with an eligibility afterwards would not establish an improper connection between the two departments. Certain it was that the appointment would be attended with intrigues and contentions that ought not to be unnecessarily admitted. He was disposed for these reasons to refer the appointment to some other source. The people at large was in his opinion the fittest in itself. It would be as likely as any that could be devised to produce an Executive Magistrate of distinguished Character. The people generally could only know & vote for some Citizen whose merits had rendered him an object of general attention & esteem. There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.

southern whites: snowflakes since 1787.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
High Plains Drifter

High Plains Drifter 11052

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I remember Bob Dole came to San Antonio over the summer of '96 and he pulled out a mini constitution out of his jacket pocket, held it up to us and said, "This is the Owner's Manual of our Republic.  Do yourself a favor a pick up a copy."  And he winked.  And I thought it was hokey at the time, a campaign gimmick to show he was more serious than Bill Clinton.  But it stuck with me.  And I thought about that moment when I saw him struggling to stand up to salute Bush's casket last year.  He carried it with him because it was important to him, it got him and our nation, out of more jams than we can possibly fathom.  I'd like to think Dole had that copy, or one like it, still in his jacket pocket.  And as he saluted the former President, thought to himself something like, "We did the best we could to keep the place running, eh George?"  

And I listen to the way Trump disregards the constitution as some online user's agreement to be scrolled past to get on to what you really want to do.  And while I don't doubt many of you will wait days in line to walk past Trump's dead body lying in state, you won't understand the integrity of people like Dole.  And you really won't understand why so many of us anti-Trump folks are in line with you to enter the Rotunda.  We'll be alongside you for the very same reason so many Spaniards still visit Franco's grave at the Valley of the Fallen.  Because we want to make sure he's still dead.  

 

I carry one in the console of my car.

 

Also, hopefully, Dotard's body won't be given the honor of lying in state at the rotunda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom

Tom 2959

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Hardly.  The EC doesn't fuck over candidates, it ensures the election process isn't rule by mob. I was as shocked as anyone that he won.

Such a bullshit take.  The EC is outdated and only ensures the very scenarios conservatives like to pretend it prevents actually happen.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Drew

Drew 2518

Posted
Posted

Wait so what would replace the EC?  It would never go over to basically have the Presidency be decided by California, NY and Illinois every time. 

I don't disagree with anyone saying the current version of it needs to be scrapped...but it can't just be a pure popular vote because we'd just end up having more strife.   Same reason we have the Congress set up the way it is, 2 per state in the Senate, and the House is determined by the populace of each state.  So we'd do away with that as well in this scenerio?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
High Plains Drifter

High Plains Drifter 11052

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Drew said:

Wait so what would replace the EC?  It would never go over to basically have the Presidency be decided by California, NY and Illinois every time. 

I don't disagree with anyone saying the current version of it needs to be scrapped...but it can't just be a pure popular vote because we'd just end up having more strife.   Same reason we have the Congress set up the way it is, 2 per state in the Senate, and the House is determined by the populace of each state.  So we'd do away with that as well in this scenerio?

 

A compromise between what we have now and a popular vote would be to have each congressional district give their EV to whichever candidate wins the popular vote in that district. The two senate EVs go to the candidate who wins the popular vote in the entire state.

For the record, I'm for a straight popular vote for pres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11683

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Drew said:

Wait so what would replace the EC?  It would never go over to basically have the Presidency be decided by California, NY and Illinois every time. 

I don't disagree with anyone saying the current version of it needs to be scrapped...but it can't just be a pure popular vote because we'd just end up having more strife.   Same reason we have the Congress set up the way it is, 2 per state in the Senate, and the House is determined by the populace of each state.  So we'd do away with that as well in this scenerio?

Yes, they want to change the Senate as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom

Tom 2959

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Drew said:

Wait so what would replace the EC?  It would never go over to basically have the Presidency be decided by California, NY and Illinois every time. 

 

This argument again?  With a popular vote, every voting citizen would have an equal voice in electing the president.  California and New York have tons of conservatives who don't have a voice in presidential elections. 

As it stands now, Ohio, Florida, and a few swing states decide every election.  Live anywhere else and your vote is about as meaningful as if you'd just stayed home.  

Edited by Tom
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9850

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Tom said:

This argument again?  With a popular vote, every voting citizen would have an equal voice in electing the president.  California and New York have tons of conservatives who don't have a voice in presidential elections. 

As it stands now, Ohio, Florida, and a few swing states decide every election.  Live anywhere else and your vote is about as meaningful as if you'd just stayed home.  

Beauty of the system. If you just have to be rules by a set of politics you are free to move. CA, NY. The spots of blue that you want to have a say over the entire red country. 
 

2,600 voting counties Trump

460 voting counties Hill

 

it works perfectly. Especially when CA is “stuffing the popular vote ballot” with open borders 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Tom said:

This argument again?  With a popular vote, every voting citizen would have an equal voice in electing the president.  California and New York have tons of conservatives who don't have a voice in presidential elections. 

As it stands now, Ohio, Florida, and a few swing states decide every election.  Live anywhere else and your vote is about as meaningful as if you'd just stayed home.  

Yep. Turnout would be much higher across the nation as a result too, and likely make more downstream races competitive. 

Everyone having a voice. Imagine that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom

Tom 2959

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

Beauty of the system. If you just have to be rules by a set of politics you are free to move. CA, NY. The spots of blue that you want to have a say over the entire red country. 
 

2,600 voting counties Trump

460 voting counties Hill

 

it works perfectly. Especially when CA is “stuffing the popular vote ballot” with open borders 

Ah, yes, the old "more land with hardly anyone living on it voted for this person over the other person!  If we get rid of the EC, who'll speak for these open plots of soil and who'll represent the arbitrary lines on a map? The system works perfectly!"

The system is outdated garbage that doesn't represent the people.  And give me a break about "open borders."  Both W. and Trump's ego tried to prove illegal immigrant voter fraud and couldn't.

And if it's so important in the 21st century to stick with an 18th century system, you'd care more about gerrymandering since the founders' vision was that the House would grow with the population.  But hey, that's also benefiting the red team morons, so I'd bet to nobody's surprise you're fine with that, too.

 

Edited by Tom
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23482

Posted
Posted

Maybe instead of abolishing the EC we should break up the country. The core issue seems to be that people in various regions do not want the will of the people in various other regions imposed on them. So take away the mechanism. Replace it with an economic zone and maybe mutual defense.  Otherwise, let people be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13587

Posted
Posted

Oh, I'm just curious what qualifies as proof to the Chicken Sandwiches Of The World in this latest iteration of the ad infinitum accusations against Democrats rigging elections that almost invariably disappear like evidence of the 3 to 5 million illegal voters that we still haven't seen 3 years after the 2016 elections.

In this case he seems to be conflating the 2 least effective methods of rigging an election- in-person voting fraud and election fraud, the former of which is so wildly ineffective requiring untold thousands to risk their freedom and hoping thousands more are doing the same, that there's never been any evidence it has ever swayed any state or federal election- that the GOP uses as a pretext for employing 1 of the 2 most effective methods for rigging an election- voter suppression- which it parlays into the other- gerrymandering.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85563

Posted
Posted (edited)

My favorite way to debunk the "Dems are stuffing ballots with illegal votes" with open borders is why the fuck would they do it in California, where they regularly win by ~4 million votes, and not allocate 800k to Texas, 22k to Wisconsin, 10k to Michigan and 44k to Pennsylvania.  Shiiiit, you can move all your illegal votes to those 4 states in 2016 and still win California by 3 million votes! 

Edited by Js1
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29378

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Js1 said:

My favorite way to debunk the "Dems are stuffing ballots with illegal votes" with open borders is why the fuck would they do it in California, where they regularly win by ~4 million votes, and not allocate 800k to Texas, 22k to Wisconsin, 10k to Michigan and 44k to Pennsylvania.  Shiiiit, you can move all your illegal votes to those 4 states in 2016 and still win California by 3 million votes! 

I always love the "Dems are busing in three million illegals from another state!" shit. I mean, think how many goddamn buses that would take and how easy it would be to actually spot.

  • Like 2
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...