Impeach Trump!

[Ibanez]

WTF...where is the villainization?

It's a point that it's a lot easier to amend when you represent the wants of a narrow demographic.

The Constitution is outdated.

You really aren't paying attention, Trip. Get out of your bubble.

[∞∞∞]

The Constitution promotes unequal representation.

You can have theoretically 99% of the population agree on a change, yet the Constitution unable to be amended simply due to where those people live. If 4951 people lived in Nebraska, and 1 person lived in every other state...13 people could stop the will of 4987.

Might as well be a federation of central government if we're gonna make a mockery of democracy.

Your hyperbole only serves to demonstrate your inability to rationally discuss the subject. What a wonder that you can't get enough people to agree with you to make the changes you deem so dire and necessary.

What a cop out.

Of course mine is an extreme example, but it's there to demonstrate how unfair it can be. The system as-is has become a comical farce to democratic principles. And as more people move to urban areas and their needs shift, the easier it's going to be to ignore those needs from a Congressional standpoint.

In the world of the American Constitution, land is king. Unequal representation is the result.

[Ibanez]

Amending the Constitution is only hard if what you're trying to amend has only very little general support in the first place. And really, if it only has little general support why would we want to enshrine it in the Constitution in the first place? If you really want something to be amended, do the hard work and convince people to agree with you. Stop falling back on tropisms whenever you realize you just can't snap into existence whatever you want because *horror* you have to engage with the other side of the electorate that you've convinced yourself is pure evil. That's not the Constitution's fault, more so the person you see in the mirror.

The Constitution promotes unequal representation.

You can have theoretically 99% of the population agree on a change, yet the Constitution unable to be amended simply due to where those people live. If 4951 people lived in Nebraska, and 1 person lived in every other state...13 to 49 people could stop the will of everyone else.

Might as well be a federation of central government if we're gonna make a mockery of democracy.

You just defeated your own position with respect to the EC.

If 4951 people lived in Nebraska, and 1 person lived in every other state...then Nebraska decides who get's elected POTUS. Candidates will ignore everything other state and compete in Nebraska. How is that fair representation. That's what you're talking about with a popular election. I'm not saying it's equal now but it's more fair than having the election decided by states on the two coasts plus Michigan. Nobody will address (pander) to you Iowa, Montana, Alaska,etc..

Now..increase representation in the HoR and maybe let's discuss changing the EC. To me, the real inequality is in the HoR.

[∞∞∞]

Sure, my extreme example works within the electoral college...but more unfair examples work within it too.

I don't disagree about the HoR. It needs waaaaaaaaaaaaay more representatives than it has right now. I'd like to see at least 10,000.

[SDHornet]

Another day, another thread where Trip goes "rrrreeeeee".

[Ibanez]

Sure, my extreme example works within the electoral college...but more unfair examples work within it too.

I don't disagree about the HoR. It needs waaaaaaaaaaaaay more representatives than it has right now. I'd like to see at least 10,000.

We've had this discussion. 10,000 would be prohibitive. There are some that think due to the population, something closer to 1000 would be appropriate. 435 was arbitrarily set in the 1920s aka about 100 years ago.

[AZGrizFan]

Amending the Constitution is only hard if what you're trying to amend has only very little general support in the first place. And really, if it only has little general support why would we want to enshrine it in the Constitution in the first place? If you really want something to be amended, do the hard work and convince people to agree with you. Stop falling back on tropisms whenever you realize you just can't snap into existence whatever you want because *horror* you have to engage with the other side of the electorate that you've convinced yourself is pure evil. That's not the Constitution's fault, more so the person you see in the mirror.

The Constitution promotes unequal representation.

You can have theoretically 99% of the population agree on a change, yet the Constitution unable to be amended simply due to where those people live. If 4951 people lived in Nebraska, and 1 person lived in every other state...13 to 49 people could stop the will of everyone else.

Might as well be a federation of central government if we're gonna make a mockery of democracy.

You must have a degree in economics.

[AZGrizFan]

Sure, my extreme example works within the electoral college...but more unfair examples work within it too.

I don't disagree about the HoR. It needs waaaaaaaaaaaaay more representatives than it has right now. I'd like to see at least 10,000.

Yeah, we need MORE people in government. More. That's the ticket.

[∞∞∞]

Sure, my extreme example works within the electoral college...but more unfair examples work within it too.

I don't disagree about the HoR. It needs waaaaaaaaaaaaay more representatives than it has right now. I'd like to see at least 10,000.

Yeah, we need MORE people in government. More. That's the ticket.

Spoken like a true conservative: "We need less representation!"

[AZGrizFan]

Yeah, we need MORE people in government. More. That's the ticket.

Spoken like a true conservative: "We need less representation!"

We need less GOVERNMENT. Period. Less of virtually everything.

You think it's a shit show now with 435 reps?

If you got your wish we'd have 10,000 incompetent, ignorant fucks running around every two years who's sole goal was to get reelected and get their pension at the end. That you and I pay for.

No thanks.

[Skjellyfetti]

AZ will be first in line to get rid of the legislature and judiciary and crown Trump Supreme Leader.

[∞∞∞]

AZ will be first in line to get rid of the legislature and judiciary and crown Trump Supreme Leader.

AZ likes his governments...efficient.

[AZGrizFan]

AZ will be first in line to get rid of the legislature and judiciary and crown Trump Supreme Leader.

You kidding? I can't stand the man, personally. But I DO like what he's done for the country...

That being said, I'll be glad when his 8 years are over.

[Ibanez]

Yeah, we need MORE people in government. More. That's the ticket.

Spoken like a true conservative: "We need less representation!"

That isn’t what he said.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[∞∞∞]

Spoken like a true conservative: "We need less representation!"

That isn’t what he said.

Knew this comment was coming from either your or Ganny.

Both of you continuously miss the larger point. Self-proclaimed "moderates" are funny.

[Skjellyfetti]

AZ will be first in line to get rid of the legislature and judiciary and crown Trump Supreme Leader.

You kidding? I can't stand the man, personally. But I DO like what he's done for the country...

That being said, I'll be glad when his 8 years are over.

Imagine how much more of his agenda he could accomplish without the legislature and judiciary.

The Senate is redundant. The House and courts are just roadblocks.

[Ivytalk]

Tripz should move to New Hampshire. The NH house of representatives has 400 members, in a state with fewer than 1.4 million residents. That’s closer to the town meeting style of governance that he seems to prefer.

And Tripz hasn’t responded to my challenge to draft a constitution that’s better than ours. I’m sure he could draw from any number of international examples. Maybe he could start with Yemen’s and mark it up.

[∞∞∞]

Tripz should move to New Hampshire. The NH house of representatives has 400 members, in a state with fewer than 1.4 million residents. That’s closer to the town meeting style of governance that he seems to prefer.

And Tripz hasn’t responded to my challenge to draft a constitution that’s better than ours. I’m sure he could draw from any number of international examples. Maybe he could start with Yemen’s and mark it up.

Yes, that's the effort I'm going to take...drafting a Constitution so I can post it here.

A good Constitution is also written by the demographics it represents, not just one white man, or 39.

[Ivytalk]

Tripz should move to New Hampshire. The NH house of representatives has 400 members, in a state with fewer than 1.4 million residents. That’s closer to the town meeting style of governance that he seems to prefer.

And Tripz hasn’t responded to my challenge to draft a constitution that’s better than ours. I’m sure he could draw from any number of international examples. Maybe he could start with Yemen’s and mark it up.

Yes, that's the effort I'm going to take...drafting a Constitution so I can post it here.

A good Constitution is also written by the demographics it represents, not just one white man, or 39.

By your strained logic, you’d advocate rewriting the constitution every time the census unearthed a “demographic” that hadn’t previously moved the needle. It would be awful if the Uzbek perspective was ignored.

It’s easy to take pot shots at the most successful foundational document in human history by calling it “garbage.” It’s quite another to put forward an intellectually coherent argument for a better product. Your approach is not only juvenile, but lazy.

[∞∞∞]

Yes, that's the effort I'm going to take...drafting a Constitution so I can post it here.

A good Constitution is also written by the demographics it represents, not just one white man, or 39.

By your strained logic, you’d advocate rewriting the constitution every time the census unearthed a “demographic” that hadn’t previously moved the needle. It would be awful if the Uzbek perspective was ignored

Yes, it should be continuously changed with every couple of years. The Uzbek perspective should not be ignored. For a "democratic" society, we have one of the most restrictive Constitutions among Western peers.

[kalm]

That isn’t what he said.

Knew this comment was coming from either your or Ganny.

Both of you continuously miss the larger point. Self-proclaimed "moderates" are funny.

Clinging to the “middle” is like atheism...a religion unto itself for some.

That said, having been a part of various committees, organizations, and associations I will freely admit there’s something to be said for dictatorships. I’m pretty sure this topic was brought up in European Vacation where Clark offered a democratic form of government for the Grizwald fam, knowing full well that Ellen would vote him as president as well.

Yes I’ve learned most of my life and important political lessons from 1980’s comedies...so fuck off!

Bottom line...we don’t need greater representation, we need better representation.

[Winterborn]

Knew this comment was coming from either your or Ganny.

Both of you continuously miss the larger point. Self-proclaimed "moderates" are funny.

Clinging to the “middle” is like atheism...a religion unto itself for some.

That said, having been a part of various committees, organizations, and associations I will freely admit there’s something to be said for dictatorships. I’m pretty sure this topic was brought up in European Vacation where Clark offered a democratic form of government for the Grizwald fam, knowing full well that Ellen would vote him as president as well.

Yes I’ve learned most of my life and important political lessons from 1980’s comedies...so fuck off!

Bottom line...we don’t need greater representation, we need better representation.

Agree. And that starts with people who elect them to office to hold them accountable.

[AZGrizFan]

You kidding? I can't stand the man, personally. But I DO like what he's done for the country...

That being said, I'll be glad when his 8 years are over.

Imagine how much more of his agenda he could accomplish without the legislature and judiciary.

The Senate is redundant. The House and courts are just roadblocks.

While I might have a tendency to agree with you, I think he's done just fine. But imagine what he could accomplish if the house would actually govern? Or if he'd just stop tweeting?

[∞∞∞]

Bottom line...we don’t need greater representation, we need better representation.

I mean you can disagree, but it's not something I'm making up. I don't know the exact equations...I'm sure I can pop out the old statistics book...but the math isn't on your side when the sample size stays the same while the range and quantity increases. I'm sure people in manufacturing, or data analysis will agree.

[Chizzang]

Women vote more than men.

Though, really... most people across all demographics don't vote in any high numbers.

Let me put it this way
Women 18 to 35 don't vote

I'm not saying they don't vote more than men in that demographic
but they are almost unanimously liberal where men are more diverse
if they all voted (women 18 to 35) we'd never have anything other than a liberal in office