Jump to content
  • Sign Up
Amentep

Politics - Jason X

Recommended Posts

Good. That movie sucks. :p

  • Like 2

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If u live in the states, now be a good time to fill up those gas tanks. With the floods in Texas, weither or not the oil fields are fine or not, I think those gas prices will start rising soon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Responding to WoD

 

OK, let's wave a magic wand and make Bernie Sanders President for the rest of this term. Will we be more like Sweden in 2020 or more like the US in 2016? The reason why you shouldn't worry too much is even if it happened he would not be all powerful. He would still have only a third of the political power of the federal government. If 218 Bernie Sanders get elected the house and 51 Bernie's in the Senate it still would not be the end because the States have their own political powers.

States only have power so long as the Constitution is respected. And the Democrats, especially the far left ones have made it clear time and again that they wipe their ass with it.

And even if all of that fails the final redoubt of the United States is and has always been insurrection. And if you don't win at the very least you won't have to be subjected to what comes next. I really would not worry about this. Yes it's fun to talk about and I am not at all ashamed to engage in a little harmless hyperbole myself.

Yes, Venezuela and Turkey are finding out right now how sweet insurrection is once a tyrant is elected. Even if we won (very doubtful) I don't want to live through that.

 

Right now you can drive from Key West to Pocatello Idaho and not pass through a single state or even county where the Democrats have any power at all. In 2008 it looked like the GOP was on the verge of extinctions. These things are cyclical. Four years from now it will be all different again.

No, demographics and dumb young people are going the Democrats' way. It's actually a miracle Trump won, and no other Republican would've won any blue state.

 

Although he's not specifically addressing what we're discussing here, Nolte explains what we're facing very well: http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2017/08/29/john-nolte-antifa-teams-big-business-big-media-corporate-fascist-rampage/

Edited by Wrath of Dagon

"Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skipping the normal quote function as it can be a hassle to deal with:

 

"States only have power so long as the Constitution is respected. And the Democrats, especially the far left ones have made it clear time and again that they wipe their ass with it."

 

The Republicans, especially the far right ones also wipe their ass with the Constitution, just in different ways than the Democrats.

 

"Yes, Venezuela and Turkey are finding out right now how sweet insurrection is once a tyrant is elected. Even if we won (very doubtful) I don't want to live through that."

 

Define tyrant, the Republicans have often called Obama a tyrant (though with some reasoning, given how he used executive orders a lot due to the Republicans being obstructionists).

 

"No, demographics and dumb young people are going the Democrat's way. It's actually a miracle Trump won, and no other Republican would've won any blue state."

 

As for Trump winning, I don't know if I'd call it a miracle, more like a box of chaos since both candidates were equally flawed and you'd have to ask yourself why didn't any of the normal establishment Republicans win either. Just saying that it's a miracle ignores the whole host of reasons and things why Trump (lost the popular vote) won and Clinton (won the popular vote) lost.

 

On the antifa stuff, Breitbart is frikking Brietbart, not much better than Fox. That said, the antifa guys shouldn't be considered allied to the Democrats because they hold no allegiance to liberal democracy and don't care whether they hurt the Dems or not.

Edited by smjjames
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"things why Trump (lost the popular vote"

 

The whole 'he lost the popular vote' just reeks of garbage for serval reasons.

 

1.  He lost the popular vote because of Kalifornia. One state shouldn't be allowed to solely decide the election.

 

2. Illegals are allowed to vote and get away with it in especially highly Democratic states while in republicans they make it harder to vote because according to Demos only minorities at eunable to get proper ID for voting.

 

 Every state in the US has their own election rules. If you went  for most votes = win you would have to make a more uniform voting policy like in other countries (like my own) that I know of).

 

The 'popular vote' is bogus. Just ask the anti Brexiters who wanted to  mass murder all the 'old people'. LOL

  • Like 1

DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I'll admit that California does have a huge amount of influence, including the largest chunk of electoral votes.

 

2. I'm not even gonna bother responding to this as the illegal immigrant part is BS.

 

3? You're getting the primaries confused with the general election.

 

I'd probably add a third (or fourth? looks like you forgot to number the third reason), the turnout being so low compared to other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1.  He lost the popular vote because of Kalifornia. One state shouldn't be allowed to solely decide the election.

 

 

 

Most economically productive state in the union, has some of the best public _and_ private higher education institutions, home to the busiest cargo ports in the states and the highest traffic airliner hub, hosts the principle naval base for USPACFLT, why on Earth shouldn't California matter a _whole_ lot?

  • Like 1

Quote
"Turned wrong way round, the relentless unforeseen was what we schoolchildren studied as 'History,' harmless history, where everything unexpected in its own time is chronicled on the page as inevitable. The terror of the unforeseen is what the science of history hides, turning a disaster into an epic.”

 

-Philip Roth, The Plot Against America

 

Quote
"Always write angry letters to your enemies. Never mail them."

 

-James Fallows

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

1. He lost the popular vote because of Kalifornia. One state shouldn't be allowed to solely decide the election.

 

 

Most economically productive state in the union, has some of the best public _and_ private higher education institutions, home to the busiest cargo ports in the states and the highest traffic airliner hub, hosts the principle naval base for USPACFLT, why on Earth shouldn't California matter a _whole_ lot?

Equality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Trump lost the popular vote for one big reason and one smaller reason. The big reason is the Urban-Suburban/Rural divide that is becoming a bigger thing every election here. The smaller reason is voter fraud. Don't get me wrong, that didn't tip any scales. Hillary Clinton had a 2M or more advantage. You cannot get that many votes by fraud without someone noticing something is up. But suppose that was under 500k? The you have to wonder. 

 

In the city of Detroit Clinton received 95% of the vote. But in 37% of the precincts more votes were cast that they had registered voters. Think about that. That is not just a 100% turnout of registered voters, which never happens anyway. It was more votes than there are voters. In several precincts (according to one news source I'm not linking because it's The Blaze) there were three times as many votes cast a registered voters. http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/editorials/2016-12-20/why-more-votes-voters.html

 

In Chicago there were more than 14k votes cast than there were registered voters to cast them. And audit found people who had been dead for over 20 years voted last year. Clinton got 92% of the vote in Chicago. Who do you think ended up with the dead votes?

 

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/numbers/president-vice-president-every-neighborhood-map-election-results-voting-general-primary-illinois 

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/10/27/2-investigators-chicago-voters-cast-ballots-from-beyond-the-grave/

http://chicagocitywire.com/stories/511195461-election-board-lists-more-general-election-votes-than-voters-in-chicago

 

Voter fraud is a thing. And as long as the political parties that benefit from it control the places it happens, it won't get fixed. 

  • Like 2

Get off my lawn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Define tyrant, the Republicans have often called Obama a tyrant (though with some reasoning, given how he used executive orders a lot due to the Republicans being obstructionists).

 

 

Republicans being obstructionist is not a reason to use Executive Orders to take powers or actions not permitted by the Constitution. The voters put the Republicans into Congress because they promised they would obstruct what Obama was doing. By circumventing Congress using Executive Orders Obama thwarted the will of the voters and imposed his own on them. So yes, the word Tyrant is not entirely inappropriate. It's not entirely appropriate either because it softens the word in a world where there are actual tyrants. 

 

Of course Bohner and McConnel and the rest of them did not do such a great job opposing Obama for the most part. But if you start expecting a lot of Republicans you are setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

But the rest of your response I agree with. Particularly the part about liberty, rights, and the Constitution being freely trampled on by both parties. The Republicans have not been the party of limited government since we bid farewell to Reagan in 1988. They talk a good game during elections but when they actually get to Washington or their state capitals they show their true colors.

 

If someone actually wants to see limited, constitutional government I suggest they forget about elephants and donkeys and pick a new animal.

 

200px-Libertarian_Party_Porcupine_%28USA

  • Like 1

Get off my lawn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

1. He lost the popular vote because of Kalifornia. One state shouldn't be allowed to solely decide the election.

 

Most economically productive state in the union, has some of the best public _and_ private higher education institutions, home to the busiest cargo ports in the states and the highest traffic airliner hub, hosts the principle naval base for USPACFLT, why on Earth shouldn't California matter a _whole_ lot?

Equality

 

 

Isn't a situation where a smaller number of people has more voting power than a larger number of people actually inequality?

  • Like 1

"My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian tourist
I am Dan Quayle of the Romans.
I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.
Heja Sverige!!
Everyone should cuffawkle more.
The wrench is your friend. :bat:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Define tyrant, the Republicans have often called Obama a tyrant (though with some reasoning, given how he used executive orders a lot due to the Republicans being obstructionists).

 

 

Republicans being obstructionist is not a reason to use Executive Orders to take powers or actions not permitted by the Constitution. The voters put the Republicans into Congress because they promised they would obstruct what Obama was doing. By circumventing Congress using Executive Orders Obama thwarted the will of the voters and imposed his own on them. So yes, the word Tyrant is not entirely inappropriate. It's not entirely appropriate either because it softens the word in a world where there are actual tyrants.

 

Well yeah, it's not a reason to overuse the Executive Orders, just saying that's why Obama did go and use them. Good thing though is that the next President (Trump in this case) can reverse every single one of those if they so wished to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Trump lost the popular vote for one big reason and one smaller reason. The big reason is the Urban-Suburban/Rural divide that is becoming a bigger thing every election here. The smaller reason is voter fraud. Don't get me wrong, that didn't tip any scales. Hillary Clinton had a 2M or more advantage. You cannot get that many votes by fraud without someone noticing something is up. But suppose that was under 500k? The you have to wonder. 

 

In the city of Detroit Clinton received 95% of the vote. But in 37% of the precincts more votes were cast that they had registered voters. Think about that. That is not just a 100% turnout of registered voters, which never happens anyway. It was more votes than there are voters. In several precincts (according to one news source I'm not linking because it's The Blaze) there were three times as many votes cast a registered voters. http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/editorials/2016-12-20/why-more-votes-voters.html

 

In Chicago there were more than 14k votes cast than there were registered voters to cast them. And audit found people who had been dead for over 20 years voted last year. Clinton got 92% of the vote in Chicago. Who do you think ended up with the dead votes?

 

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/numbers/president-vice-president-every-neighborhood-map-election-results-voting-general-primary-illinois

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/10/27/2-investigators-chicago-voters-cast-ballots-from-beyond-the-grave/

http://chicagocitywire.com/stories/511195461-election-board-lists-more-general-election-votes-than-voters-in-chicago

 

Voter fraud is a thing. And as long as the political parties that benefit from it control the places it happens, it won't get fixed. 

 

http://www.snopes.com/more-votes-than-voters-in-detroit/

 

Detroit's case may have been more because of voting machines there had problems during election day which has caused poll workers to miss calculate number of people that voted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That said, the antifa guys shouldn't be considered allied to the Democrats because they hold no allegiance to liberal democracy and don't care whether they hurt the Dems or not.

That's the problem, the Dems don't believe in liberal democracy either. Not freedom of speech, and not rule of law. Otherwise I wouldn't be worried.

 

 

Just technicalities, a Presidential pardon can't be overruled. Btw, all this outrage about Arpaio being pardoned for enforcing the law (convicted by criminals who refuse to enforce the law themselves and not even allowed a jury trial), and crickets about Terry McAuliffe restoring voting rights to 60000 felons just so they could vote for Hillary. http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/06/exclusive-virginia-gov-pardons-60000-felons-enough-to-swing-election/ Edited by Wrath of Dagon

"Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

1. He lost the popular vote because of Kalifornia. One state shouldn't be allowed to solely decide the election.

 

Most economically productive state in the union, has some of the best public _and_ private higher education institutions, home to the busiest cargo ports in the states and the highest traffic airliner hub, hosts the principle naval base for USPACFLT, why on Earth shouldn't California matter a _whole_ lot?
Equality

Isn't a situation where a smaller number of people has more voting power than a larger number of people actually inequality?

There's no equality with our voting system as long as we have the winner take all results with states and instead go back to everyone gets there share.

Keeping winner takes all and going with popular vote instead let's 4 states dictate over the rest of the 46.

Keep the electoral voting system instead, that way big populations still get an advantage but the rest have a say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That said, the antifa guys shouldn't be considered allied to the Democrats because they hold no allegiance to liberal democracy and don't care whether they hurt the Dems or not.

That's the problem, the Dems don't believe in liberal democracy either. Not freedom of speech, and not rule of law. Otherwise I wouldn't be worried.

 

 

Just technicalities, a Presidential pardon can't be overruled. Btw, all this outrage about Arpaio being pardoned for enforcing the law (convicted by criminals who refuse to enforce the law themselves and not even allowed a jury trial), and crickets about Terry McAuliffe restoring voting rights to 60000 felons just so they could vote for Hillary. http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/06/exclusive-virginia-gov-pardons-60000-felons-enough-to-swing-election/

 

 

I hate to break it to you, but the Republicans don't believe in liberal Democracy either.

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. He lost the popular vote because of Kalifornia. One state shouldn't be allowed to solely decide the election.

Most economically productive state in the union, has some of the best public _and_ private higher education institutions, home to the busiest cargo ports in the states and the highest traffic airliner hub, hosts the principle naval base for USPACFLT, why on Earth shouldn't California matter a _whole_ lot?
Equality

Isn't a situation where a smaller number of people has more voting power than a larger number of people actually inequality?

There's no equality with our voting system as long as we have the winner take all results with states and instead go back to everyone gets there share.

Keeping winner takes all and going with popular vote instead let's 4 states dictate over the rest of the 46.

Keep the electoral voting system instead, that way big populations still get an advantage but the rest have a say.

 

 

It's also an issue with the Electoral College system. It was originally designed as a compromise between the slave holding southern states and the northern states and as a compromise between the smaller states and the bigger states. It may have been balanced by the standards of the time, but the Founders couldn't predict the future as far as the Electoral College goes.

Edited by smjjames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would fixing the electoral college system even change the results of the last election? It just sounds like a way to make people in more populated states even more marginalized when it comes to the Federal election. Of course, us in California can take solace in the fact that we have better wine, food, and weather than everyone else. Oh, and Yosemite.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Of course, us in California can take solace in the fact that we have better wine, food, and weather than everyone else. Oh, and Yosemite.

 

Oh yeah? Last year in state income tax I paid $0. How do you like me now! You have wine? Humph... fancy drinks for fancy folks. We have bourbon. So there! And I'll see your Yosemite and raise you The Great Smokey Mountains. 

 

Whose got the best State? You know who!  :lol: 


Get off my lawn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, us in California can take solace in the fact that we have better wine, food, and weather than everyone else. Oh, and Yosemite.

And you have the best song about any state

 

  • Like 1

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh gawd here is comes. I start bragging about the smokies and here comes the guy who lives in the Rockies. 

 

Remember James Lofton from the Bills teams in the 90's. He said he'd never wear his AFC championship right because he was afraid someone would show up wearing a super bowl ring. 

  • Like 1

Get off my lawn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who?

 

:p

double posted

Edited by Guard Dog

Get off my lawn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh gawd here is comes. I start bragging about the smokies and here comes the guy who lives in the Rockies. 

 

Remember James Lofton from the Bills teams in the 90's. He said he'd never wear his AFC championship right because he was afraid someone would show up wearing a super bowl ring. 

 

New York? The Appalachians barely go into New York.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...