Blue Wave 2018

[JohnStOnge]

Interesting results on the generic congressional question in the recent Quinnipiac University poll (https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-de ... aseID=2553). The point estimates are Democrats favored by 50% and Republicans favored by 41%. But here's what gets me:

By 71% to 20%, respondents said they would like to see Congress be a check on Donald Trump. So how is it that there is only a 9 percentage point edge for the Democrats in the same poll? How could anyone who has been watching what's going on POSSIBLY think that a Congress controlled by the Republicans is going to be a check on Donald Trump?

[Baldy]

Trump will be president for a generation.

That ratio.

[Ivytalk]

Trump will be president for a generation.

That ratio.

Vox

[SeattleGriz]

Trump will be president for a generation.

That ratio.

Vox

#RepealTermLimits

[Baldy]

Trump will be president for a generation.

That ratio.

Vox

klam loves him some Vox.

[BDKJMU]

Trump will be president for a generation.

That ratio.

Wow, what a bunch of left wing libtard socialist claptrap..Right up there with Trip's "we need to throw out the Constitution"..

I take it this Vox is some left wing socialist rag..Libtards..

[houndawg]

Trump will be president for a generation.

That ratio.

Wow, what a bunch of left wing libtard socialist claptrap..Right up there with Trip's "we need to throw out the Constitution"..

I take it this Vox is some left wing socialist rag..Libtards..

Trip is apparently the only one capable of thinking outside the box. Its long past time that we catch up with the first world countries and roll with a Parliament.

[CID1990]

Wow, what a bunch of left wing libtard socialist claptrap..Right up there with Trip's "we need to throw out the Constitution"..

I take it this Vox is some left wing socialist rag..Libtards..

Trip is apparently the only one capable of thinking outside the box. Its long past time that we catch up with the first world countries and roll with a Parliament.

You'd be the first sob sister crying and moaning about minority strangleholds on coalition governments (the hallmark of parliamentary systems)

It has exactly the same effect as the Electoral College - in fact that is its purpose




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[∞∞∞]

Increase the House to 10,000 representatives. Remove most of the Senate's legislative authority, but keep them as a check against the President (confirmations, impeachments, etc.). Increase the Supreme Court to 55 judges, one judge from each state during a Presidential election cycle, 4 permanent judges as currently selected, and one rotating judge that's voted by the population every Presidential cycle. Vacancies in judges not selected by states can be temporarily filled by President/Senate.

Remove the electoral college and add recall elections to the Constitution.

Or split the US into completely separate governments while keeping an allied federation of nations.

[Col Hogan]

Increase the House to 10,000 representatives. Remove most of the Senate's legislative authority, but keep them as a check against the President (confirmations, impeachments, etc.). Increase the Supreme Court to 55 judges, one judge from each state during a Presidential election cycle, 4 permanent judges as currently selected, and one rotating judge that's voted by the population every Presidential cycle. Vacancies in judges not selected by states can be temporarily filled by President/Senate.

Remove the electoral college and add recall elections to the Constitution.

Again, go for it...if you think these would be popular changes, there is a process outlined in the Constitution to make those changes...

Good luck...

[∞∞∞]

Increase the House to 10,000 representatives. Remove most of the Senate's legislative authority, but keep them as a check against the President (confirmations, impeachments, etc.). Increase the Supreme Court to 55 judges, one judge from each state during a Presidential election cycle, 4 permanent judges as currently selected, and one rotating judge that's voted by the population every Presidential cycle. Vacancies in judges not selected by states can be temporarily filled by President/Senate.

Remove the electoral college and add recall elections to the Constitution.

Again, go for it...if you think these would be popular changes, there is a process outlined in the Constitution to make those changes...

Good luck...

The Constitution is a social contract; like any idea, it's only as powerful as the people willing to follow or defend it. It can be changed with or without the processes outlined in it. This may cause strife, a civil war, or revolution, but it depends how much people are willing to sacrifice for their beliefs.

[Gil Dobie]

The Constitution is a simple document complicated by people with agenda's.

[BDKJMU]

Increase the House to 10,000 representatives. Remove most of the Senate's legislative authority, but keep them as a check against the President (confirmations, impeachments, etc.). Increase the Supreme Court to 55 judges, one judge from each state during a Presidential election cycle, 4 permanent judges as currently selected, and one rotating judge that's voted by the population every Presidential cycle. Vacancies in judges not selected by states can be temporarily filled by President/Senate.

Remove the electoral college and add recall elections to the Constitution.

Or split the US into completely separate governments while keeping an allied federation of nations.

And you think there's gridlock now. So you want to toss out the Constitution and then do the above because you're gal lost the last election. You're dumb ideas just keep getting dumber..Libtards are awesome

[kalm]

Vox

klam loves him some Vox.

Love?

I LOVE caddis fly hatches, red turf, and Northern Palouse sunrises.

I’m not butthurt by Vox articles but I’ve only read a few. It certainly ain’t no Rolling Stone though...that’s for sure!

[kalm]

The Constitution is a simple document complicated by people with agenda's.

Like those who confuse corporations with people and money with speech? I agree, Gil.

[AZGrizFan]

Again, go for it...if you think these would be popular changes, there is a process outlined in the Constitution to make those changes...

Good luck...

The Constitution is a social contract; like any idea, it's only as powerful as the people willing to follow or defend it. It can be changed with or without the processes outlined in it. This may cause strife, a civil war, or revolution, but it depends how much people are willing to sacrifice for their beliefs.

Probably don’t want to cause a civil war, given that your party doesnt’ have any guns.

[Ivytalk]

Increase the House to 10,000 representatives. Remove most of the Senate's legislative authority, but keep them as a check against the President (confirmations, impeachments, etc.). Increase the Supreme Court to 55 judges, one judge from each state during a Presidential election cycle, 4 permanent judges as currently selected, and one rotating judge that's voted by the population every Presidential cycle. Vacancies in judges not selected by states can be temporarily filled by President/Senate.

Remove the electoral college and add recall elections to the Constitution.

Or split the US into completely separate governments while keeping an allied federation of nations.

A 10,000-member legislature? Even Red China (your role model?), the largest legislature in the world, has fewer than 3,000.

You’re always good for comic relief. Keep “thinking outside the box.”

[Col Hogan]

Again, go for it...if you think these would be popular changes, there is a process outlined in the Constitution to make those changes...

Good luck...

The Constitution is a social contract; like any idea, it's only as powerful as the people willing to follow or defend it. It can be changed with or without the processes outlined in it. This may cause strife, a civil war, or revolution, but it depends how much people are willing to sacrifice for their beliefs.

Well, I took an oath to “Support and defend...” that “social contract”...and I know thousands of others who did the same...

[CID1990]

Increase the House to 10,000 representatives. Remove most of the Senate's legislative authority, but keep them as a check against the President (confirmations, impeachments, etc.). Increase the Supreme Court to 55 judges, one judge from each state during a Presidential election cycle, 4 permanent judges as currently selected, and one rotating judge that's voted by the population every Presidential cycle. Vacancies in judges not selected by states can be temporarily filled by President/Senate.

Remove the electoral college and add recall elections to the Constitution.

Or split the US into completely separate governments while keeping an allied federation of nations.

A 10,000-member legislature? Even Red China (your role model?), the largest legislature in the world, has fewer than 3,000.

You’re always good for comic relief. Keep “thinking outside the box.”

Klamruschev gave him a little encouragement so he's on a roll


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

There is no such thing as a "social contract." Not really. This is one of those revered things that just isn't true. Nobody agrees to a contract by virtue of being born into whatever society/system they are born into.

[houndawg]

The Constitution is a social contract; like any idea, it's only as powerful as the people willing to follow or defend it. It can be changed with or without the processes outlined in it. This may cause strife, a civil war, or revolution, but it depends how much people are willing to sacrifice for their beliefs.

Probably don’t want to cause a civil war, given that your party doesnt’ have any guns.

What do you think we're fighting the Second Civil War with at this very moment? As we speak the Colorado 420th is preparing to engage at the Battle of Covfefe. Military experts expect the carnage to be worse than at the Bowling Green Massacre...

[houndawg]

The Constitution is a social contract; like any idea, it's only as powerful as the people willing to follow or defend it. It can be changed with or without the processes outlined in it. This may cause strife, a civil war, or revolution, but it depends how much people are willing to sacrifice for their beliefs.

Well, I took an oath to “Support and defend...” that “social contract”...and I know thousands of others who did the same...

Does the CinC take that oath when he assumes office? Serious question.

[∞∞∞]

A 10,000-member legislature? Even Red China (your role model?), the largest legislature in the world, has fewer than 3,000.

You’re always good for comic relief. Keep “thinking outside the box.”

What's wrong with 10000 legislatures? Are you against more representation in Congress?

It's a big number. So? I think Americans are innovative enough to figure out how to coordinate/vote in large assemblies. We do it at conventions, stockholder meetings, etc. And with instant flow of communication, there's little excuse.

[Ibanez]

Increase the House to 10,000 representatives. Remove most of the Senate's legislative authority, but keep them as a check against the President (confirmations, impeachments, etc.). Increase the Supreme Court to 55 judges, one judge from each state during a Presidential election cycle, 4 permanent judges as currently selected, and one rotating judge that's voted by the population every Presidential cycle. Vacancies in judges not selected by states can be temporarily filled by President/Senate.

Remove the electoral college and add recall elections to the Constitution.

Or split the US into completely separate governments while keeping an allied federation of nations.

Oh help me, Rhonda!

We've gone over this before - 10,000 politicians isn't just a drag on the budget, but it's unwieldy. I'm all for enlarging the HoR based on the increasing population. Each Representative represents ~ 729k people. In fact, James Madison wanted the 1st Amendment to guarantee that the # of representatives would increase with the population. 435 didn't become a fixed number until the 1920s...and the US population has tripled since that time (approximately). IIRC, the last time we talked about this, the Wyoming Rule and the Cuban Rule are some pretty good idea's with the former bringing the total to ~570 and the latter to ~1,300.

55 Judges? Where do you come up this?

And removing the EC? Please...Democrats have bitched and moaned about it twice in the past 18 years...which happened to be the last 2 times the winner of the EC lost the popular vote and still won. And that winner was a Republican. So something that works +90% of the time is suddenly bad b/c your candidate lost? It's sour grapes nothing more. If Democrats really care, they would've complained in 2004, 2008 and 2012. But they didn't. I wonder why? The EC has worked, as design, in 52 of the 56 POTUS elections.


If you think about it, correcting the size of the HoR would fix the "problem" with the EC (which is based on representation). If we had allowed the HoR to increase, California would have a larger # of electors per democratic voter and could possibly have handed Clinton the election.

[Ibanez]

Probably don’t want to cause a civil war, given that your party doesnt’ have any guns.

What do you think we're fighting the Second Civil War with at this very moment? As we speak the Colorado 420th is preparing to engage at the Battle of Covfefe. Military experts expect the carnage to be worse than at the Bowling Green Massacre...

#NeverForgetBGMassacre