Blue Wave

[Dashinka 23,262]

18 hours ago, Marty Byrde said:

So the Democrats gained ground in races that have districts and the Repubs gained ground in races that don't have districts 

Yet the MDL blames any repub success on Gerrymandering,. Yes I know thats just how out of touch they are 

Not according to Joy Behar.

 

‘Genius’! Joy Behar may never live down blaming GOP Senate wins on ‘gerrymandering’

 

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2018/11/08/genius-joy-behar-may-never-live-down-blaming-gop-senate-wins-on-gerrymandering-691541

[Dashinka 23,262]

7 hours ago, Póg mo said:

Or perhaps a more nuanced approach could be undertaken. Give larger States a couple of extra senators, to help balance out the rise of partisan politics, and return to having senators being by state legislative bodies. The Senate was supposed to help quel populism, not facilitate it.

Why?  The Senate was not put in place to represent the people directly, it was there to represent the States through the state legislatures.  The only logical way to do it according to the MDL logic is to do away with the Senate altogether since we already have the House that is charged with representing the people directly.  There is no need to have two bodies with direct representation of the people. 

 

By the way, it was the 17th Amendment that messed up the Senate, creating a populism in that body that was never the intention of the founders.  Why not argue to have that repealed?  It is an interesting debate, it won't happen, just like re-writing the Constitution, or getting rid of the 1sr, 2nd, 5th, or 6th won't happen?

[Dashinka 23,262]

6 hours ago, JimandChristy said:

They wouldn't, they be voting what is best for their States because voila there are more people there!

 

One senator in California represents 20 million people.

One Senator in Texas represents 14 million people.

 

One Senator in Wyoming represents 250,000

One Senator in Vermont represents 300,000.

 

It is absolutely ludicrous that the Senators from Vermont/Wyoming have just as much power as the Senator from Texas/California. It's a false Democracy.

So in your world, those that live in suburban, or rural areas should not count at all?  Thank God the founding fathers did what they did.  There are a lot of countries (Canada, the UK, Australia) using a parliamentary system of government where the people do not vote directly for their head of state, or their upper house.  There are also countries that vote directly for their head of state such as Russia, or Venezuela.  How is that working out for them?

[Sonea 138]

14 hours ago, JimandChristy said:

They wouldn't, they be voting what is best for their States because voila there are more people there!

 

One senator in California represents 20 million people.

One Senator in Texas represents 14 million people.

 

One Senator in Wyoming represents 250,000

One Senator in Vermont represents 300,000.

 

It is absolutely ludicrous that the Senators from Vermont/Wyoming have just as much power as the Senator from Texas/California. It's a false Democracy.

Its a republic for one, and the Senate is a check / balance at the end of the day. Without the Senate there would be no United States because low population colonies like Georgia, Delaware,  New Hampshire etc would not have ratified. We'd still have some form of the Articles of Confederation and in all likelyhood the US would be 2 or 3 countries by now.

 

At the end of the day if people are complaining that the Senate didn't flip this election, it has more to do with the cycle than anything else. There were simply less republican seats to flip this election. They will probably flip it next election. 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Sonea

[TBoneTX 43,081]

Hearing the beefing and the proposals to ban the Senate makes one wonder hoo sum of the Civvix teechurs in there skools were.

[TM92 527]

4 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

Hearing the beefing and the proposals to ban the Senate makes one wonder hoo sum of the Civvix teechurs in there skools were.

Even the uber liberal/socialist "god" Bernie is like SMH at the idea that California should have more Senators than Vermont:

 

Edited November 10, 2018 by TM92

[TM92 527]

On 11/7/2018 at 6:51 PM, Cyberfx1024 said:

Scott has won in Florida, at least that's why are calling right now. 

Oh, Florida. Always trying to one up itself in post-election shenanigans, http://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/2018/11/08/recount-recount-recount-heres-where-florida-is-headed/:

Quote

Welcome to recount-ageddon.

 

Even for Florida, home to the most notorious recount in modern history, this election is heading toward an unprecedented conclusion. Three statewide races and three statehouse races appear headed to a recount.

 

From here on out, Florida is in uncharted territory.

[TM92 527]

On 11/7/2018 at 10:31 PM, TBoneTX said:

Presuming Senate victories in Arizona, Montana, & Nevada, no future Supreme Court nominee should have to rely on whatever Murkowski or Collins decides.

Looks like future SCOTUS nominees might still need Murkowski and/or Collins approval; keeping an eye on the close race in Arizona, the automatic recount in Florida, and the runoff for the special senate election in Mississippi on Nov 27.

Edited November 10, 2018 by TM92

[TM92 527]

On 11/8/2018 at 2:13 PM, Póg mo said:

Oh that's right, Republicans rely more on voter disenfranchisement for those races.  I'm sure the Dems probably did it to, that's okay then. 

[TM92 527]

On 11/9/2018 at 7:01 PM, Póg mo said:

Would it make you feel better if California was split into two or more pieces?

Tim Draper tried to get the ball rolling (twice) but the Supreme Court of California made an unanimous decision stating "the Secretary of State is directed to refrain from placing the challenged initiative measure on the November 2018 ballot or any future ballot."

[Dashinka 23,262]

This sounds interesting.  So a political third party can go around and collect absentee ballots and maybe only deliver the ballots that agree with their political interest?

 

Paul Ryan questions California's 'bizarre' vote-counting process

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/paul-ryan-questions-californias-vote-counting-process-as-bizarre

 

I see the 9th Circuit actually ruled against a vote harvesting group in AZ.

 

Court: ‘Ballot harvesting’ ban not 1st Amendment violation

 

https://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2018/10/31/court-ballot-harvesting-ban-not-1st-amendment-violation/

[JimandChristy 1,689]

Dems have now gained 40 seats in the House, it's a Tsunami not a wave. Dems acquired over 60,000,000 votes, Mango blew it despite having a fantastic economy to run on, it'll not save him in 2020.  

[bcking 3,157]

On 11/9/2018 at 3:54 AM, Bill & Katya said:

So in your world, those that live in suburban, or rural areas should not count at all?  Thank God the founding fathers did what they did.  There are a lot of countries (Canada, the UK, Australia) using a parliamentary system of government where the people do not vote directly for their head of state, or their upper house.  There are also countries that vote directly for their head of state such as Russia, or Venezuela.  How is that working out for them?

I know this is an "old" post that was resurrected (well not THAT old) but...

 

In no way does a population-based voting system mean that people in rural areas "do not count at all". They count as much as every other human that votes counts. That is the whole point. You can argue that isn't fair, which is fine...but that doesn't mean their vote doesn't count. Each person is worth one vote. 

 

The Senate wasn't created to make sure rural people's votes "counted". It was created to appease the rich people in rural colonies because they were upset that a population-based system would give them less power. 

[refugee 169]

1 hour ago, JimandChristy said:

Dems have now gained 40 seats in the House, it's a Tsunami not a wave. Dems acquired over 60,000,000 votes, Mango blew it despite having a fantastic economy to run on, it'll not save him in 2020.  

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, JimandChristy said:

Dems have now gained 40 seats in the House, it's a Tsunami not a wave. Dems acquired over 60,000,000 votes, Mango blew it despite having a fantastic economy to run on, it'll not save him in 2020.  

Really was not that bad considering Obama lost more seats in Congress than any president in modern history. Your ditch runneth over 

 

https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/dec/07/matthew-dowd/has-president-obama-lost-more-democratic-seats-con/