schriznoeder Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 When the minority party has too much power, this is what happens... 2 1 1 Link to comment
schriznoeder Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 2 hours ago, schriznoeder said: When the minority party has too much power, this is what happens... Just curious what's funny about this post? Other than the 2016 House general election in which the Rs received approximately 1.4 million more votes than the Ds, the general elections results since 2016 swing heavily in the favor of the Ds. It's pretty hard to deny who the minority party is in this country. 2016 House: 63,173,815 - 61,776,554 = 1,397,261 2016 Senate: 51,496,682 - 40,402,790 = 11,093,892 2016 Presidential: 65,853,514 - 62,984,828 = 2,868,686 2018 House: 60,572,245 - 50,861,970 = 9,710,275 2018 Senate: 52,260,651 - 34,723,013 = 17,537,638 2 Link to comment
admo Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 3 hours ago, schriznoeder said: When the minority party has too much power, this is what happens... No offense, but this tweet feels like a math word problem. Had to read it again lol. 2 2 Link to comment
schriznoeder Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 14 minutes ago, admo said: No offense, but this tweet feels like a math word problem. Had to read it again lol. So, does Train A or Train B get to its destination first? 1 Link to comment
DevoHusker Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 1 hour ago, admo said: No offense, but this tweet feels like a math word problem. Had to read it again lol. Hell, I had to read it 4 times 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 1 hour ago, admo said: No offense, but this tweet feels like a math word problem. Had to read it again lol. 2 minutes ago, DevoHusker said: Hell, I had to read it 4 times These are jokes, right? Link to comment
DevoHusker Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 1 minute ago, knapplc said: These are jokes, right? Ari must have been up against the Twitter 140 cap. In theSenate Judiciary Committeecommawhere GOP represents 9 million fewer Americans than Demscommaconfirmingtheirthird SCOTUS justice forapresident who lostthepopular vote by 3 millioncomma just 12 days before Nov 3election commawhen 45 million people already votedearly commaafter blocking Merrick Garland for 237 daysback in 2016. 1 1 Link to comment
admo Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 47 minutes ago, knapplc said: These are jokes, right? No. I was initially confused reading it the first time. Because it didn't flow with all the numbers thrown in. So I lol'd at myself and read it again. Why should I have to clarify? 2 Link to comment
knapplc Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 I'm not even a math guy and that made sense to me the first time I read it. 1 Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 4 hours ago, RedDenver said: Voting rights are quite possibly the thing I'm most afraid for under this new SCOTUS. They just flat out don't give a f#&%. Kennedy halfway cared where he could be persuaded with the right argument but he's gone now and replaced with more Federalist bots and they explicitly think whatever voter suppression tactics states decided are fine. It's gonna be the Wild West when it comes to new ways to deny the franchise. The next administration absolutely has to prioritize a new Voting Rights Act and dare them to slap it down. 1 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 7 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said: Voting rights are quite possibly the thing I'm most afraid for under this new SCOTUS. They just flat out don't give a f#&%. Kennedy halfway cared where he could be persuaded with the right argument but he's gone now and replaced with more Federalist bots and they explicitly think whatever voter suppression tactics states decided are fine. It's gonna be the Wild West when it comes to new ways to deny the franchise. The next administration absolutely has to prioritize a new Voting Rights Act and dare them to slap it down. Year one they should prioritize creating voting laws and strengthening checks and balances, then if the Supreme Court deems any of it unconstitutional, stack the court. Then add D.C. and Puerto Rico as states. 1 1 Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 45 minutes ago, Moiraine said: Year one they should prioritize creating voting laws and strengthening checks and balances, then if the Supreme Court deems any of it unconstitutional, stack the court. Then add D.C. and Puerto Rico as states. I agree. Well, I think they need to do popular stuff early as well to continue to build popular support, so big COVID-19 relief bills and infrastructure/environmental spending could make a lot of sense. But all of that stuff should be on the year one to-do list. Some liberal academics I follow advocate for a broader court reform involving not only SCOTUS but the lower courts as well to make them more democratically representative and less politicized. I do think Biden's answer about having a "court reform commission" is really smart. It's basically a way to keep his powder dry and keep that card to play later without pissing anyone off. Link to comment
admo Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 1 hour ago, Danny Bateman said: I agree. Well, I think they need to do popular stuff early as well to continue to build popular support, so big COVID-19 relief bills and infrastructure/environmental spending could make a lot of sense. But all of that stuff should be on the year one to-do list. Some liberal academics I follow advocate for a broader court reform involving not only SCOTUS but the lower courts as well to make them more democratically representative and less politicized. I do think Biden's answer about having a "court reform commission" is really smart. It's basically a way to keep his powder dry and keep that card to play later without pissing anyone off. But why now? Aren't liberals saying they want to create a new developing situation where more democratic SCJ will rule on the SC ? I.E. "packing the courts" in favor of the democratic party? I mean, does that plan not sound like a new court dictatorship in the making? Just curious why that is now tolerant, cool and OK to do so 2 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 11 minutes ago, admo said: But why now? Aren't liberals saying they want to create a new developing situation where more democratic SCJ will rule on the SC ? I.E. "packing the courts" in favor of the democratic party? I mean, does that plan not sound like a new court dictatorship in the making? Just curious why that is now tolerant, cool and OK to do so Can you think about it for a bit and try to come up with the reasons? I'm not saying you have to agree with the reasons, but at least come up with what you think they are. 1 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts