Republicans Owned

[Dr Grump]

This will be TDS thread 1,513

It could also be dumbass thread 77.

Could also be a beacon for Deplorables to reflect on their dumb-arsary

 

[Sun Devil 92]

This will be TDS thread 1,513

It could also be dumbass thread 77.

Could also be a beacon for Deplorables to reflect on their dumb-arsary

Ony if the sun rises in the west (in the U.S.) and sets in the east.

 

[Dr Grump]

Ony if the sun rises in the west (in the U.S.) and sets in the east.

I know. Self-reflection is anathema to Deplorables. As is intelligent debate.

 

[Dragonlady]

He is wrong about the Senate. The two Houses of Congress were necessary as the "Great Compromise" between small and large states.

He said something in there that I have banged on about with regard to the EC and the Senate and how unfair it is.

I'll ask you this: At it's must fundamental, is it okay for one per son in Wyoming to have the same amount of say as 68 people in California. That to me, is fundamentally unfair. Let's take it to the nth degree - let's say it was 1 million vs 68 million?

You know in Rwanda, the biggest issue was that the Belgians created a ruling class called the Tutsi. They made up 15% of Rwanda's population. I did a study of the country about four years before the genocide. I said to my teacher at the time, 'I'm surprised the Hutu's haven't overthrown them". We then had a discussion - the exact content of which I can't remember verbatim - but it was something along the lines (this was my teacher saying this) that sometimes it doesn't take a lot of people to control a larger group of people. Or course, four years later and 100s of 1000s of dead Tutsi's later.

If you want to live in 'the greatest, freest' and dear I say 'fairest' country in the world, then I'm sorry, somebody in Wyoming having more representation at a Federal level will not work. Resentment will grow.

I'll also say this: Surely any really pressing matters for the smaller states can be sorted at a state level. Also, if a smaller state does have an issue, who's to say the larger states won't agree with them if they put up a good argument?

If you marginalize people, and they think a systems is unfair, there will be repercussions. The video touched on them.

1. The US Constitution went thru the big state vs small state debate in 1776. Its fucking over. Stop whining about it.
2. Move to Wyoming if that issue is so important to you.
3. You can resent the EC until you die, it is not going to fucking change.
4. If the EC was replaced by a popular vote only 4-states would matter, and the folks in the other 46 states would be resentful too.
5. The Constitution has done us well since 1776, as has the EC, if you really feel resentment, try a therapist.

The Founding Fathers Wrote a Constitution for a small coastal nation of 3.5 million people where the rest of the world lived a minimum of 6 weeks and a perilous sea voyage away. Canons were the most powerful weapons and guns were single shot pistols and muskets.

If your 200 year old Constitution was really working for you, neither of the worst two fiscally destructive Presidents in history would have been elected. There would have been no Iraq War, and no ISIS. You’d have competent leadership in this pandemic instead of a guy who is shovelling money to his donors and friends while cutting off funding to states, cities and people who didn’t vote for him.

The video is spot on. It is supposed to be government of the people, for the people, by the people and it’s not anything like that.

The Roman Republic endured for 1000 years because the elites never got greedy, and they fully recognized that as long as the Head Count was well fed, happy and entertained, they could play they corrupt games and nobody cared. Bread and circuses.

Well the American head count are not well fed, the are not happy and they sure as fuck aren’t being entertained.

Your Republic has failed and the people have lost. Don’t think they aren’t pissed off.

 

[jillian]

What I find interesting is that what this guy is actually saying you think most Republicans would agree with him going by what they spout on this board. Interesting.

Funny how the trumpscum don’t much like the truth.

 

[jillian]

Ony if the sun rises in the west (in the U.S.) and sets in the east.

I know. Self-reflection is anathema to Deplorables. As is intelligent debate.

Remember the days when they pretended to be all moral and everything

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Ony if the sun rises in the west (in the U.S.) and sets in the east.

I know. Self-reflection is anathema to Deplorables. As is intelligent debate.

Remember the days when they pretended to be all moral and everything

And lefties pretended to be Americans

 

[Dr Grump]

Ony if the sun rises in the west (in the U.S.) and sets in the east.

I know. Self-reflection is anathema to Deplorables. As is intelligent debate.

Remember the days when they pretended to be all moral and everything

And lefties pretended to be Americans

Probably more in touch of the 'spirit' of America than Deplorables. That is where the guy in the video got it spot on. Deplorables, at their very heart, are tyrannical.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Ony if the sun rises in the west (in the U.S.) and sets in the east.

I know. Self-reflection is anathema to Deplorables. As is intelligent debate.

Remember the days when they pretended to be all moral and everything

And lefties pretended to be Americans

Probably more in touch of the 'spirit' of America than Deplorables. That is where the guy in the video got it spot on. Deplorables, at their very heart, are tyrannical.

Never the case.

You've been loyal to your own causes from day one.

You are for the "greater good" as long as you are getting the greater portion of the good.

Fuck the guy in the video. He's a piece of shit.

 

[Dick Foster]

He is wrong about the Senate. The two Houses of Congress were necessary as the "Great Compromise" between small and large states.

He said something in there that I have banged on about with regard to the EC and the Senate and how unfair it is.

I'll ask you this: At it's must fundamental, is it okay for one per son in Wyoming to have the same amount of say as 68 people in California. That to me, is fundamentally unfair. Let's take it to the nth degree - let's say it was 1 million vs 68 million?

You know in Rwanda, the biggest issue was that the Belgians created a ruling class called the Tutsi. They made up 15% of Rwanda's population. I did a study of the country about four years before the genocide. I said to my teacher at the time, 'I'm surprised the Hutu's haven't overthrown them". We then had a discussion - the exact content of which I can't remember verbatim - but it was something along the lines (this was my teacher saying this) that sometimes it doesn't take a lot of people to control a larger group of people. Or course, four years later and 100s of 1000s of dead Tutsi's later.

If you want to live in 'the greatest, freest' and dear I say 'fairest' country in the world, then I'm sorry, somebody in Wyoming having more representation at a Federal level will not work. Resentment will grow.

I'll also say this: Surely any really pressing matters for the smaller states can be sorted at a state level. Also, if a smaller state does have an issue, who's to say the larger states won't agree with them if they put up a good argument?

If you marginalize people, and they think a systems is unfair, there will be repercussions. The video touched on them.

1. The US Constitution went thru the big state vs small state debate in 1776. Its fucking over. Stop whining about it.
2. Move to Wyoming if that issue is so important to you.
3. You can resent the EC until you die, it is not going to fucking change.
4. If the EC was replaced by a popular vote only 4-states would matter, and the folks in the other 46 states would be resentful too.
5. The Constitution has done us well since 1776, as has the EC, if you really feel resentment, try a therapist.

The Founding Fathers Wrote a Constitution for a small coastal nation of 3.5 million people where the rest of the world lived a minimum of 6 weeks and a perilous sea voyage away. Canons were the most powerful weapons and guns were single shot pistols and muskets.

If your 200 year old Constitution was really working for you, neither of the worst two fiscally destructive Presidents in history would have been elected. There would have been no Iraq War, and no ISIS. You’d have competent leadership in this pandemic instead of a guy who is shovelling money to his donors and friends while cutting off funding to states, cities and people who didn’t vote for him.

The video is spot on. It is supposed to be government of the people, for the people, by the people and it’s not anything like that.

The Roman Republic endured for 1000 years because the elites never got greedy, and they fully recognized that as long as the Head Count was well fed, happy and entertained, they could play they corrupt games and nobody cared. Bread and circuses.

Well the American head count are not well fed, the are not happy and they sure as fuck aren’t being entertained.

Your Republic has failed and the people have lost. Don’t think they aren’t pissed off.

By the way do you know where the phrase government of the people, by the people and for the people came from? It's acutally part if the Gettysburg address and it came from the lips of Abraham Lincoln the first REPUBLICAN president.

 

[justinacolmena]

Government funded research invented lots of things. Those who fund, own the rights.

We the people, right? It's public domain, by federal law, as far as I know, but it's never enforced that way. It's always privatized and spun off in a politically motivated leftist think-tank-cum-corporation of sorts.

 

[Dr Grump]

Never the case.
You've been loyal to your own causes from day one.
You are for the "greater good" as long as you are getting the greater portion of the good.
Fuck the guy in the video. He's a piece of shit.

And you don't want a fair and equitable society even though it is quite an easy thing to achieve. Deplorables are usually older white people, don't give a shit about anybody but themselves, and try and marginalise just about everybody else because they think they're entitled.

I don't know any normal conservatives or liberals who want just a greater portion of the good and go fuck everybody else. I loved that video. He was so spot on in just about everything. Deplorables and Donnie Boy are just selfish, entitled, divisive, glory hunting wannabes. They are dinosaurs.

 

[odanny]

He is just an angry cry baby mad at losing his dream nation of socialism under Obama...well Obama may be retroactively impeached if his thugs start singing......get out the cement boots Barry...Bwhahahahahah!....

You have the intellect of a 12 year old.

 

[Dr Grump]

By the way do you know where the phrase government of the people, by the people and for the people came from? It's acutally part if the Gettysburg address and it came from the lips of Abraham Lincoln the first REPUBLICAN president.

Maybe somebody should remind Republicans of that.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

He is wrong about the Senate. The two Houses of Congress were necessary as the "Great Compromise" between small and large states.

He said something in there that I have banged on about with regard to the EC and the Senate and how unfair it is.

I'll ask you this: At it's must fundamental, is it okay for one per son in Wyoming to have the same amount of say as 68 people in California. That to me, is fundamentally unfair. Let's take it to the nth degree - let's say it was 1 million vs 68 million?

You know in Rwanda, the biggest issue was that the Belgians created a ruling class called the Tutsi. They made up 15% of Rwanda's population. I did a study of the country about four years before the genocide. I said to my teacher at the time, 'I'm surprised the Hutu's haven't overthrown them". We then had a discussion - the exact content of which I can't remember verbatim - but it was something along the lines (this was my teacher saying this) that sometimes it doesn't take a lot of people to control a larger group of people. Or course, four years later and 100s of 1000s of dead Tutsi's later.

If you want to live in 'the greatest, freest' and dear I say 'fairest' country in the world, then I'm sorry, somebody in Wyoming having more representation at a Federal level will not work. Resentment will grow.

I'll also say this: Surely any really pressing matters for the smaller states can be sorted at a state level. Also, if a smaller state does have an issue, who's to say the larger states won't agree with them if they put up a good argument?

If you marginalise people, and they think a systems is unfair, there will be repercussions. The video touched on them.

Let’s compromise then. Instead of the EC being state based let’s make every county in the nation get one point toward the electorate of politicians both state and national.

How about that?

 

[Dr Grump]

He is wrong about the Senate. The two Houses of Congress were necessary as the "Great Compromise" between small and large states.

He said something in there that I have banged on about with regard to the EC and the Senate and how unfair it is.

I'll ask you this: At it's must fundamental, is it okay for one per son in Wyoming to have the same amount of say as 68 people in California. That to me, is fundamentally unfair. Let's take it to the nth degree - let's say it was 1 million vs 68 million?

You know in Rwanda, the biggest issue was that the Belgians created a ruling class called the Tutsi. They made up 15% of Rwanda's population. I did a study of the country about four years before the genocide. I said to my teacher at the time, 'I'm surprised the Hutu's haven't overthrown them". We then had a discussion - the exact content of which I can't remember verbatim - but it was something along the lines (this was my teacher saying this) that sometimes it doesn't take a lot of people to control a larger group of people. Or course, four years later and 100s of 1000s of dead Tutsi's later.

If you want to live in 'the greatest, freest' and dear I say 'fairest' country in the world, then I'm sorry, somebody in Wyoming having more representation at a Federal level will not work. Resentment will grow.

I'll also say this: Surely any really pressing matters for the smaller states can be sorted at a state level. Also, if a smaller state does have an issue, who's to say the larger states won't agree with them if they put up a good argument?

If you marginalise people, and they think a systems is unfair, there will be repercussions. The video touched on them.

Let’s compromise then. Instead of the EC being state based let’s make every county in the nation get one point toward the electorate of politicians both state and national.

How about that?

I was thinking the states split the EC along votes counted. I think a couple of states do that already. Means being a repub in California and NY means something. Ditto Dems in Texas.

 

[Dragonlady]

He is wrong about the Senate. The two Houses of Congress were necessary as the "Great Compromise" between small and large states.

He said something in there that I have banged on about with regard to the EC and the Senate and how unfair it is.

I'll ask you this: At it's must fundamental, is it okay for one per son in Wyoming to have the same amount of say as 68 people in California. That to me, is fundamentally unfair. Let's take it to the nth degree - let's say it was 1 million vs 68 million?

You know in Rwanda, the biggest issue was that the Belgians created a ruling class called the Tutsi. They made up 15% of Rwanda's population. I did a study of the country about four years before the genocide. I said to my teacher at the time, 'I'm surprised the Hutu's haven't overthrown them". We then had a discussion - the exact content of which I can't remember verbatim - but it was something along the lines (this was my teacher saying this) that sometimes it doesn't take a lot of people to control a larger group of people. Or course, four years later and 100s of 1000s of dead Tutsi's later.

If you want to live in 'the greatest, freest' and dear I say 'fairest' country in the world, then I'm sorry, somebody in Wyoming having more representation at a Federal level will not work. Resentment will grow.

I'll also say this: Surely any really pressing matters for the smaller states can be sorted at a state level. Also, if a smaller state does have an issue, who's to say the larger states won't agree with them if they put up a good argument?

If you marginalise people, and they think a systems is unfair, there will be repercussions. The video touched on them.

Let’s compromise then. Instead of the EC being state based let’s make every county in the nation get one point toward the electorate of politicians both state and national.

How about that?

Republicans would divide red states into 300 counties.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

He is wrong about the Senate. The two Houses of Congress were necessary as the "Great Compromise" between small and large states.

He said something in there that I have banged on about with regard to the EC and the Senate and how unfair it is.

I'll ask you this: At it's must fundamental, is it okay for one per son in Wyoming to have the same amount of say as 68 people in California. That to me, is fundamentally unfair. Let's take it to the nth degree - let's say it was 1 million vs 68 million?

You know in Rwanda, the biggest issue was that the Belgians created a ruling class called the Tutsi. They made up 15% of Rwanda's population. I did a study of the country about four years before the genocide. I said to my teacher at the time, 'I'm surprised the Hutu's haven't overthrown them". We then had a discussion - the exact content of which I can't remember verbatim - but it was something along the lines (this was my teacher saying this) that sometimes it doesn't take a lot of people to control a larger group of people. Or course, four years later and 100s of 1000s of dead Tutsi's later.

If you want to live in 'the greatest, freest' and dear I say 'fairest' country in the world, then I'm sorry, somebody in Wyoming having more representation at a Federal level will not work. Resentment will grow.

I'll also say this: Surely any really pressing matters for the smaller states can be sorted at a state level. Also, if a smaller state does have an issue, who's to say the larger states won't agree with them if they put up a good argument?

If you marginalise people, and they think a systems is unfair, there will be repercussions. The video touched on them.

Let’s compromise then. Instead of the EC being state based let’s make every county in the nation get one point toward the electorate of politicians both state and national.

How about that?

Republicans would divide red states into 300 counties.

They already are dumbass. What it means is blue states are divided that way as well. And Cook in Illinois would no longer be the sole decider of any election in that state. Same goes for LA, NY or any other state with a greater population in one county or city dictating to the rest of that state.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Never the case.
You've been loyal to your own causes from day one.
You are for the "greater good" as long as you are getting the greater portion of the good.
Fuck the guy in the video. He's a piece of shit.

And you don't want a fair and equitable society even though it is quite an easy thing to achieve. Deplorables are usually older white people, don't give a shit about anybody but themselves, and try and marginalise just about everybody else because they think they're entitled.

I don't know any normal conservatives or liberals who want just a greater portion of the good and go fuck everybody else. I loved that video. He was so spot on in just about everything. Deplorables and Donnie Boy are just selfish, entitled, divisive, glory hunting wannabes. They are dinosaurs.

If you could ever define fair and equitable, that would be a great start. Then I will know if you are really full of shit or just full of shit. Older white people are just that....older white people. They give just as many fucks as the rest of the world....or do you have something scientific to back up your claim. As to marginalizing people, everyone does and they always have. The whole term deplorable was an effort on the part of Hillarybitch to ignore or downplay the interests of her adversaries. And they made her pay for it.

Nobody sees themselves as greedy....but they are the entitled ones. Both sides. Of course you loved that video....it gives clarity to your bullshit. But it's still just that.....BULLSHIT.

Donnie is a motherfucker...won't argue that point.

If he bought the house next door, I'd sell mine and leave.

But I'll be voting for him again for the same reason. At least he's dropped the facade of the Bush's and the Obama's and the knife he's going to stick in you is in plain sight. And when he plunges it in, it will right through your heart or your gut. There won't be any attacks from the back.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

He is wrong about the Senate. The two Houses of Congress were necessary as the "Great Compromise" between small and large states.

He said something in there that I have banged on about with regard to the EC and the Senate and how unfair it is.

I'll ask you this: At it's must fundamental, is it okay for one per son in Wyoming to have the same amount of say as 68 people in California. That to me, is fundamentally unfair. Let's take it to the nth degree - let's say it was 1 million vs 68 million?

You know in Rwanda, the biggest issue was that the Belgians created a ruling class called the Tutsi. They made up 15% of Rwanda's population. I did a study of the country about four years before the genocide. I said to my teacher at the time, 'I'm surprised the Hutu's haven't overthrown them". We then had a discussion - the exact content of which I can't remember verbatim - but it was something along the lines (this was my teacher saying this) that sometimes it doesn't take a lot of people to control a larger group of people. Or course, four years later and 100s of 1000s of dead Tutsi's later.

If you want to live in 'the greatest, freest' and dear I say 'fairest' country in the world, then I'm sorry, somebody in Wyoming having more representation at a Federal level will not work. Resentment will grow.

I'll also say this: Surely any really pressing matters for the smaller states can be sorted at a state level. Also, if a smaller state does have an issue, who's to say the larger states won't agree with them if they put up a good argument?

If you marginalise people, and they think a systems is unfair, there will be repercussions. The video touched on them.

Let’s compromise then. Instead of the EC being state based let’s make every county in the nation get one point toward the electorate of politicians both state and national.

How about that?

I was thinking the states split the EC along votes counted. I think a couple of states do that already. Means being a repub in California and NY means something. Ditto Dems in Texas.

And if any of you fuckers understood the federalism that was intended for this country, you know why it is that way.

The left wing effort to fuck up our education system has succeeded and people like you are living proof.