45
   

Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 01:29 am
@Baldimo,
Quote:
Bobsal and Rex have both been creating new usernames on here lately. I guess they are embarrassed by what they post and don't want the real world to know how they really think.

I have no use for either, as they never seem to have brain. Are they not D bots?
0 Replies
 
TheCobbler
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 02:46 am
How Republicans turn fewer votes into more legislative seats
http://on.msnbc.com/1zrOaOg
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 03:06 am
@TheCobbler,
TheCobbler wrote:

How Republicans turn fewer votes into more legislative seats
http://on.msnbc.com/1zrOaOg

By winning the majority of the votes to control state capitals. While I dont approve of Gerrymandering I suggest that the solution to R rigging of the lines is to not vote R's into power. Stop whining and start trying to deprive them of votes.

Are you in High School yet, because based upon your posting history I seriously doubt it, you are one ignorant mother ******.
mysteryman
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 09:07 am
@TheCobbler,
Your lack of logic is astounding.
You say that being a parent is a permanent job, and you say that the keystone pipeline will only create 50 permanent jobs.
So, are you saying that the pipeline will create 50 parents, or that it's the governments job to create more parents than that?

Because if you were trying to use being a parent as an example of a full time job, as used in the context of discussion about the pipeline, you have not only failed miserably to make your point, you have also proven yourself to be totally ignorant of the subject
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 10:15 am
@hawkeye10,
That solution would work before the districts were already drawn in such a way to favor one party over another, after that it becomes a little difficult as the votes in minority district are all lumped together and do not count as much. If your vote don't count, how can you vote for representatives who will change it?

Quote:
For all you Democrats still in the fetal position after Tuesday's election, this part may offer some comfort: Michigan Democrats got more votes for the U.S. House than Republicans did.

But, Republicans woke up Wednesday morning with nine seats, while Democrats won just five.

Understand gerrymandering in 20 seconds (ok, 29...)

Stating facts is not the same as whining.

We asked our resident political junkie, Zoe Clark, to explain gerrymandering.

In 20 seconds. She took a deep breath and went for it.

"The U.S. has a census every 10 years. It's part of the Constitution.

"And in part it's to help apportion the country's 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

"Gerrymandering is the idea of drawing those political maps of the 435 seats for political advantage.

"If you draw the maps, you try to make sure your voters are in the majority in each district. Or you lump together your opposing voters so that their votes just don't go as far."


How to end gerrymandering forever in just 2 easy steps

Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 10:20 am
@RABEL222,
Sorry Rabel I've only been Baldimo since I joined this site 10 years ago. I don't have a need to try and hide my thoughts and opinions behind different names. Creating a new name to hide behind is the sign of a coward. Rex, Bob and even CJ have been known to change names and post from different accounts. How many different names have you used here? Could you also be JTT?
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 10:31 am
@revelette2,
We need to make sure we adjust the Census to account for citizens vs non-citizens. We should not be using illegal immigrants and non-citizens in the Census to account for Representative representation. Until we do this, there will never be proper accounting for the American people and our representation in our govt.
revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 11:41 am
@Baldimo,
Quote:
Glenn Beck devoted a long rant last night to his contention that the U.S. Census Bureau shouldn't be counting what he blithely calls "illegal aliens" -- i.e., undocumented immigrants.

But his argument -- that we shouldn't be counting people who can't vote -- doesn't merely cut against the undocumented. It cuts against all immigrants -- who, by definition, are also already non-citizens.

Moreover, the Census Bureau isn't charged with accurately counting the number of citizens living within the United States -- it's charged with counting the entire population.

What Beck wants Census to do -- that is, to exclude non-citizens from its count -- is in direct violation of its charter, which is to count the population whole:


The Census Bureau does not ask about legal (migrant) status of respondents in any of its survey and census programs. As examples, in the decennial census, the American Community Survey, and Current Population Survey as there is no legislative mandate to collect this information. Given the success of Census 2000 in counting nearly every person residing in the United States, we expect that unauthorized migrants were included among people who indicated that the United States was their usual place of residence on the survey date. The foreign-born population includes naturalized U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, temporary migrants (e.g., foreign students), humanitarian migrants (e.g., refugees), and unauthorized migrants (people illegally present in the United States).

Beck would have the Census omit not just unauthorized migrants, but also lawful permanent residents, humanitarian migrants, and foreign-born residents here legally.

Of course, he's arguing for this because he believes counting the undocumented will give the eeeeevil SEIU more power in its quest for total global domination or something like that. You have to watch the video to get it all, and even then it never quite holds together, much less make sense
.

five years ago

Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 12:33 pm
@revelette2,
I'm for counting everyone, but we need to add a question about being a citizen. This is the portion where they account for Representation in the govt. So they get a full count and then subtract the number of people who are not citizens. This is the number we then use to account for how many Representatives each state should have. If the 2000 Census was so accurate on the number of people living in the US, we can then get an accurate count of both legal and illegal immigrants residing in the US.

I DO NOT want or support the use of this data in the deportation of immigrants. I just want an honest counting of CITIZENS for representation in The House.
revelette2
 
  4  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 01:50 pm
@Baldimo,
If it is important for people, get a mandate for it to pass in congress. I really don't think it is as important as you obviously do and it really does not have a thing to do with gerrymandering.
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2015 02:18 pm
@revelette2,
A minimum of 11 million illegal immigrants in the country and you don't think a proper counting of voting citizens is required for proper representation?

You speak of a mandate and yet there was no mandate for Obama's immigration action.
RABEL222
 
  3  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2015 12:25 am
@Baldimo,
Than I guess we are all cowards because we all hide behind names not our own so by your own hand you have declared yourself a coward. Maybe you could correct that by stating your real name. And dont bother asking me my name because all you will get is a screw you. And thanks for the Bill O rally answer, bombast and insults. And to answer your question the handle I use is the same I used since I was on abuzz.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  3  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2015 12:28 am
@Baldimo,
Quote:
You speak of a mandate and yet there was no mandate for Obama's immigration action.


Only a legal presidential action made legal by the vote of a majority of the voting public.
mysteryman
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2015 03:20 am
@RABEL222,
Quote:

Only a legal presidential action made legal by the vote of a majority of the voting public.

So, since Obama is in the white house, whatever he does is legal simply because he was elected, is that your position?
revelette2
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2015 06:50 am
@mysteryman,
Pretty sure you are twisting his words.

President's have been making executive orders long before Obama and they will continue to long after Obama. It is up to the courts to decide if his immigration executive order went too far or not.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2015 07:07 am
@Baldimo,
Quote:
A minimum of 11 million illegal immigrants in the country and you don't think a proper counting of voting citizens is required for proper representation?


The problem is already addressed when people register to vote as all states require voters to be citizens and some form of ID. Moreover, voter impersonation rarely if ever happens. So, no I do not think the issue having citizens counted in the census as important as you do.

Proof of Citizenship & Voting Identification
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2015 08:31 am
@revelette2,
We do not get our Representatives due to the # of people who are registered to vote, they are assigned due to population which is determined by the Census. Starting to talk about voter impersonation wasn't the subject, you have injected it to try and change the debate.

I have been talking about making sure we have the proper Representative representation according to US citizens living in an area, not an inflated # that has illegal immigrants included in the count.
revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2015 08:42 am
@Baldimo,
I actually wasn't trying to change the subject, I guess I do not quite understand what you are getting at, precisely, nor do I understand how it relates to gerrymandering which is no way favors areas where there might be illegal immigrants as the proof is in the pudding so to speak, so it seems to me a problem not in existence.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  4  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2015 12:40 pm
@mysteryman,
no. Its legal because a bunch of republican presidents made it legal by having done the same in the past like Bush and Raygun. Presidential prerogative dosent become illegal because the president is a democrat.
RABEL222
 
  3  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2015 12:47 pm
@Baldimo,
If you want to see the importance of your argument divide 320 million into 11 million. It will come to .0032.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.23 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 10:20:50