• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court rejects judge-drawn Texas election maps

X Factor said:
Oh, you're talking about the will of Congress. I was referring to the will of the people.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, in some cases the two are actually aligned. So, for example, the majority in Congress and the majority of the people favored letting the top Bush tax cuts expire. But the minority in Congress prevented it from happening. The majority in Congress, and the majority of the people, favored bigger payroll tax cuts, paid for by a surtax on very high income, but the minority in Congress prevented it from happening (and nearly prevented the continuation of the existing payroll tax cut that is overwhelmingly approved by the majority of Americans). Etc.
 
AdamT said:
And thanks, too, for stating the obvious, but the point of our indirect democracy, and having a Senate that is not proportional to population, was not to give the minorit of representatives the ability to hamstring the majority of representatives.
Click to expand...

the states agreed to the constitution. Every state gets 2 senators and the House is proportional to the population. If you don't like it you can start a campaign to amend the Constitution.
 
digsbe said:
the states agreed to the constitution. Every state gets 2 senators and the House is proportional to the population. If you don't like it you can start a campaign to amend the Constitution.
Click to expand...

I guess I wasn't clear. The system itself provides some protection against regional dominance. That was approved by the states in a constitutional amendment (not the original constitition). But the Senate rules that, when abused, allow the minority party to block almost any action, were not approved by the states, or the House, or the President. I think the filibuster rules are a real problem, and not just because Republicans are in the minority.
 
AdamT said:
Believe it or not, in some cases the two are actually aligned. So, for example, the majority in Congress and the majority of the people favored letting the top Bush tax cuts expire. But the minority in Congress prevented it from happening. The majority in Congress, and the majority of the people, favored bigger payroll tax cuts, paid for by a surtax on very high income, but the minority in Congress prevented it from happening (and nearly prevented the continuation of the existing payroll tax cut that is overwhelmingly approved by the majority of Americans). Etc.
Click to expand...

The majority of the people did NOT want Obamacare. In that case, the minority of Congress was aligned with the majority of the people. BTW, who wanted the tax cuts to expire? Most people I know prefer to pay fewer taxes. Oh and that pay roll tax cut you admit that the majority of people approve of? The Republicans wanted to keep those good for a year instead of just 2 months. Why didn't the Dems support that,? But, oh yeah, Dems are holy and blameless and would never try to obstruct a majority Republican congress. LOL
 
Last edited:
X Factor said:
The majority of the people did NOT want Obamacare. In that case, the minority of Congress was aligned with the majority of the people. BTW, who wanted the tax cuts to expire? Most people I know prefer to pay fewer taxes.
Click to expand...

It's true that a majority turned against quote-unquote Obamacare after the election. OTOH, Obama was elected by a considerable majority on the promise of enacting HCR. And in fact, when Americans were polled about the individual aspects of HCR, a majority approved of most of the provisions.
 
AdamT said:
It's true that a majority turned against quote-unquote Obamacare after the election. OTOH, Obama was elected by a considerable majority on the promise of enacting HCR. And in fact, when Americans were polled about the individual aspects of HCR, a majority approved of most of the provisions.
Click to expand...

Remember you said this and don't complain if a Republican president gets elected partially on the promise to end Obamacare.
 
They should just come up with some sort of computer algorithm that will just take raw population data and create districts as close to uniform as possible.
 
jamesrage said:
I think the idea someone's color,race/ethnicity,political affiliation should be taken into account when redrawing election maps is absurd and immoral. The only factor should be population and nothing else.This is why I think a computer should draw the lines and not scumbag politicians trying to redraw the districts to favor themselves.
Click to expand...

Deuce said:
They should just come up with some sort of computer algorithm that will just take raw population data and create districts as close to uniform as possible.
Click to expand...

These folks are on the ball. Location and population are the only factors that should make any difference.

On the partisan side of the discussion, doesn't it say something that pro Democrat means "protecting minorities from oppression"? Why aren't Republicans ashamed of that?
 
Paschendale said:
These folks are on the ball. Location and population are the only factors that should make any difference.

On the partisan side of the discussion, doesn't it say something that pro Democrat means "protecting minorities from oppression"? Why aren't Republicans ashamed of that?
Click to expand...
Ashamed? by what? Stupid political pandering? The implication is that minorities would suffer without their betters caring for them. Personally it's the lefties that should be ashamed for such sentiments.
 
Paschendale said:
These folks are on the ball. Location and population are the only factors that should make any difference.

On the partisan side of the discussion, doesn't it say something that pro Democrat means "protecting minorities from oppression"? Why aren't Republicans ashamed of that?
Click to expand...

Pro democrat doesn't have **** to do with protecting minorities from oppression.Its about democrats trying to rig the voting districts in their favor due to some stereotype that minorities always vote for democrats.
 
jamesrage said:
Pro democrat doesn't have **** to do with protecting minorities from oppression.Its about democrats trying to rig the voting districts in their favor due to some stereotype that minorities always vote for democrats.
Click to expand...

...or Republicans doing it for the same reason.
 
Deuce said:
...or Republicans doing it for the same reason.
Click to expand...

Republicans are trying, and failing, to convince minorities that we believe they are equal and every bit as capable as anyone.

Democrats are trying, and succeeding, in convincing minorities that they are genetically incapable of existing without the help of governmental intervention.
 
Erod said:
Republicans are trying, and failing, to convince minorities that we believe they are equal and every bit as capable as anyone.
Click to expand...

That part is true. No one actually believes you when you say you believe that others are your equals. When your words say one thing and your actions another, we believe your actions. Republican actions are steeped in racism and bigotry.

Democrats are trying, and succeeding, in convincing minorities that they are genetically incapable of existing without the help of governmental intervention.
Click to expand...

Or we recognize that they might need a little help to shake off all the crap you folks have done to them. It has nothing to do with genetics and everything to do with systematic oppression. Your scapegoats are the real underdogs. Do the American thing. Side with the underdogs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom