• 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!

Our senate is a joke

AtlantaAdonis

AtlantaAdonis

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
2,383
Reaction score
717
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
 
Someone has a vagina filled with sand because the Senate didn't go the way they want.
 
AtlantaAdonis said:
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

We already have the House of Representatives whose seats are apportioned by population. So is your complaint simply that the Senate rather than the House must give its advice and consent to seat Supreme Court Justices? Because if we did it the other way, and the House had to give its advice and consent, Kavanaugh would be seated with votes to spare.
 
Last edited:
Chillfolks said:
Someone has a vagina filled with sand because the Senate didn't go the way they want.
Click to expand...

Well I know how he feels. Democracy is only a good thing when it goes my way. :roll:
 
I find it odd when things don't go the way one likes the rules and laws are always blamed.
 
Last edited:
AtlantaAdonis said:
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

Would you be posting the same thing if Collins didn't gave that speech?
 
AtlantaAdonis said:
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
Probably bothers you as much as it would bother watching a bunch of 'progressive' twats impose their diseased thinking on the rest of the country.
 
Much of America is a decrepit wreck, but I digress....
 
AtlantaAdonis said:
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

We kicked this around in another thread a month or so ago. After two centuries of expansion and natural internal migration, the "Great Compromise" that facilitated the ratification of the Constitution has resulted in the 50 Senators representing the 25 smallest states only representing 16% of the population. The other 50 Senators representing the 25 largest states represent 84% of the people in this country. An imbalance has always existed, by design, to ensure that small states were not treated as politically unequal to large states. But this compromise was enacted, mind you, when Senators represented States, and not the people of those states (prior to the 17th amendment), and when the United States was still viewed as a confederation of largely autonomous political entities--the united States. Our founders never anticipated that so much political power would be centralized in our federal government, and they never anticipated the implications of such an imbalance in such a centralized system. And it's only going to get worse if demographic trends continue.

There's 1 Senator for every 275K people in Wyoming. There's 1 for every 20M in California. That's 72:1. I bet any county sheriff, teacher, small business owner, local banker, etc can get a meeting with John Barasso or Mike Enzi (Wyoming's Senators) or their Chiefs of Staff within a couple of days. I wonder how many hundreds of thousands of dollars a Californian would have to donate, or how many people his organization would have to represent, for him to secure a sit-down with Kamala Harris or Diane Feinstein.

Since Senators now directly represent voters, there's clearly an inequality in representation at play.
 
AtlantaAdonis said:
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

That's what the House is for.
 
AtlantaAdonis said:
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

Ouch. The sting of the realization that Kavanaugh will be confirmed is going to hurt for a long time, just as the sting of Trump beating Hillary still hurts two years later. I guess you forgot about that government body they call the House of Representatives.
 
Bucky said:
I find it odd when things don't go the way ones like the rules and laws are always blamed.
Click to expand...

That's exactly why the left believes in judges who make the law instead of interpreting the law.
 
Felis Leo said:
Well I know how he feels. Democracy is only a good thing when it goes my way. :roll:
Click to expand...

Somewhere long ago I heard "You win some...you lose some" and "It's not whether you win or lose but how you played the game." I don't like sore losers or sore winners.
 
Felis Leo said:
We already have the House of Representatives whose seats are apportioned by population. So is your complaint simply that the Senate rather than the House must give its advice and consent to seat Supreme Court Justices? Because if we did it the other way, and the House had to give its advice and consent, Kavanaugh would be seated with votes to spare.
Click to expand...

And so what the GOP in the house has done is to gerrymander their districts so severely that the will of the majority of voters be damned.
 
AtlantaAdonis said:
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

It must be comforting to know that equal representation in the Senate cannot be changed!
 
LincolnRossiter said:
We kicked this around in another thread a month or so ago. After two centuries of expansion and natural internal migration, the "Great Compromise" that facilitated the ratification of the Constitution has resulted in the 50 Senators representing the 25 smallest states only representing 16% of the population. The other 50 Senators representing the 25 largest states represent 84% of the people in this country. An imbalance has always existed, by design, to ensure that small states were not treated as politically unequal to large states. But this compromise was enacted, mind you, when Senators represented States, and not the people of those states (prior to the 17th amendment), and when the United States was still viewed as a confederation of largely autonomous political entities--the united States. Our founders never anticipated that so much political power would be centralized in our federal government, and they never anticipated the implications of such an imbalance in such a centralized system. And it's only going to get worse if demographic trends continue.

There's 1 Senator for every 275K people in Wyoming. There's 1 for every 20M in California. That's 72:1. I bet any county sheriff, teacher, small business owner, local banker, etc can get a meeting with John Barasso or Mike Enzi (Wyoming's Senators) or their Chiefs of Staff within a couple of days. I wonder how many hundreds of thousands of dollars a Californian would have to donate, or how many people his organization would have to represent, for him to secure a sit-down with Kamala Harris or Diane Feinstein.

Since Senators now directly represent voters, there's clearly an inequality in representation at play.
Click to expand...

This is a perfectly good starting point as to how Federal representation is apportioned. The problem is, I am not sure if AtlantaAdonis cares about it in principle. I could be wrong, but I suspect that if the Senate were about to vote Kavanaugh down, AtlantaAdonis would not raise a peep. To many, the process or the principle does not matter. Only the goal. Some people are willing to cut down any law to catch the Devil, thinking the Devil will never turn around to meet them.

As for me, I think the system is perfectly fine the way it is. Even when it did not go my way.
 
Last edited:
AtlantaAdonis said:
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

We've got worse problems than that. And it appears to be getting worse with Kavanaugh's confirmation; I know you're thinking, "duh, what did I just say", I know. But, as long as the super wealthy can buy control of OUR Senate as they seem to be able to do … It wouldn't matter how many Senators a State has. Citizens United was another nail in the coffin of the common mans chance to have a voice in government; and, apparently, it's only going to get worse. No way could we get the votes to amend the Constitution so that equal representation for the common man is insured … or even … possible. AmeriCANs live by the golden rule. Those with the Gold Rule.

Not only that they've used tax free dollars to create think tanks that have declared that fair taxation is just envious baloney; and enough of us believe them that they are in controll. Consequently they keep getting richer and WE AmeriCANs keep voting against our interest and for theirs. Until Lush Rimbaw and Faux News are recognized as the traitors they are … "we missed a shift on the long decline" (Neil Young), we've missed the shift because of the slight of hand and pandering to our fears and hate.

I don't have answers, but, I too have fears … for the Country of my birth, the Country I love with my every breath; and ALL of my fellow AmeriCANs!
 
Last edited:
PirateMk1 said:
Your feeling mean.
Click to expand...

My BS limit has been reached for the week. Actually I hit it around Wen of this week.

I'm all for having the Senate go back to being determined by the state legislature verses a vote. But that's not what the OP is about. It's simply about a bratty kid not getting their way.

Let em cake at the kiddie table
 
LincolnRossiter said:
We kicked this around in another thread a month or so ago. After two centuries of expansion and natural internal migration, the "Great Compromise" that facilitated the ratification of the Constitution has resulted in the 50 Senators representing the 25 smallest states only representing 16% of the population. The other 50 Senators representing the 25 largest states represent 84% of the people in this country. An imbalance has always existed, by design, to ensure that small states were not treated as politically unequal to large states. But this compromise was enacted, mind you, when Senators represented States, and not the people of those states (prior to the 17th amendment), and when the United States was still viewed as a confederation of largely autonomous political entities--the united States. Our founders never anticipated that so much political power would be centralized in our federal government, and they never anticipated the implications of such an imbalance in such a centralized system. And it's only going to get worse if demographic trends continue.

There's 1 Senator for every 275K people in Wyoming. There's 1 for every 20M in California. That's 72:1. I bet any county sheriff, teacher, small business owner, local banker, etc can get a meeting with John Barasso or Mike Enzi (Wyoming's Senators) or their Chiefs of Staff within a couple of days. I wonder how many hundreds of thousands of dollars a Californian would have to donate, or how many people his organization would have to represent, for him to secure a sit-down with Kamala Harris or Diane Feinstein.

Since Senators now directly represent voters, there's clearly an inequality in representation at play.
Click to expand...

In 1870, we had 37 states. The 36 senators from the bottom 18 states represented 19.5% of the population. (7,235,695 out of 37,063,232) The ratio between the most populous state (NY) and the least populous (NV) was 103 to 1. This was 148 years ago. This is not a new phenomenon. It is also hair splitting, IMO, to differentiate between a state and the people of a state. A state is merely an idea on paper without its people and the actions taken by those senators still worked to either the betterment or detriment of their populations.
 
Last edited:
AtlantaAdonis said:
The idea of an equal number of representatives per state is absurd in today's America. The state of California has almost as many people as the bottom 30 least populous states. So basically, they get 2 senators while all the small states full of bigoted Bubbas a Jim Bobs get dozens. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

But our founding fathers were infallible gods that can do no wrong, so we can't change the sacred "kawnstitution" to fix this situation at all. Absolutely makes me sick to watch senators from backward states vote to put a theocratic bigot onto the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

I suggest you take some very basic civics classes.
 
StuPedaso said:
We've got worse problems than that. And it appears to be getting worse with Kavanaugh's confirmation; I know you're thinking, "duh, what did I just say", I know. But, as long as the super wealthy can buy control of OUR Senate as they seem to be able to do … It wouldn't matter how many Senators a State has. Citizens United was another nail in the coffin of the common mans chance to have a voice in government; and, apparently, it's only going to get worse. No way could we get the votes to amend the Constitution so that equal representation for the common man is insured … or even … possible. AmeriCANs live by the golden rule. Those with the Gold Rule.

Not only that they've used tax free dollars to create think tanks that have declared that fair taxation is just envious baloney; and enough of us believe them that they are in controll. Consequently they keep getting richer and WE AmeriCANs keep voting against our interest and for theirs. Until Lush Rimbaw and Faux News are recognized as the traitors they are … "we missed a shift on the long decline" (Neil Young), we've missed the shift because of the slight of hand and pandering to our fears and hate.

I don't have answers, but, I too have fears … for the Country of my birth, the Country I love with my every breath; and ALL of my fellow AmeriCANs!
Click to expand...

I think you meant "progressive" taxation. Fair would be a flat tax.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom