President Obama's New Redistricting Organization
-
Your blind hatred for whites is very apparent.
You ignore the facts, like the ones I posted above, so you can play the victim.
You worship a party that hates you. Bill Clinton signed into law the 3 most homophobic laws in US history and one of them was (supposedly) authored by Chuck Schumer (Religious Freedom Restoration Act).
They don't care about helping their own, but rather helping illegals instead. This was a switch in 2015 due to Trump.
-
with a popular vote, you wouldnt have any issues with gerrymandering.
i just wish america would join the other western democracies and get rid of the electoral college and have popular voting instead. as i understand the electoral college was implemented in the 18th century because of issues with slavery in the south of america. i would think an electoral college has no real purpose in the 21st century.
-
YEP, you're a blind liberal who gets his "news" from MSM liars.
The Electoral College was created to prevent cities from having total say in every election. Of course, every white person not living in a US city owned at least 10,000 slaves. Illinois is a well known slavery state, didnt'cha know.
-
lol do you people consider wikipedia "msm"? i mean im not really surprised, but still….
how exactly would cities have total say in every election? do you not know what the popular vote is or how democracy is supposed to work?
YEP, you're a blind liberal who gets his "news" from MSM liars.
The Electoral College was created to prevent cities from having total say in every election. Of course, every white person not living in a US city owned at least 10,000 slaves. Illinois is a well known slavery state, didnt'cha know.
-
Wikipedia isn't trustworthy. Only an idiot believes that it is. Maybe you should look into the history and problems of Wikipedia before you blindly believe what it tells you.
I bet you also believe SNOPES, despite being proven to have lied.
-
no idea what snopes is but i do read bellingcat.
wikipedia is a great source of peer-reviewed information. if any fact lacks a citation it is shown and controversial pages are being fact checked continuously. but oh yeah, "fact checking" isnt really that popular with alt right media, i can see why someone from the alt right could be confused about fact checking.
Wikipedia isn't trustworthy. Only an idiot believes that it is. Maybe you should look into the history and problems of Wikipedia before you blindly believe what it tells you.
I bet you also believe SNOPES, despite being proven to have lied.
-
i still want to know why you think popular vote would give large cities "total say in every election". i cant really understand your statement except if it would be to reduce democracy in usa. which would be bad regardless if it would be a leftist or rightist skewing.
YEP, you're a blind liberal who gets his "news" from MSM liars.
The Electoral College was created to prevent cities from having total say in every election. Of course, every white person not living in a US city owned at least 10,000 slaves. Illinois is a well known slavery state, didnt'cha know.
-
You really need to read up on Wikipedia and its biases.
Feminist "editathons" is a good one, where they go through pages and make them have a feminist slant.
I think it was the Danish royal family that edited out their scandals.
Wikipedia has too many problems to be trusted.
SNOPES is supposed to be a fact checker, but they now are heavily biased toward the left. They have been caught in proven lies.
Instead of doing a bit of fact checking on your own, you just call me "alt-right" as if that offends me anymore. You people just screech whatever names you can think of at your enemies.
-
lol, i dont call you alt right as a slur meant to provoce you, is use it because its a it is a good description for how your opinions lean.
if you dont like my reference to wikipedia for the electoral college its easy to fact check the sources in the article. again, im not surprised someone from the alt right would try fact checking.
and what was this weird theory that large cities will have total say in every election? do you support less democratic elections?
You really need to read up on Wikipedia and its biases.
Feminist "editathons" is a good one, where they go through pages and make them have a feminist slant.
I think it was the Danish royal family that edited out their scandals.
Wikipedia has too many problems to be trusted.
SNOPES is supposed to be a fact checker, but they now are heavily biased toward the left. They have been caught in proven lies.
Instead of doing a bit of fact checking on your own, you just call me "alt-right" as if that offends me anymore. You people just screech whatever names you can think of at your enemies.
-
You must be totally clueless that you can't understand how a couple of major cities and California (southern 1/3rd) would rule the US in a popular vote for the President.
Do you really think people living in cities care about farmers and those living in small town America? I have lived in a small town and major cities. City people are greedy and only think about themselves.
We already see people in non-city areas being forgotten, under the current system. It would be far worse if the President was only chosen by the major cities.
The US is 228 bigger than Denmark and is far more mixed than. 350+ million people vs 5.6 million people.
-
but do you even understand how democracy works? why would the people in low populated states have a relative voting power of four times the voting power of the people in california? that's just not how a democracy should work in my opinion. then again, i know alt right people have trouble understanding why EQUALITY is actually beneficial for all.
this video isnt directly related to equality but its in the same neighborhood:
You must be totally clueless that you can't understand how a couple of major cities and California (southern 1/3rd) would rule the US in a popular vote for the President.
Do you really think people living in cities care about farmers and those living in small town America? I have lived in a small town and major cities. City people are greedy and only think about themselves.
We already see people in non-city areas being forgotten, under the current system. It would be far worse if the President was only chosen by the major cities.
The US is 228 bigger than Denmark and is far more mixed than. 350+ million people vs 5.6 million people.
-
Obama needs to go away. Imagine how butt hurt you and your fellow lunatics would be if GWB and other former Presidents constant criticized Obama while he was President.
MAGA isn't about white supremacy, except to lunatics. It's about the US having manufacturing in all sectors like we used to have. It's about ending NAFTA. It's about getting all NATO nations to pay their legal obligations of 2% of GDP, instead of letting them pay as little as nothing and the US topping up NATO's funds.
I don't know the economics of manufacturing, but … do you genuinely believe that US can reclaim its manufacturing base in all sectors like the past? I feel like the boat has sailed, and countries with lower manufacturing bases and looser environmental regulations will underprice any US manufacturing. I feel like the people who say this have a very naive view of the world (and this is not a criticism at you, but a general observation). Capitalism will always source goods and materials with the cheapest labor and materials. That's just how capitalism works. Does a company want to hire a $35 / hr American who wants paid family leave, full medical / dental / vision healthcare, and employee benefits like disability insurance versus an $8 / hr Chinese who is grateful to be sending money to his family home. Does the American actually want to plug a widget into a gizmo for 12 hours a day, live in substandard company housing, and get paid $8 / hr?? And even if the US President wants to try to move manufacturing back to America via tariffs, it would STILL be cheaper to make it in China, transport it across an ocean, and add tariffs. I think America needs to have a serious discussion about what is possible, versus constantly trying to relive a glorified view of the past. That stymies us from having real and difficult conversations about what it'll take for us to be a continuing leader in new technologies and industries.
As an American, I am all for a strong America. I'm for strong borders, I'm for making allies pay their fair share for us to police their shit neighborhoods, I'm for fair trade where countries don't rip our intellectual property. But I'm also for a hard look at how we actually evaluate our future options in a realistic manner.
-
If we reverse the benefits of sending jobs outside of the US, then we can reclaim many of our manufacturing jobs. Ending NAFTA was a great step in that. NAFTA gave special rights to Mexico and Canada, that the US didn't get. Canada got to protect several of its industries from NAFTA and Mexico was allowed to keep its low workplace standards, among others. Trudeau called it racist when Trump said that Mexico needed to have the same workplace standards as the US and Canada. Seems like its Trudeau's racism of low expectations that's the problem.
When I lived in Houston, I saw the shitty trucks coming up from Mexico that would be illegal without NAFTA.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login