Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
"A lot" of people agree with them?!?!?...That's your criteria in a *ahem* democracy?The problem with that is that a lot of people agree with them whether they make up 2% or 90%. Like it or not the days of colonial empire are over. No laws are being broken, and frankly we have no business running perpetual colonial fiefdoms. Give them the choice and let them decide. I couldn't care less if it's one guy behind it who also happens to be a Chinese fascist in a gorilla suit, it's a good idea and I hope Congress approves.
This isn't about colonial times...This is about a blatant attempt by one party in America (guess which) to gain nearly permanent one-party rule, through jimmying the election when they don't like the results they've been getting.
"A lot" of people agree with them?!?!?...That's your criteria in a *ahem* democracy?The problem with that is that a lot of people agree with them whether they make up 2% or 90%. Like it or not the days of colonial empire are over. No laws are being broken, and frankly we have no business running perpetual colonial fiefdoms. Give them the choice and let them decide. I couldn't care less if it's one guy behind it who also happens to be a Chinese fascist in a gorilla suit, it's a good idea and I hope Congress approves.
This isn't about colonial times...This is about a blatant attempt by one party in America (guess which) to gain nearly permanent one-party rule, through jimmying the election when they don't like the results they've been getting.
I think there are interests coinciding here to allow something to happen that should have happened a long time ago. Yes, it is about colonialism. What else is Puerto Rico after all? A colony.
The fact that it's become politically palatable, even advantageous, to the current majority to do something about it just means something might get done about it. That's never happened before, right?
"A lot" of people agree with them?!?!?...That's your criteria in a *ahem* democracy?
This isn't about colonial times...This is about a blatant attempt by one party in America (guess which) to gain nearly permanent one-party rule, through jimmying the election when they don't like the results they've been getting.
I think there are interests coinciding here to allow something to happen that should have happened a long time ago. Yes, it is about colonialism. What else is Puerto Rico after all? A colony.
The fact that it's become politically palatable, even advantageous, to the current majority to do something about it just means something might get done about it. That's never happened before, right?
That it's happened before should never be considered justification for it to happen again.
It's a scam by the socialists to get more Hispanic votes.
I think there are interests coinciding here to allow something to happen that should have happened a long time ago. Yes, it is about colonialism. What else is Puerto Rico after all? A colony.
The fact that it's become politically palatable, even advantageous, to the current majority to do something about it just means something might get done about it. That's never happened before, right?
That it's happened before should never be considered justification for it to happen again.
Ideally? Maybe. But we're talking about Congress here, which is a political body filled with political hacks. From a practical standpoint if it's not in their political interests it won't get done. And frankly I don't care where the idea came from or what percentage of whose population makes up the label attached to it, it's a good idea that should be done.
That it's happened before should never be considered justification for it to happen again.
Ideally? Maybe. But we're talking about Congress here, which is a political body filled with political hacks. From a practical standpoint if it's not in their political interests it won't get done. And frankly I don't care where the idea came from or what percentage of whose population makes up the label attached to it, it's a good idea that should be done.
Even though you recognize that it's politically advantageous for the Dems to have PR as a state, and that they would move on it BECAUSE of that, you still support the idea?
The electoral consequences ALONE ought to dissuade any centrist from supporting something like that.
Christ, that's all we need. A state full of airheaded J-Lo types!
WoW!!
Disparaging a whole country and/or racial type.
Classic Neo-Con rhetoric.
Keep it up.
Ideally? Maybe. But we're talking about Congress here, which is a political body filled with political hacks. From a practical standpoint if it's not in their political interests it won't get done. And frankly I don't care where the idea came from or what percentage of whose population makes up the label attached to it, it's a good idea that should be done.
Even though you recognize that it's politically advantageous for the Dems to have PR as a state, and that they would move on it BECAUSE of that, you still support the idea?
The electoral consequences ALONE ought to dissuade any centrist from supporting something like that.
Be realistic here. What is the population of Puerto Rico? How many Congressional seats/electoral votes are they likely to receive? And how well offset by the inevitable compromise seats in underrepresented Red states as well as probable net gains in those areas as a result of the census? This is certainly advantageous, but hardly the makings of a "perpetual majority". And the positives in getting rid of a colony outweigh the negatives.
Even though you recognize that it's politically advantageous for the Dems to have PR as a state, and that they would move on it BECAUSE of that, you still support the idea?
The electoral consequences ALONE ought to dissuade any centrist from supporting something like that.
Be realistic here. What is the population of Puerto Rico? How many Congressional seats/electoral votes are they likely to receive? And how well offset by the inevitable compromise seats in underrepresented Red states as well as probable net gains in those areas as a result of the census? This is certainly advantageous, but hardly the makings of a "perpetual majority". And the positives in getting rid of a colony outweigh the negatives.
I never claimed a perpetual majority. Only that the Dems would move on it out of sheer politics. Regardless, it benefits them.
The centrist is one who is dissuaded by such tactics, or so I would think.
Is it just a coincidence that you support the idea, and that it's potentially happening on the Dems' watch?
How does admitting PR improve the US?
Most of my Mom's side of the family is from there...I've never been, but I'd love to go there one day.They already have all of the benefits without any of the responsibilities, I doubt they will want to become a State, if they are smart, they won't.
I have a Cousin who moved there, loves it.
And this PR is conservative...but maybe not in the eyes of some neocons!
On the left there is a good reason to want Puerto Rico....and 3 other good reasons to be on the good side of our neighbors in the Carribean and Gulf of Mexico...
On the left there is a good reason to want Puerto Rico....and 3 other good reasons to be on the good side of our neighbors in the Carribean and Gulf of Mexico...
This is a perfect example of why I hate the Ms. California types (typically). Bonde hair bule eyes bore me since I lived in Pacific Beach Ca. for so long.
On the left there is a good reason to want Puerto Rico....and 3 other good reasons to be on the good side of our neighbors in the Carribean and Gulf of Mexico...
This is a perfect example of why I hate the Ms. California types (typically). Bonde hair bule eyes bore me since I lived in Pacific Beach Ca. for so long.
Well, they don't "bore me."
Although I never lived in Pacific Beach CA, or Sweden, I still find Latinas WAY HAWT.
