My Tea Party Brother VERY Unhappy Today

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

"""WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused Monday to change the way state and municipal voting districts are drawn, denying an effort by conservatives that could have increased the number of rural, mostly white districts at the expense of urban, largely Hispanic ones.

The "one person, one vote" case was among the most consequential of the high court's term, and once again the court's liberal wing won out. The ruling left intact Texas' method of drawing districts with roughly equal numbers of residents.

Challengers had argued only eligible voters should be counted, a method that would have allowed states to ignore non-citizens and others who do not vote, including children. In most cases, that would have helped Republicans and hurt Democrats.

If the court had ruled that districts should be based on eligible voters rather than total population, states with large numbers of non-citizens would have seen the biggest change -- Texas, California, New York, New Jersey, Arizona and Nevada among them. Cities such as Chicago and Miami also would be affected."""

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

 

[JimBowie1958]

He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.

Lol, your 'Tea Party' brother lives in your head, most likely, and not in the reality the rest of us live in.

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

So a county that recruits several large privately managed penal institutions that have nonvoting populations can and should, in your opinion, have more representation than actual voting residents?

My Gawd, you libtards have lost your fucking minds.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.

Lol, your 'Tea Party' brother lives in your head, most likely, and not in the reality the rest of us live in.

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

So a county that recruits several large privately managed penal institutions that have nonvoting populations can and should, in your opinion, have more representation than actual voting residents?

My Gawd, you libtards have lost your fucking minds.

Since convicts in prison can't vote, what does it matter? My brother and his fellow Tea Partiers got all the way to the SCOTUS with their case. Have you ever pulled anything like THAT out of your sizable ass?

 

[JimBowie1958]

He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.

Lol, your 'Tea Party' brother lives in your head, most likely, and not in the reality the rest of us live in.

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

So a county that recruits several large privately managed penal institutions that have nonvoting populations can and should, in your opinion, have more representation than actual voting residents?

My Gawd, you libtards have lost your fucking minds.

Since convicts in prison can't vote, what does it matter? My brother and his fellow Tea Partiers got all the way to the SCOTUS with their case. Have you ever pulled anything like THAT out of your sizable ass?

Still playing with your imaginary friends, huh?

As to why the convicts matter, stupid retard jack ass heathen, is that they GET A SMALLER CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. Where do you think they build most of the private prisons, dip shit? In RURAL AREAS. Thus doing exactly what you said this court decision would not do.

GAWDAM, you libtards are a special kind of blithering idiot.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Conservatives complaining about the constitution again

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.

Lol, your 'Tea Party' brother lives in your head, most likely, and not in the reality the rest of us live in.

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

So a county that recruits several large privately managed penal institutions that have nonvoting populations can and should, in your opinion, have more representation than actual voting residents?

My Gawd, you libtards have lost your fucking minds.

Since convicts in prison can't vote, what does it matter? My brother and his fellow Tea Partiers got all the way to the SCOTUS with their case. Have you ever pulled anything like THAT out of your sizable ass?

Still playing with your imaginary friends, huh?

As to why the convicts matter, stupid retard jack ass heathen, is that they GET A SMALLER CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. Where do you think they build most of the private prisons, dip shit? In RURAL AREAS. Thus doing exactly what you said this court decision would not do.

GAWDAM, you libtards are a special kind of blithering idiot.

So we should build prisons in dense, highly populated areas? Let's start with a new one in your trailer park.

The answer to your problem is to decriminalize drugs and close prisons.
""We have five percent of the world's population, but 25 percent of its prisoners. The cost of housing all those inmates: $80 billion a year."" Bill Whitaker, CBS News

GAWD, your tiny little jock strap certainly is in a wad this morning.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Conservatives complaining about the constitution again

This whole case has been nothing but an attempt to put more old, white men in charge, because the Hispanic population is growing in the south and southwest.

 

[Slave2the$]

Imagine the power you would have if you were the only legal voter in a district with only illegals, legal immigrants and prisoners.

I can understand both sides of the argument here though. It's a tough one.

 

[Little-Acorn]

My Tea Party Brother VERY Unhappy Today
He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.


So much fun to watch the leftist fanatics squalling, whining, and frantically making up "facts" as their own candidates circle the drain at ever-increasing speeds.

 

[OKTexas]

He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

"""WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused Monday to change the way state and municipal voting districts are drawn, denying an effort by conservatives that could have increased the number of rural, mostly white districts at the expense of urban, largely Hispanic ones.

The "one person, one vote" case was among the most consequential of the high court's term, and once again the court's liberal wing won out. The ruling left intact Texas' method of drawing districts with roughly equal numbers of residents.

Challengers had argued only eligible voters should be counted, a method that would have allowed states to ignore non-citizens and others who do not vote, including children. In most cases, that would have helped Republicans and hurt Democrats.

If the court had ruled that districts should be based on eligible voters rather than total population, states with large numbers of non-citizens would have seen the biggest change -- Texas, California, New York, New Jersey, Arizona and Nevada among them. Cities such as Chicago and Miami also would be affected."""

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

The whole OP is a lie. This has nothing to do with voting, but the population that is eligible to vote to be considered for representation. The citizens are demanding the formula found in Section 2 of the 14th Amendment be followed. Once again the court ignores the Constitution.

 

[Dragonlady]

My Tea Party Brother VERY Unhappy Today
He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.


So much fun to watch the leftist fanatics squalling, whining, and frantically making up "facts" as their own candidates circle the drain at ever-increasing speeds.

So much fun to watch conservatives gleefully celebrating an election victory that hasn't happened, and won't happen, with the current slate of Republican candidates. The only people who will vote for Trump are angry white men. Everyone else thinks he's as asshole who is neither qualified nor competent to run the US.

 

[Little-Acorn]

My Tea Party Brother VERY Unhappy Today
He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.
So much fun to watch the leftist fanatics squalling, whining, and frantically making up "facts" as their own candidates circle the drain at ever-increasing speeds.

The only people who will vote for Trump are angry white men.

See?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Congressional districts have always been based on the total population, not eligible voters, so this was an easy decision.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

"""WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused Monday to change the way state and municipal voting districts are drawn, denying an effort by conservatives that could have increased the number of rural, mostly white districts at the expense of urban, largely Hispanic ones.

The "one person, one vote" case was among the most consequential of the high court's term, and once again the court's liberal wing won out. The ruling left intact Texas' method of drawing districts with roughly equal numbers of residents.

Challengers had argued only eligible voters should be counted, a method that would have allowed states to ignore non-citizens and others who do not vote, including children. In most cases, that would have helped Republicans and hurt Democrats.

If the court had ruled that districts should be based on eligible voters rather than total population, states with large numbers of non-citizens would have seen the biggest change -- Texas, California, New York, New Jersey, Arizona and Nevada among them. Cities such as Chicago and Miami also would be affected."""

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

The whole OP is a lie. This has nothing to do with voting, but the population that is eligible to vote to be considered for representation. The citizens are demanding the formula found in Section 2 of the 14th Amendment be followed. Once again the court ignores the Constitution.

^^^^^^

Winna winna chicken dinna!!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Congressional districts have always been based on the total population, not eligible voters, so this was an easy decision.

And by "always" you mean since.....

 

[SuperDemocrat]

The Donald hoped democrats would forget how to properly bash America.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Congressional districts have always been based on the total population, not eligible voters, so this was an easy decision.

And by "always" you mean since.....

The first Census

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Congressional districts have always been based on the total population, not eligible voters, so this was an easy decision.

And by "always" you mean since.....

The first Census

Was that the one where slaves were 3/5 of a person?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

My Tea Party Brother VERY Unhappy Today
He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.


So much fun to watch the leftist fanatics squalling, whining, and frantically making up "facts" as their own candidates circle the drain at ever-increasing speeds.

Excuse me but the ultra-unibrowed-conservatives lost today. I couldn't be more pleased.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

He was hoping that poor and minority people would lose their ability to vote.

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

"""WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused Monday to change the way state and municipal voting districts are drawn, denying an effort by conservatives that could have increased the number of rural, mostly white districts at the expense of urban, largely Hispanic ones.

The "one person, one vote" case was among the most consequential of the high court's term, and once again the court's liberal wing won out. The ruling left intact Texas' method of drawing districts with roughly equal numbers of residents.

Challengers had argued only eligible voters should be counted, a method that would have allowed states to ignore non-citizens and others who do not vote, including children. In most cases, that would have helped Republicans and hurt Democrats.

If the court had ruled that districts should be based on eligible voters rather than total population, states with large numbers of non-citizens would have seen the biggest change -- Texas, California, New York, New Jersey, Arizona and Nevada among them. Cities such as Chicago and Miami also would be affected."""

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'

The whole OP is a lie. This has nothing to do with voting, but the population that is eligible to vote to be considered for representation. The citizens are demanding the formula found in Section 2 of the 14th Amendment be followed. Once again the court ignores the Constitution.

A lie? Would you rather me quote the Wall Street Journal instead? Don't let that knee jerkin' knock you out. What was it that Romney used to say about things said in quiet rooms.... It's about denying the vote to minorities. Wise up.