With Kavanaugh vote, the Senate reaches a historic low in democratic metric

[mudwhistle]

We're there kids - Rule by fiat rigged by an autocratic minority. Sad

The disconnect between the United States Senate and the American people has never been greater. If you thought the Senate has gone off its rails, the numbers back you up.

The Senate majority represents a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

Based on a new analysis of Senate votes from 1901 to the present, we found that beginning last year senators voting in the majority represented a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

In yesterday’s vote to confirm Justice Kavanaugh, the 50 senators voting yes represent states covering just 44% of the U.S. population or 143 million Americans. That’s less than a majority, less than the 181 million Americans represented by the senators voting no (you might say the “Senate popular vote”). Yet the nomination was confirmed.​

With Kavanaugh vote, the Senate reaches a historic low in democratic metric

You libtards must get all of your talking points from the same place.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Silly irrelevant bs. The Senate was not designed to represent the people democratically but to give the states equal representation. When you consider that the state of Texas and the state of Delaware have the same number of senators, complaining that the majority party does not represent the majority of the people is a confession of ignorance about the American government and American history.

"The Senate was not designed to represent the people democratically"

Well it pretty much did that then, but sure as hell doesn't now -- And THAT my friend is the problemo!

No, if you were familiar with US history, you would know the Senate was designed to represent the states, not the people. The smaller states were afraid of being overwhelmed by the larger states and would not have signed the Constitution without the protection of equal representation for the states in the Senate and so the Senate was designed to place a limit on democracy in the federal government. States Rights was an even stronger issue then than it is today, and the design of the Senate is a monument States Rights.

Ah yes "States Rights" -
That thing that conservatives bellow about endlessly, UNTIL a state does something they hate.
*See Oregon Death with Dignity Law - (Ashcroft)/ Sanctuary Cites (Trump-Sessions)/ environmental regulation (Pruitt) and marijuana legalization (Sessions)
Democrats and Republicans have virtually switched sides on states' rights

The same can be said about Democrats who are arguing the states have the right to decide for themselves what to do about illegal immigrants and the federal government has no right to determine the issue for them. However, none of this has anything to do with your bizarre complaints about the Senate not representing the people democratically; it was never suppose to.

And yet until the middle of the 20th century - It pretty much did. C'mon now, do you seriously believe that the founders could have envisioned the semi-automatic assault rifle when they wrote the second amendment? I have an old single-load Flintlock Musket from the late 1800s. The weaponry we have today would have been unimaginable at the time.

And this is the problem with constitutional originalists. They want to interpret the constitution in a way that affirms their conservative worldview by somehow reading minds, but fail to see that 250 years of time kinda changes everything!

Again, if you were at all familiar with US history, you would know the Senate never represented the states according to population and was never supposed to. Quite the opposite was true, it was intended to allow small states the same representation in Congress as larger states. This was always true, from the time the Constitution as signed up to today.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Silly irrelevant bs. The Senate was not designed to represent the people democratically but to give the states equal representation. When you consider that the state of Texas and the state of Delaware have the same number of senators, complaining that the majority party does not represent the majority of the people is a confession of ignorance about the American government and American history.

"The Senate was not designed to represent the people democratically"

Well it pretty much did that then, but sure as hell doesn't now -- And THAT my friend is the problemo!

No, if you were familiar with US history, you would know the Senate was designed to represent the states, not the people. The smaller states were afraid of being overwhelmed by the larger states and would not have signed the Constitution without the protection of equal representation for the states in the Senate and so the Senate was designed to place a limit on democracy in the federal government. States Rights was an even stronger issue then than it is today, and the design of the Senate is a monument States Rights.

Ah yes "States Rights" -
That thing that conservatives bellow about endlessly, UNTIL a state does something they hate.
*See Oregon Death with Dignity Law - (Ashcroft)/ Sanctuary Cites (Trump-Sessions)/ environmental regulation (Pruitt) and marijuana legalization (Sessions)
Democrats and Republicans have virtually switched sides on states' rights

The same can be said about Democrats who are arguing the states have the right to decide for themselves what to do about illegal immigrants and the federal government has no right to determine the issue for them. However, none of this has anything to do with your bizarre complaints about the Senate not representing the people democratically; it was never suppose to.

And yet until the middle of the 20th century - It pretty much did. C'mon now, do you seriously believe that the founders could have envisioned the semi-automatic assault rifle when they wrote the second amendment? I have an old single-load Flintlock Musket from the late 1800s. The weaponry we have today would have been unimaginable at the time.

And this is the problem with constitutional originalists. They want to interpret the constitution in a way that affirms their conservative worldview by somehow reading minds, but fail to see that 250 years of time kinda changes everything!

So you keep repeating the same bullshit and hopes it stick?

Once again Nostrdumbass was television, radio , the web around when the 1st amendment created?


.

 

[DrLove]

So you keep repeating the same bullshit and hopes it stick?

Once again Nostrdumbass was television, radio , the web around when the 1st amendment created?

I saw this for the first time last week and thought of you ...
Is there a drug that would make you go away?

 

[Wyatt earp]

So you keep repeating the same bullshit and hopes it stick?

Once again Nostrdumbass was television, radio , the web around when the 1st amendment created?

I saw this for the first time last week and thought of you ...
Is there a drug that would make you go away?

No but I would go away if you bother to read the Constitution.

 

[DrLove]

So you keep repeating the same bullshit and hopes it stick?

Once again Nostrdumbass was television, radio , the web around when the 1st amendment created?

I saw this for the first time last week and thought of you ...
Is there a drug that would make you go away?

No but I would go away if you bother to read the Constitution.

I have - and we interpret it differently. Constitutional originalism is about the goofiest thing ever.

 

[BluesLegend]

C'mon now, do you seriously believe that the founders could have envisioned the semi-automatic assault rifle when they wrote the second amendment?

God you liberals are dumb. In the late 1700's when the 2nd amendment was written many of the arms commonly carried back then are completely illegal to carry today, too dangerous.

 

[Red Dog]

[.... do you seriously believe that the founders could have envisioned the semi-automatic assault rifle when they wrote the second amendment?

I think the founders envisioned anything that would repel tyranny.

Sent from my VS835 using Tapatalk

 

[DrLove]

C'mon now, do you seriously believe that the founders could have envisioned the semi-automatic assault rifle when they wrote the second amendment?

God you liberals are dumb. In the late 1700's when the 2nd amendment was written many of the arms commonly carried back then are completely illegal to carry today, too dangerous.

Really - Did they allow the private ownership of cannons then?

 

[Flash]

We're there kids - Rule by fiat rigged by an autocratic minority. Sad

The disconnect between the United States Senate and the American people has never been greater. If you thought the Senate has gone off its rails, the numbers back you up.

The Senate majority represents a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

Based on a new analysis of Senate votes from 1901 to the present, we found that beginning last year senators voting in the majority represented a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

In yesterday’s vote to confirm Justice Kavanaugh, the 50 senators voting yes represent states covering just 44% of the U.S. population or 143 million Americans. That’s less than a majority, less than the 181 million Americans represented by the senators voting no (you might say the “Senate popular vote”). Yet the nomination was confirmed.​

With Kavanaugh vote, the Senate reaches a historic low in democratic metric

Damn that Constitution sucks for you stupid Moon Bats, doesn't it?

Really stands in the way of making this country a socialist shithole so you can get your free stuff, doesn't it?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Silly irrelevant bs. The Senate was not designed to represent the people democratically but to give the states equal representation. When you consider that the state of Texas and the state of Delaware have the same number of senators, complaining that the majority party does not represent the majority of the people is a confession of ignorance about the American government and American history.

"The Senate was not designed to represent the people democratically"

Well it pretty much did that then, but sure as hell doesn't now -- And THAT my friend is the problemo!

Well it pretty much did that then, but sure as hell doesn't now --

How did it do that when the Senators weren't elected by popular vote?

 

[BluesLegend]

C'mon now, do you seriously believe that the founders could have envisioned the semi-automatic assault rifle when they wrote the second amendment?

God you liberals are dumb. In the late 1700's when the 2nd amendment was written many of the arms commonly carried back then are completely illegal to carry today, too dangerous.

Really - Did they allow the private ownership of cannons then?

OMG yes dummy cannons were legal to own. Go look stupid somewhere else okay.

 

[DrLove]

C'mon now, do you seriously believe that the founders could have envisioned the semi-automatic assault rifle when they wrote the second amendment?

God you liberals are dumb. In the late 1700's when the 2nd amendment was written many of the arms commonly carried back then are completely illegal to carry today, too dangerous.

Really - Did they allow the private ownership of cannons then?

OMG yes dummy cannons were legal to own. Go look stupid somewhere else okay.

That sounds like something a dummy such as yourself would have owned had you been born 200 years ago.

 

[imawhosure]

We're there kids - Rule by fiat rigged by an autocratic minority. Sad

The disconnect between the United States Senate and the American people has never been greater. If you thought the Senate has gone off its rails, the numbers back you up.

The Senate majority represents a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

Based on a new analysis of Senate votes from 1901 to the present, we found that beginning last year senators voting in the majority represented a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

In yesterday’s vote to confirm Justice Kavanaugh, the 50 senators voting yes represent states covering just 44% of the U.S. population or 143 million Americans. That’s less than a majority, less than the 181 million Americans represented by the senators voting no (you might say the “Senate popular vote”). Yet the nomination was confirmed.​

With Kavanaugh vote, the Senate reaches a historic low in democratic metric

Hey, incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial one------------>

So who should confirm, the HOUSE?

Wait, wait, someone is whispering something in my ear, what was that you say?

OH, you mean at the current time, the House has a much LARGER % of Republicans, meaning your side would lose by a BIGGER margin, lololololololol.

You are seriously a phony-E-Baloney, and those are the nicest adjectives/descriptors I can use-) It is apparent that you want to totally rewrite our constitution; the constitution that has given us more freedom from government control, than any other country on earth!

So now everyone, let's see what the NEW far leftist talking points are---------->

1. With judge K on the SC, the SC is no longer fair minded; even though whenever they can't get the voters to agree with their ridiculous ideas, the 1st place they run to for over turning the will of the people is...…….you guessed it, THE COURTS, and then push up to the SC.

2. The Senate isn't fair-) And why do you think they are saying that? Do you think it is because this just dawned on them? Or rather, do you think it is because of Judge K the polls have turned, and now it looks like they are going to get hosed in the senate BIG TIME!

Let me ask all of you-------------> all this party, or ANY party has to do to change the make up, is SELL their ideas to the people voting. That is what the far left can NOT do! For them---------> it is much easier to convince one or 2 people wearing black robes, than it is to convince 100 MILLION people; which is EXACTLY why they need control of the courts so badly! Can you imagine------------> They go into Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Wyoming, etc and say, "We want to raise your taxes, and allow MEN to go into the bathroom with your daughters and wives."

Now you know why they need the courts so badly, and why they NEED FEDERAL CONTROL! They can not win on what they want! They need to IMPOSE their will from Washington, because most of the states would flip them the bird! This is why in the world according to them, "it is unfair!" They know better than you do what works in your part of the country, and they will IMPOSE their will upon YOU from Washington DC, just ask them, they will tell ya...……..ummmm, no they won't, they want to FOOL you into giving them power, by ANY MEANS NECESSARY-)

 

[DrLove]

We're there kids - Rule by fiat rigged by an autocratic minority. Sad

The disconnect between the United States Senate and the American people has never been greater. If you thought the Senate has gone off its rails, the numbers back you up.

The Senate majority represents a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

Based on a new analysis of Senate votes from 1901 to the present, we found that beginning last year senators voting in the majority represented a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

In yesterday’s vote to confirm Justice Kavanaugh, the 50 senators voting yes represent states covering just 44% of the U.S. population or 143 million Americans. That’s less than a majority, less than the 181 million Americans represented by the senators voting no (you might say the “Senate popular vote”). Yet the nomination was confirmed.​

With Kavanaugh vote, the Senate reaches a historic low in democratic metric

Hey, incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial one------------>

So who should confirm, the HOUSE?

Wait, wait, someone is whispering something in my ear, what was that you say?

OH, you mean at the current time, the House has a much LARGER % of Republicans, meaning your side would lose by a BIGGER margin, lololololololol.

You are seriously a phony-E-Baloney, and those are the nicest adjectives/descriptors I can use-) It is apparent that you want to totally rewrite our constitution; the constitution that has given us more freedom from government control, than any other country on earth!

So now everyone, let's see what the NEW far leftist talking points are---------->

1. With judge K on the SC, the SC is no longer fair minded; even though whenever they can't get the voters to agree with their ridiculous ideas, the 1st place they run to for over turning the will of the people is...…….you guessed it, THE COURTS, and then push up to the SC.

2. The Senate isn't fair-) And why do you think they are saying that? Do you think it is because this just dawned on them? Or rather, do you think it is because of Judge K the polls have turned, and now it looks like they are going to get hosed in the senate BIG TIME!

Let me ask all of you-------------> all this party, or ANY party has to do to change the make up, is SELL their ideas to the people voting. That is what the far left can NOT do! For them---------> it is much easier to convince one or 2 people wearing black robes, than it is to convince 100 MILLION people; which is EXACTLY why they need control of the courts so badly! Can you imagine------------> They go into Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Wyoming, etc and say, "We want to raise your taxes, and allow MEN to go into the bathroom with your daughters and wives."

Now you know why they need the courts so badly, and why they NEED FEDERAL CONTROL! They can not win on what they want! They need to IMPOSE their will from Washington, because most of the states would flip them the bird! This is why in the world according to them, "it is unfair!" They know better than you do what works in your part of the country, and they will IMPOSE their will upon YOU from Washington DC, just ask them, they will tell ya...……..ummmm, no they won't, they want to FOOL you into giving them power, by ANY MEANS NECESSARY-)

YOU my friend, are on the LOSING end of literally every issue Americans care about.
Name it: Abortion, Kavanaugh, Trump, marijuana, - Literally EVERYTHING
Links needed?

 

[imawhosure]

We're there kids - Rule by fiat rigged by an autocratic minority. Sad

The disconnect between the United States Senate and the American people has never been greater. If you thought the Senate has gone off its rails, the numbers back you up.

The Senate majority represents a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

Based on a new analysis of Senate votes from 1901 to the present, we found that beginning last year senators voting in the majority represented a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

In yesterday’s vote to confirm Justice Kavanaugh, the 50 senators voting yes represent states covering just 44% of the U.S. population or 143 million Americans. That’s less than a majority, less than the 181 million Americans represented by the senators voting no (you might say the “Senate popular vote”). Yet the nomination was confirmed.​

With Kavanaugh vote, the Senate reaches a historic low in democratic metric

Hey, incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial one------------>

So who should confirm, the HOUSE?

Wait, wait, someone is whispering something in my ear, what was that you say?

OH, you mean at the current time, the House has a much LARGER % of Republicans, meaning your side would lose by a BIGGER margin, lololololololol.

You are seriously a phony-E-Baloney, and those are the nicest adjectives/descriptors I can use-) It is apparent that you want to totally rewrite our constitution; the constitution that has given us more freedom from government control, than any other country on earth!

So now everyone, let's see what the NEW far leftist talking points are---------->

1. With judge K on the SC, the SC is no longer fair minded; even though whenever they can't get the voters to agree with their ridiculous ideas, the 1st place they run to for over turning the will of the people is...…….you guessed it, THE COURTS, and then push up to the SC.

2. The Senate isn't fair-) And why do you think they are saying that? Do you think it is because this just dawned on them? Or rather, do you think it is because of Judge K the polls have turned, and now it looks like they are going to get hosed in the senate BIG TIME!

Let me ask all of you-------------> all this party, or ANY party has to do to change the make up, is SELL their ideas to the people voting. That is what the far left can NOT do! For them---------> it is much easier to convince one or 2 people wearing black robes, than it is to convince 100 MILLION people; which is EXACTLY why they need control of the courts so badly! Can you imagine------------> They go into Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Wyoming, etc and say, "We want to raise your taxes, and allow MEN to go into the bathroom with your daughters and wives."

Now you know why they need the courts so badly, and why they NEED FEDERAL CONTROL! They can not win on what they want! They need to IMPOSE their will from Washington, because most of the states would flip them the bird! This is why in the world according to them, "it is unfair!" They know better than you do what works in your part of the country, and they will IMPOSE their will upon YOU from Washington DC, just ask them, they will tell ya...……..ummmm, no they won't, they want to FOOL you into giving them power, by ANY MEANS NECESSARY-)

YOU my friend, are on the LOSING end of literally every issue Americans care about.
Name it: Abortion, Kavanaugh, Trump, marijuana, - Literally EVERYTHING
Links needed?

You think so? Then explain why your side keeps losing-) If your ideas were so popular, you would control all 3 branches of government, and have 5 or 6 Leftist judges on the SC-)

All you people can do is go cry to the courts after the voters consistently tell you to stuff it-) Soon, you won't be able to do that, and that is exactly why your whole side is in a panic!

 

[DrLove]

You think so? Then explain why your side keeps losing-) If your ideas were so popular, you would control all 3 branches of government, and have 5 or 6 Leftist judges on the SC-)

All you people can do is go cry to the courts after the voters consistently tell you to stuff it-) Soon, you won't be able to do that, and that is exactly why your whole side is in a panic!

Panic? Hardly
#Mueller #FemaleOutrage #Dreamers #Kav #Wall #Russia #Cohen #Manafort #Stone #SouthernDistrictNY ..... ETC ETC ETC (Need I go on?)
Name your poison #A-holio!

 

[BluesLegend]

C'mon now, do you seriously believe that the founders could have envisioned the semi-automatic assault rifle when they wrote the second amendment?

God you liberals are dumb. In the late 1700's when the 2nd amendment was written many of the arms commonly carried back then are completely illegal to carry today, too dangerous.

Really - Did they allow the private ownership of cannons then?

OMG yes dummy cannons were legal to own. Go look stupid somewhere else okay.

That sounds like something a dummy such as yourself would have owned had you been born 200 years ago.

Your reply was weak and pathetic, work on your come backs.

 

[Oldstyle]

Yet it's a HUGE difference and the Founding Fathers were obviously well aware of that fact...correct? So they chose to make the representation in the Senate different than in the House! Why would they do that? Do you think it was an oversight on their part? The truth is that they did what they did so that there would be a check against the States with large populations "bullying" States with smaller populations!

4 to 1 is not 60 to 1. If they'd seen the discrepancy such as we now have between CA and WY they'd never have written it that way. And had the Fathers been able to peak 250 years into the future, they'd have written at least a quarter or a third of the damn thing entirely differently.

Pretending otherwise is pretty dumb

Actually...wanting to change a system that's worked rather well for 250 years because your side lost an election is pretty dumb. I think the Founding Fathers would be pleased by how well what they conceived has worked so far.

We'll see how you feel about that next time Rs win an election by 3 million votes and Ds squeak the EC with the help of foreign trolls and bots.
Bet you'll be singing a different tune!

Unlike you, Doc...I grasp that one plays by the rules that were stated BEFORE a contest begins and one doesn't whine about those rules if you lose! If Democrats win the Electoral College...then they have won the election fair and square and you won't hear a thing from me on that.

What's amusing is how liberals like Hillary Clinton declared that anyone who disputed the results of an election was undermining our democracy...but then changed her mind on that totally once she lost. It's the same liberal hypocrisy that declared elections to have consequences back in 2008 and then not so much after the mid terms in 2010!

You're not as bad as some of your bros around here, but I've definitely caught you moving the goalpost ;-)

Why would I move the goalposts? Sorry to point this out to you, Doc but your "team" doesn't have a viable quarterback...and absolutely no game plan for improving the country! You're running on "Resist" and although that sells to the progressive fringe...I think moderates in the Democratic Party and Independents desire competence at managing the economy and creating jobs...something that progressives are AWFUL at!

 

[satrebil]

We're there kids - Rule by fiat rigged by an autocratic minority. Sad

The disconnect between the United States Senate and the American people has never been greater. If you thought the Senate has gone off its rails, the numbers back you up.

The Senate majority represents a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

Based on a new analysis of Senate votes from 1901 to the present, we found that beginning last year senators voting in the majority represented a historically low proportion of the country’s population.

In yesterday’s vote to confirm Justice Kavanaugh, the 50 senators voting yes represent states covering just 44% of the U.S. population or 143 million Americans. That’s less than a majority, less than the 181 million Americans represented by the senators voting no (you might say the “Senate popular vote”). Yet the nomination was confirmed.​

With Kavanaugh vote, the Senate reaches a historic low in democratic metric

Now take into consideration this little tidbit: Just 4 of those "no" senators represent 59 million people.

This, kids, is why we are a representative republic and NOT a direct democracy. This concludes today's lesson.