The plan going forward
#601
Our country was intentionally designed so the majority didn’t have complete say. There’s a reason why it’s supposed to take 2/3’s of the Senate to pass a bill.
It’s living in a twilight zone. FWIW, when she says tax the the rich, she is referring to those making $250k-$500k per year. That’s us. The real rich class just has money and isn’t getting taxed on anything directly.
It’s living in a twilight zone. FWIW, when she says tax the the rich, she is referring to those making $250k-$500k per year. That’s us. The real rich class just has money and isn’t getting taxed on anything directly.
Btw I plan to vote for Trump for the 3rd time next month.
#602
That/It/Thang
Joined APC: Aug 2020
Posts: 2,952
Let’s pretend that nobody cares about the above discussion and we move on? Once Oooof makes an appearance with Whackmaster, everyone loses.
#603
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 913
Our country was intentionally designed so the majority didn’t have complete say. There’s a reason why it’s supposed to take 2/3’s of the Senate to pass a bill.
The democratic party has finally decided that since they have the majority of the popular vote, they should get to do whatever they want with no input what-so-ever from the other side. They are doing this by using the media, social media, and hollywood as propaganda machines. They are censoring the other party and flat out lying. They don’t even hide it anymore. If you disagree, you are a “Trumper”, “bigot”, “racist”, or “intolerant.”
They even say the biggest threats to democracy are Trump, the Supreme Court, the electoral college, fillibuster, etc. Basically any of the constitutional protections that get in their way.
Meanwhile we have a president with dementia that is in hiding, and a vice president running for president without ever winning a primary election. That all being said, the other side is the threat according to them.
It’s living in a twilight zone. FWIW, when she says tax the the rich, she is referring to those making $250k-$500k per year. That’s us. The real rich class just has money and isn’t getting taxed on anything directly.
The democratic party has finally decided that since they have the majority of the popular vote, they should get to do whatever they want with no input what-so-ever from the other side. They are doing this by using the media, social media, and hollywood as propaganda machines. They are censoring the other party and flat out lying. They don’t even hide it anymore. If you disagree, you are a “Trumper”, “bigot”, “racist”, or “intolerant.”
They even say the biggest threats to democracy are Trump, the Supreme Court, the electoral college, fillibuster, etc. Basically any of the constitutional protections that get in their way.
Meanwhile we have a president with dementia that is in hiding, and a vice president running for president without ever winning a primary election. That all being said, the other side is the threat according to them.
It’s living in a twilight zone. FWIW, when she says tax the the rich, she is referring to those making $250k-$500k per year. That’s us. The real rich class just has money and isn’t getting taxed on anything directly.
but on the flip side of that, I don’t think it’s a tenable position to have the general direction of the country steered by people who’s policy positions across the board have minority support. National polling on issues like gay marriage, gun control, marijuana legalization, abortion rights, etc. all favor moving the country in a certain direction, yet, because of one party’s entirely disproportionate control of the executive, judicial and legislative branches (at least since I’ve been an adult) means that “reasonable” progress as a country, in the direction most people (not even including me in some areas) want it to go.
As for your other point, on the flip side you can make the exact same argument from the other direction with words like “commie”, “woke”, “socialist”, “libtard”.
I totally agree on your point that the owner class have obscene control of the national narrative and sure as hell aren’t going to give that or an extra penny up to keep the lights on.
all just my opinion, what do you think? You disagree?
#606
It can be changed...
The states that joined the union under a structure that had some guardrails to protect their soveriegnty simply need to agree to cede some of their sovereignty to the federal government and voters in distant states.
Or the federal government and the distant states can impose such a structure by force of arms.
We are the United States of America.
Not the United "People" of America.
Again that can be changed, you just need the will and fortitude to do it. Until then I'm tired of hearing people complain about it.
The states that joined the union under a structure that had some guardrails to protect their soveriegnty simply need to agree to cede some of their sovereignty to the federal government and voters in distant states.
Or the federal government and the distant states can impose such a structure by force of arms.
We are the United States of America.
Not the United "People" of America.
Again that can be changed, you just need the will and fortitude to do it. Until then I'm tired of hearing people complain about it.
#607
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,810
It can be changed...
The states that joined the union under a structure that had some guardrails to protect their soveriegnty simply need to agree to cede some of their sovereignty to the federal government and voters in distant states.
Or the federal government and the distant states can impose such a structure by force of arms.
We are the United States of America.
Not the United "People" of America.
Again that can be changed, you just need the will and fortitude to do it. Until then I'm tired of hearing people complain about it.
The states that joined the union under a structure that had some guardrails to protect their soveriegnty simply need to agree to cede some of their sovereignty to the federal government and voters in distant states.
Or the federal government and the distant states can impose such a structure by force of arms.
We are the United States of America.
Not the United "People" of America.
Again that can be changed, you just need the will and fortitude to do it. Until then I'm tired of hearing people complain about it.
all of that said, no sovereignty of a wyoming state voter is ceded to anyone else with the abolition of the electoral college. their vote will simply not be privileged anymore. a loss of privilege can seem scary to many, though, as we see in other issues.
#608
Can’t find crew pickup
Joined APC: Jun 2021
Posts: 2,297
the way you change things in the system we have is by getting people involved and interested in a subject. that inevitably requires people to talk about it. you’re tired of people complaining because you don’t want it changed (likely because it benefitted your favored candidate and will again), not because of the methods of change require discourse.
all of that said, no sovereignty of a wyoming state voter is ceded to anyone else with the abolition of the electoral college. their vote will simply not be privileged anymore. a loss of privilege can seem scary to many, though, as we see in other issues.
all of that said, no sovereignty of a wyoming state voter is ceded to anyone else with the abolition of the electoral college. their vote will simply not be privileged anymore. a loss of privilege can seem scary to many, though, as we see in other issues.
#610
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 3,281
I forgot what are we debating about again?
hey OOfff,
why you never call me anymore?
hey OOfff,
why you never call me anymore?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DLax85
Cargo
11
01-18-2017 07:53 PM