Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, April 29, 2021

James Carville on the state of Democratic politics. "Wokeness is a problem," he told me, "and we all know it." According to Carville, Democrats are in power for now, but they also only narrowly defeated Donald Trump, "a world-historical buffoon," and they lost congressional seats and failed to pick up state legislatures. The reason is simple: They've got a "messaging problem."

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Obama was right its far easier to declare yourself woke than working with people you don't always agree with.

#1 | Posted by Tor at 2021-04-28 01:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Great article. Good read.

I like James Carville.

He's right. The Democrats are awful at messaging. It's their Achilles heal.

It's why Fox News and Limbaugh are so successful.

Americans were more upset Dr Seuss Enterprises stop printing some books. Than they are about pedophiles in the Republican Party.

Also. Interesting fact from the article.

"18 percent of the population controls 52 percent of the Senate seats. That's a fact."

Empty red states have control over the federal government.

#2 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-28 02:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The Democrats are awful at messaging. It's their Achilles heal."

Yeah, like the ones who embraced "Defund the Police", "Medicare 4 All" and "We don't need no stinkin' moderates".

#3 | Posted by sentinel at 2021-04-28 02:50 PM | Reply

Empty red states have control over the federal government.

They are not "empty". They have people in them that deserve a voice in how their environment is set up. An environment that doesnt look like the mobs on the coast and where they live.

Our system is set up so they can say "NO", and not only get lip service from the majority.

What a great country.

#4 | Posted by boaz at 2021-04-28 04:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

They are not "empty".

For all intents and purposes.

Yes.

They're desolate, empty states.

If you weren't such a partisan hack.

You'd understand the problem with 18% of the population controlling 52% of the senate.

But you can't be honest enough to have a discussion about anything political.

You're all about your team winning. Even if it means ignoring pedophiles and habitual liars.

#5 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-28 04:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

What a great country.
#4 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Funny. You also believe we should
Make America Great Again.

#6 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-28 04:46 PM | Reply

And you cant either. You only want to talk about mob democracy, which isnt how we are set up and we were not intended to be set up that way. It only benefits your ideology to be a mob. That's why you keep bringing it up.

And you certainly cant use anything from this article, because VOX is a VERY liberal mag and would never have any conservative point of view.

"18 percent of the population controls 52 percent of the Senate seats. That's a fact."

I question that. Sounds like some sort of contorting statistic type of answer.

#7 | Posted by boaz at 2021-04-28 04:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

You only want to talk about mob democracy, which isnt how we are set up and we were not intended to be set up that way. It only benefits your ideology to be a mob. That's why you keep bringing it up.

What is this word salad supposed to mean?

Boaz. You're unable to rationally assess anything.

You're only okay with this because you somehow feel like you're personally winning.

I question that.

Of course you do.

You've become conditioned to ignore actual facts and statistics.

It's how Republicans control you.

#8 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-28 05:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

You've become conditioned to ignore actual facts and statistics.

So have you.

You mentioning how a mob democracy does things is stupid. Here in the U.S., we dont care, that's not now we do things.

#9 | Posted by boaz at 2021-04-28 05:32 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

What is this word salad supposed to mean?

The only ones trying to make things difficult, is liberals.

Everything I talk about is very straight forward to understand.

#10 | Posted by boaz at 2021-04-28 05:33 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

You mentioning how a mob democracy does things is stupid.

Like I said. You're unable to discuss anything because you don't get it.

If you can't understand how 18% of the population, who live in desolate, dead, red states. That contribute nothing to the nation other than 2 senators. Are controlling the lives of the other 82% of the nation. Isn't a good system.

Then you're only reinforcing my point.

"you can't be honest enough to have a discussion about anything political.

You're all about your team winning."

Even if it means destroying this nation. As Trump was well underway with.

#11 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-28 05:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The only ones trying to make things difficult, is liberals.

Liberals bad!

How so?

Care to expound?

I bet you're unable.

#12 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-28 05:41 PM | Reply

What a great country.

#4 | POSTED BY BOAZ

And the moment the majority gets their rightful majority power you'll turn on a dime.

As always as long as it serves YOU it's the best.

Here in the U.S., we dont care, that's not now we do things.

#9 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Yeah, it's supposed to be majority rule with minority protections.

But the GOP, as they've slipped further and further into minority status, have shredded our norms and institutions to hold on to power so that we are now a perverted version of what we should be.

#13 | Posted by jpw at 2021-04-28 07:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Because at the core, we are a racist society and it won't fly in vast stretches of amerikkka.

#14 | Posted by fresno500 at 2021-04-29 12:46 AM | Reply

"You only want to talk about mob democracy, which isnt how we are set up and we were not intended to be set up that way."

Well then how exactly are we supposed to be set up?
You keep saying we're not a democracy. Why do we vote on things if we're not a democracy?
Isn't every election aside from President a strictly democratic affair?

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 01:46 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Boaz, I don't mean to single you out, but you should realize as an honorably retired officer of the Army that it's the President's primary duty to protect the Constitution and our Federal Republic at all costs.

Even if he had to send 90% of our population to their deaths to protect it, he would have to do so. To reiterate, their job is to protect the idea of our form of government. Something most people have a hard time grasping. It's the law.

If any state or states decided to secede, they'd be met with military force of unprecedented proportions.

Mob democracy has been tempered by the constitution in many ways. The Republicans can see the writing on the wall: mene, mene, tekel, upharsin. Interpreted by Daniel for King Belshazzar, the last King of the Neo-Babylonian empire as: "MENE, God has numbered the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end; TEKEL, you have been weighed... and found wanting;" and "PERES, your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.

--Daniel Chapter 5

Is that what you want? Another civil war that would result in the destruction of tens of millions of Americans? Read your history. The Republicans are doing their damndest to keep voting by minorities to a bare minimum. This isn't even up for debate. Republicans are scared and desperate and are willing to pull every trick in the book to hold onto power. They simply don't want any social or economic progression. Wait till they start killing people to keep the status quo. Do you want to be part of that?

#16 | Posted by madscientist at 2021-04-29 03:50 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 8

Why shouldn't every citizen be able to cast their ballot easily? Why should people be forced to wait in line for HOURS to cast a ballot? TELL ME, OH MIGHTY BO@SS!

#17 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2021-04-29 12:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

They are not "empty". They have people in them that deserve a voice in how their environment is set up.

#4 | Posted by boaz

They are mostly empty. Why do those people deserve more say in the country's government than people in other states?

#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-29 12:05 PM | Reply

You mentioning how a mob democracy does things is stupid. Here in the U.S., we dont care, that's not now we do things.

#9 | Posted by boaz

What was your cult doing on 1/6? Remind us...

#19 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-29 12:06 PM | Reply

"For all intents and purposes. Yes."

Mmmm...did you ever take a civics class?

Do you even live in the US?

#20 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 01:37 PM | Reply

"If you can't understand how 18% of the population, who live in desolate, dead, red states. That contribute nothing to the nation other than 2 senators. Are controlling the lives of the other 82% of the nation. Isn't a good system."

Cool.

So you can get with black hoodie-wearing friends and try and start another revolution-something I don't advise, or you can try and...I don't even know how this would work...replace the US constitution.

But that would make you not unlike-probably worse-that the 06 Jan insurgents.

#21 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 01:39 PM | Reply

"They are mostly empty. Why do those people deserve more say in the country's government than people in other states?"

What in the akktval fv

#22 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 01:40 PM | Reply

"They are mostly empty. Why do those people deserve more say in the country's government than people in other states?"

What in the akktval fv

#22 | Posted by madbomber

What part of the question is too complicated for you?

Why should our nation's government tilt power in favor of some states over others?

#23 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-29 01:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Why should our nation's government tilt power in favor of some states over others?"

They don't.

You just lack an understanding of the United States and the documents that govern it.

There is a reason it's called the "United States of America," rather than just the "State of America."

Now do you kinda get it?

#24 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 01:55 PM | Reply

"They are mostly empty. Why do those people deserve more say in the country's government than people in other states?"
What in the akktval fv

#22 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

You're waaaay too involved in politics to not know that that's true.

#25 | Posted by jpw at 2021-04-29 01:56 PM | Reply

They don't.
You just lack an understanding of the United States and the documents that govern it.

Apparently I was wrong in post 25.

My apologies for expecting too much of you.

#26 | Posted by jpw at 2021-04-29 01:58 PM | Reply

I'm sorry dude, maybe you actually don't get it.

There are 50 states in the Union, each of them equal partners. The Senate is intended to represent equality, while the house of representatives is intended to represent proportionality.

So I'm not sure what you've advocating? Eliminating the Senate? Eliminate the concept of the "United States?"

And this isn't just the way it works in the US...this is common in most countries. For the very same reasons it was adopted in the US.

#27 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 01:59 PM | Reply

"My apologies for expecting too much of you."

I think you might need a civics lesson as well, sir.

#28 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 02:00 PM | Reply

"They don't."

Nonsense; of course they do. The structure of the Senate itself tilts it. You can't have one person representing 300K and one representing 20MM and it not be "tilted".

#29 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-04-29 02:01 PM | Reply

"The Senate is intended to represent equality"

With apologies to Orwell...some states are more equal than others.

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-04-29 02:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The Senate is intended to represent equality, while the house of representatives is intended to represent proportionality."

Only one of those things represents democracy.

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 02:05 PM | Reply

I'm sorry dude, maybe you actually don't get it.
There are 50 states in the Union, each of them equal partners. The Senate is intended to represent equality, while the house of representatives is intended to represent proportionality.

You're being obtuse.

What the stat that's tossed around? A voter in Wyoming has 13x the clout than a voter in CA?

The winner take all nature of the EC is a long documented problem.

#32 | Posted by jpw at 2021-04-29 02:05 PM | Reply

"Nonsense; of course they do. The structure of the Senate itself tilts it. You can't have one person representing 300K and one representing 20MM and it not be "tilted"."

Interesting.

So I can assume you believe that the framers got it all wrong back in 1789?

#33 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 02:10 PM | Reply

"Only one of those things represents democracy."

OK.

The US has never been a democracy.

Ever.

#34 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 02:10 PM | Reply

There are 50 states in the Union, each of them equal partners.

No, they're not equal. Does each state's citizens pay the same amount in federal taxes? Then why should each receive equal Senate representation?

When the Constitution was written there was no federal tax code as such. Once disparate funding became codified, the entire concept behind equality of Senate representation should have been reevaluated if the goal was to have a true representative democracy/republic.

Basically, we've got freeloading states (those which take more than they give in taxes) voting themselves a larger slice of the pie than they deserve while wielding an outsized influence over the affairs of larger states actually footing most of the bills.

#35 | Posted by tonyroma at 2021-04-29 02:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

More Myth Bombing, same suspect...

"The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

However, a constitutional amendment is not the only means by which an alternative to the current Electoral College can be implemented. The most popular alternative is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). Started in the mid-2000s, the NPVIC is a fairly straightforward system that capitalizes on the constitutional guarantee that states are free to determine the manner in which they award their electoral votes.

The compact requires states to pass laws that would award their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote nationally. Under the current plan, states that join will not activate the compact until enough states have joined to total 270 electoral votes. That is, the compact does not go into effect until there is a critical mass of states for it to be effective.

Currently, 15 states and DC have approved the NPVIC. These states currently total 196 electoral votes...."

#36 | Posted by Corky at 2021-04-29 02:18 PM | Reply

"What the stat that's tossed around? A voter in Wyoming has 13x the clout than a voter in CA?"

That's only true if the states elect to allocate votes that way. Which the states, as equal partners in these United States.

But that still has nothing to do with the Senate or the HoR.

Unless, like Speak, you think the framers got it wrong back in 1789. In which case I don't know how I could console you.

#37 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 02:18 PM | Reply

"There are 50 states in the Union, each of them equal partners."

Equal partners in what?
They're not equal partners when it comes to choosing the President, for example.
So, what?

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 02:18 PM | Reply

So I can assume you believe that the framers got it all wrong back in 1789?
#33 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Sounds like this is a sacred cow for you. So you're just making an argument from authority.

#39 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 02:19 PM | Reply

#35

Do you think the answer is to convene another constitutional convention?

www.alternet.org

#40 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 02:20 PM | Reply

www.brookings.edu

#41 | Posted by Corky at 2021-04-29 02:21 PM | Reply

The US has never been a democracy.
Ever.
#34 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

We aren't?
How can that be, when we elect literally everyone except the President by a democratic process?

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 02:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Currently, 15 states and DC have approved the NPVIC. These states currently total 196 electoral votes...."

Yeah...it's being done at the state level.

You're literally making my point for me.

Thank you.

#43 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 02:21 PM | Reply

"Why should our nation's government tilt power in favor of some states over others?"

They don't.

You just lack an understanding of the United States and the documents that govern it.

There is a reason it's called the "United States of America," rather than just the "State of America."

Now do you kinda get it?

#24 | Posted by madbomber

Really? Our system doesn't give equal senate power to states whether they have zero or a billion people in them?

Youre the one who seems to lack basic understanding of our government.

How would giving all americans equal representation in government make the name "United States" not applicable?

#44 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-29 02:21 PM | Reply

But that still has nothing to do with the Senate or the HoR.

HR you're right.

But not the senate.

NY has over 20 million people. Wyoming has just under 600,000.

But both have equal say.

Tell me again how that's not imbalanced?

Unless, like Speak, you think the framers got it wrong back in 1789. In which case I don't know how I could console you.

#37 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Dude, they weren't divine beings. It's absolutely OK to say they got something wrong.

More accurately, it's definitely OK to say things have changed in the last 250 years and the system needs an update.

#45 | Posted by jpw at 2021-04-29 02:22 PM | Reply

"Sounds like this is a sacred cow for you. So you're just making an argument from authority."

Not really.

It's not a sacred cow...it's a question.

So do you, Snoofy, believe that the framers got it all wrong back in 1789?

#46 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 02:23 PM | Reply

Unless, like Speak, you think the framers got it wrong back in 1789. In which case I don't know how I could console you.

#37 | Posted by madbomber

Do you think the framers got anything wrong in 1789? Or did they decend from the holy mount with flawless rules and laws dictated by the almighty?

#47 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-29 02:23 PM | Reply

United is not synonymous with Equal.

Does someone need a dictionary?

#48 | Posted by tonyroma at 2021-04-29 02:24 PM | Reply

- You're literally making my point for me.

Says the clown who pretended above that getting rid of the Constitution by revolution was the only alternative...

"So you can get with black hoodie-wearing friends and try and start another revolution-something I don't advise, or you can try and...I don't even know how this would work...replace the US constitution."

But hey, you not reading what you write is... understandable. It's mostly gibberish.

#49 | Posted by Corky at 2021-04-29 02:25 PM | Reply

you think the framers got it wrong back in 1789.

The Framers did the best that they could do in 1789 and left us the amendment process because they understood that what they did then would need to be changed in the future. They self-admitted that they were fallible, why can't you?

#50 | Posted by tonyroma at 2021-04-29 02:27 PM | Reply

Listen, Ladies...Your problem is not with me...it's with the constitution of the United States. And there are mechanisms by which that can be changed. But I think when you're looking at this country, what you're not acknowledging is that it is a compact between states. And those states chose to be part of this union under the conditions outlined in the constitution.

And there are mechanisms that allow for the legal amendments to be made, pending approval by the states. Anything else would be what we call treason.

#51 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 02:27 PM | Reply

"believe that the framers got it all wrong back in 1789?"

All wrong?
Were the goalposts malleable when you widened them?

"Initially, delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention set the representation ratio at one representative for every 40,000 people."
So the house would have 8,205 Representatives if the Founders were right.
Is it wrong that the House doesn't have 8,205 Representatives, MadBomber?

#52 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 02:27 PM | Reply

And there are mechanisms that allow for the legal amendments to be made, pending approval by the states. Anything else would be what we call treason.

#51 | Posted by madbomber

So you're saying that the only way to fix the undemocratic unfair nature of our government is to have the beneficiaries of that unfairness volunteer to fix it and give up power?

#53 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-29 02:37 PM | Reply

So I can assume you believe that the framers got it all wrong back in 1789?
#33 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

It worked for what they had to deal with at the time. As time went on, the Senate became more and more a tool of the rich landowners. As Jefferson wrote to Madison, the Constitution should be reviewed every 19 years to correct mistakes.

The framers weren't perfect and left occasions for major changes that would be impossible to meet under the current political environment. For instance, 2/3 of the Senate to ratify an amendment.

Admittedly, I don't know what your point is other than to prove the United States has never been a Democracy. It is a Representative Democracy so each and every person doesn't have to white or blackball every piece of legislature themselves. So what? Our Senators and Representatives are elected in a direct democratic fashion. As well as State and local elections. The only office that is able to run interference in an election is the Electoral College. However, I will stipulate that the US Government is behaving like a Classical Oligarchy/Plutocracy...which a Democracy allows since we can pick our candidate as picking a melon in the market, as Socrates quipped. So, what's your point? Just to type voluminous texts of repeated Atlas Shrugged dogma?

There will be a day coming soon that you will loose your strength, hearing, eyesight, teeth, and be afraid to go outside for fear of lions in the street. So your pride and arrogance will not help you anymore and you'll realize the need for a cohesive community. You'll not be 10' tall and bulletproof anymore.

-------------------------------------------

Ecclesiates 13:1-14 (KJV), written by Solomon, Son of David, King of Israel

1. Remember your Creator in the days of your youth,
before the days of adversity come
and the years approach of which you will say,
"I find no pleasure in them,"

2. before the light of the sun, moon, and stars is darkened, and the clouds return after the rain,

3. on the day the keepers of the house tremble
and the strong men stoop,
when those grinding cease because they are few
and those watching through windows see dimly,

4. when the doors to the street are shut
and the sound of the mill fades away,
when one rises at the sound of a bird
and all the daughters of song (songbirds) grow faint,

5. when men fear the heights and dangers of the road,
when the almond tree blossoms,
the grasshopper loses its spring,
and the caper berry shrivels"
for then man goes to his eternal home
and mourners walk the streets.

6. Remember Him before the silver cord is snapped and the golden bowl is crushed,
before the pitcher is shattered at the spring
and the wheel is broken at the well,

7. before the dust returns to the ground from which it came and the spirit returns to God who gave it.

8. "Futility of futilities," says the Teacher.
"Everything is futile!"

--The Whole Duty of Man--

9. Not only was the Teacher wise, but he also taught the people knowledge; he pondered, searched out, and arranged many proverbs.

10. The Teacher searched to find delightful sayings and to record accurate words of truth.

11. The words of the wise are like goads, and the anthologies of the masters are like firmly embedded nails driven by a single Shepherd.

12.And by these, my son, be further warned: There is no end to the making of many books, and much study wearies the body.

13. When all has been heard, the conclusion of the matter is this: Fear God and keep His commandments, because this is the whole duty of man.

14. For God will bring every deed into judgment, along with every hidden thing, whether good or evil.

#54 | Posted by madscientist at 2021-04-29 02:38 PM | Reply

Do you think the framers got anything wrong in 1789? Or did they decend from the holy mount with flawless rules and laws dictated by the almighty?

#47 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Yeah, they were anointed by &diety and they were able to perfectly imagine what it would take to manage a continent-sized world military power at a time when almost everybody lived on a farm and it took days to travel from one state to another and months to cross the country. They anticipated instantaneous worldwide communications, and nuclear weapons, personal weapons capable of mowing down hundreds of people, space travel and designed a perfect system to manage all of that.

It's absurd to think that the constitution addresses all the change of the last 240+ years. It was designed to move slowly to avoid acting in too much haste. Today everything changes so rapidly it is difficult for anyone to keep up.

We have political parties that represent different "sides" of policy. Then we hold elections. If the winners of the elections don't get to implement the policies they ran on, what is the point of having elections?

Elections have consequences (if/only if the Republicans win).

#55 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2021-04-29 02:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

- Do you even live in the US?

#20 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

aka "unintentional irony", lmao!

#56 | Posted by Corky at 2021-04-29 02:45 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

You're being obtuse.

That's literally his entire shtick.

He's a troll.

Nothing more.

#57 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-29 02:49 PM | Reply

-So do you, Snoofy, believe that the framers got it all wrong back in 1789?

When you ask a question like that and you see the answers, you realize how little some people really want to solve problems vs just whine about them.

or it's a realization how little they understand the subject they're pontificating about.

Let me answer it....At this point in history....yes, they have it wrong. Meaning it's wrong. It's created an imbalance nobody intended.

but....discussing the framers is really silly anyway.

#58 | Posted by eberly at 2021-04-29 02:52 PM | Reply

I can assume you believe that the framers got it all wrong back in 1789?

The framers didn't know there would be 3.9 million people living in Los Angeles. And only 578k in the state of Wyoming.

They also didn't want minorities and women voting.

Unbelievable!

#59 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-29 02:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Actually Los Angeles county is 10 million.

4 million is just the in the city.

#60 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-29 02:55 PM | Reply

"Let me answer it....At this point in history....yes, they have it wrong. Meaning it's wrong. It's created an imbalance nobody intended."

It's nice to know Eberly can be sensible when he wants to.
(That ability sets him apart from the core of the Republican Party.)

#61 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 02:59 PM | Reply

57

don't tell me you actually quoted snoofy with that.

We could clone Madbomber 50 times and he still couldn't keep up with snoofy's trolling.

#62 | Posted by eberly at 2021-04-29 03:00 PM | Reply

don't tell me you actually quoted snoofy with that

That was JPW

Madbomber 50 times and he still couldn't keep up with snoofy's trolling.

You ever discuss national healthcare with him? You'll end up discussing whether Hitler was a socialist.

Or wage inequality? Apparently it doesn't exist and we'd all be living like kings in Honduras.

I see Snoofy push people's buttons, troll them. But I can follow his logic.

The two of you simply have a complicated history.

#63 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-29 03:09 PM | Reply

Part of my difficulty with "wokeness" is that to a large degree it seems to be a generational thing. Young people are far, far more focused on it than older people. I'm not saying one way or the other is better, but it certainly creates a divide when discussing certain topics cross-generationally. For me, just two weeks ago, I made the mistake of talking with a far younger, extremely intelligent female attorney in my office about the challenges I have communicating with a certain transgender client. She was taken aback by it and actually seemed genuinely offended that it was any type of issue for me. I tried to make clear that it was not the fact that the client was transgender but rather the fact the client also happened to be mentally ill which was causing the difficulty. She clearly did not accept that. I spent the rest of the day expecting her to complain to management about my 'tolerance' issues. In a way, it was a good wake-up call for me that I really need to be cautious when engaging these types of topics.

#64 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-04-29 03:12 PM | Reply

"I see Snoofy push people's buttons, troll them. But I can follow his logic."

Thanks!

"Though this be madness, yet there is method in't."

#65 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 03:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-I see Snoofy push people's buttons, troll them

he follows people from thread to thread, mentioning them when they aren't even here, juvenile ---- like that.

Madbomber doesn't do that. You just don't agree with him.

Snoofy is the troll, not Madbomber.

It's actually not complicated at all. I have no problems with Snoofy's position (when he actually manages to express them) even if I don't agree.

#66 | Posted by eberly at 2021-04-29 03:14 PM | Reply

"Part of my difficulty with "wokeness" is that to a large degree it seems to be a generational thing. Young people are far, far more focused on it than older people."

Young people see a world of ----, built by the old people, and wonder why old people are happy living in a world of ----.
Old people don't have a good answer for this, so they shoot the messenger.
It's a species-wide Kubler-Ross event.

I mean, global warming is going to make life very very bad for billions of people, in young people's lifetime.
Old people either deny the problem exists, or make token gestures of appeasement.

#67 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 03:18 PM | Reply

"he follows people from thread to thread, mentioning them when they aren't even here, juvenile ---- like that."

Alas, You should be honored, to live rent-free in my head.
Harrumph!

#68 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 03:19 PM | Reply

"Part of my difficulty with "wokeness" is that to a large degree it seems to be a generational thing. Young people are far, far more focused on it than older people."

Young people see a world of ----, built by the old people, and wonder why old people are happy living in a world of ----.
Old people don't have a good answer for this, so they shoot the messenger.
It's a species-wide Kubler-Ross event.

I mean, global warming is going to make life very very bad for billions of people, in young people's lifetime.
Old people either deny the problem exists, or make token gestures of appeasement.

#67 | Posted by snoofy

Climate change isn't related to wokeness, just science.

Wokeness is about mandating what you can and can't say so someone somewhere doesn't get their feelings hurt. Young people have turned finding and scolding and destroying "unwoke" people into an olympic sport and they think it helps their social status to point at less woke people and call them evil. When in fact all it does is help republicans win elections.

#69 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-29 03:49 PM | Reply

Snoofy is the troll, not Madbomber.

I guess to each their own.

Mostly depends on the interactions people have with one another.

#70 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-29 03:55 PM | Reply

"So you're saying that the only way to fix the undemocratic unfair nature of our government is to have the beneficiaries of that unfairness volunteer to fix it and give up power?"

The US was never intended to be Democratic. By design. It's a Constitutional Republic.

That being said, at any time any one of the United States felt that being part of the union no longer suited them, they should be free to separate from the union.

But truth in lending, that wouldn't be necessary if the US honored the 10th amendment as it was intended. If California wanted to provide lavish benefits and impose high taxes...who cares...so long as it's limited to CA. And if Wyoming wants to eliminate any sort of safety net and minimize taxes...that's OK too. So much of the acrimony comes from activists wanting to impose a one-size-fits-all model across all the states.

#71 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 03:57 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

For instance, I think that CA should be free to be it's own country.

They can pay the neighboring states for their water.

Who knows, maybe we could even fill Lake Meade again.

#72 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-29 04:02 PM | Reply

The US was never intended to be Democratic. By design. It's a Constitutional Republic.

That being said, at any time any one of the United States felt that being part of the union no longer suited them, they should be free to separate from the union.

But truth in lending, that wouldn't be necessary if the US honored the 10th amendment as it was intended. If California wanted to provide lavish benefits and impose high taxes...who cares...so long as it's limited to CA. And if Wyoming wants to eliminate any sort of safety net and minimize taxes...that's OK too. So much of the acrimony comes from activists wanting to impose a one-size-fits-all model across all the states.

#71 | Posted by madbomber

Semantics. The leaders of the republic are chosen by voting - that's democracy.

You act like a state's actions don't affect other states. Does texas' pollution stay in texas? Do their creationism-taught morons never seek national office? That would be the only way that it's no one else's business what they do.

#73 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-29 04:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

The entire system is chosen through the popular, democratic, vote, except the President.

Despite Republicans wanting to insist otherwise.

They're only happy with the archaic electoral college because it's the only way their backwards, regressive policies can be implemented.

If it wasn't for gerrymandering. Most red districts would be blue.

#74 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-04-29 04:14 PM | Reply

The US was never intended to be Democratic. By design. It's a Constitutional Republic.

Saying stuff like this tells us you have no clue.

#75 | Posted by jpw at 2021-04-29 04:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

"The US was never intended to be Democratic. By design. It's a Constitutional Republic"

This sort of thing appears to mean something to some people, and some people go on and on about it.

#76 | Posted by Zed at 2021-04-29 04:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

He's not wrong. A lot of progressives fail to see the big picture. Take "Defund the police." I'm all in favor or reimagining police funding, coming up with alternative solutions to some of the issues that police respond to, such as homelessness, but what the woke urban Dems don't understand is that the GQP paints all Dems as being pro-defund. Dems need to win big in the suburbs, and most suburban residents like their local police departments, they don't want them defunded. In fact, when a tragedy like a officer killed in the line of duty hits another agency, our break room is full of pizza and treats from our citizens and local businesses for weeks to remind us how much they appreciate our service. The activists need to be smarter regarding their language, because the Reichwing has a megaphone that will blatantly lie for them without shame.

#77 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2021-04-29 06:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The activists need to be smarter regarding their language, because the Reichwing has a megaphone that will blatantly lie for them without shame.

#77 | Posted by _Gunslinger_

The woke activists would scream at you that you're part of the problem by saying that they're the problem, then theyd try to get your fired from your job.

They're the worst. Second to trump supporters of course.

#78 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-29 06:29 PM | Reply

"The US was never intended to be Democratic. By design. It's a Constitutional Republic."

Silly, stupid, semantics.

GFY

#79 | Posted by Angrydad at 2021-04-29 06:52 PM | Reply

"It's a Constitutional Republic."

I wonder if the Constitution has anything in it about democratic elections.
Anyone know?
...

#80 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-29 07:21 PM | Reply

Those who haven't taken philosophy or critical thinking hate discussions that don't take two sentences. Entire books were written on a single question in antiquity. Take Plato's Republic. The entire tome was written 2500 years ago in response to the Greek Sophist Thrasymachus asking Socrates, "What is Justice?"

#81 | Posted by madscientist at 2021-04-29 07:39 PM | Reply

For ----- sake MadSci, lighten up.

#82 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-04-29 11:10 PM | Reply

For ----- sake MadSci, lighten up

Shut up, Moder8, you drunken doily.

#83 | Posted by madscientist at 2021-04-29 11:16 PM | Reply

:) It's true! It's true! It's so true! blechhhhhvomittttttttt!

#84 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-04-30 12:00 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

#81 Please be more succinct.

#85 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2021-04-30 05:19 AM | Reply

#85 It took me an inordinate amount of mental power to understand the early philosophers because they seemed to turn common knowledge up on it's head. I had to read and reread them in order to understand them, which, up till that point hadn't been a problem for me.

Read Euthyphro, Republic, Enchiridion. Talk about a mind ----. Much of what we take for granted as common knowledge is plainly wrong. We're simply conditioned to think a certain way by our culture.

#86 | Posted by madscientist at 2021-04-30 06:29 AM | Reply

The sun is setting as the prison officer enters to tell Socrates that he must take the poison. The officer remarks that he knows that Socrates will not be angry with him for telling him so. During Socrates' time in prison, the officer has become convinced that Socrates is the noblest, gentlest, and bravest man he has ever met, and trusts that Socrates know that he is following orders against his wishes. The officer says goodbye to Socrates, offers his best wishes, and then bursts into tears and departs.

Socrates now indicates that he should take the poison. Crito objects, telling Socrates that there is still time, that many prisoners don't take the poison until well into the night. Socrates replies that these men cling too desperately to life, whereas he has no reason to fear death. Socrates is brought the cup of hemlock, which he receives quite cheerfully. Socrates offers a prayer to the gods that his journey from this world to the next may be prosperous, and then downs the cup in one gulp. At this point, Phaedo and all the others break down in tears, not for Socrates' sake, but for their own, at losing such a friend. Socrates chastises them, saying he sent the women away to avoid such a show of tears. He would like to meet his end in reverent silence, and urges his friends to be brave.

Ashamed by his rebuke, Socrates' friends fall silent. Socrates then gets up and walks about a bit to help the poison spread throughout the body. As he begins to feel numb, he lies down on the bed. His last words are: "Crito, we ought to offer a ---- to Asclepius. See to it, and don't forget." After this, Socrates drifts imperceptibly from this world to the next. Phaedo concludes his narrative, remarking that Socrates was the bravest, wisest, and most just of men.

Phaedo, The Death of Socrates.

www.sparknotes.com

PS: Don't read the article if you don't want to expand your mind without drugs.

#87 | Posted by madscientist at 2021-04-30 06:52 AM | Reply

Fundamental stuff

#88 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2021-04-30 07:01 AM | Reply

I used to think that, Doc, but it appears this fundamental information has escaped many of the drudgies over the past few years. So, I reposted it from learning it 30 years ago.

#89 | Posted by madscientist at 2021-04-30 08:13 AM | Reply

Have you ever been to North Dakota or South Dakota Boaz?
I have, was born and raised in Nebraska. How about
Montana, Wyoming, Idaho? Get outside each of these states
1 or 2 major cities of any size and they are largely empty
vacuous shells of a state.

Sure there are good folks in all of those states. And there's
a fair share of Nutters too. But the point is, largely empty
low population states have WAAAAAAAY too much power and punch
for their populations within the Republic. This has never
been fixed, because the GOP realizes their advantage and doesn't
want it fixed.

It's a tilted playing field that favors white, rural, Christian
populations...in other words, WASPs...

And the GOP is just fine with that...

#90 | Posted by earthmuse at 2021-04-30 08:23 AM | Reply

fyi....love Carville. Bright bright man wrapped in
a downhome country shirt. Real people...

#91 | Posted by earthmuse at 2021-04-30 08:25 AM | Reply

Managing to very effectively encapsulating the Democrat messaging problem.

Lets not discuss how to convert those "empty husks of states" to the Democrat party. Lets talk about how much it sucks that they have power and how we can take it from them.

#92 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-04-30 08:42 AM | Reply

#92

Try seeing it without the partisan bent. Then you'll completely understand.

#93 | Posted by jpw at 2021-04-30 09:09 AM | Reply

"Saying stuff like this tells us you have no clue."

Really?

You think the Constitution of the United States established the US as a democracy?

#94 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-30 09:40 AM | Reply

"But the point is, largely empty low population states have WAAAAAAAY too much power and punch for their populations within the Republic. This has never been fixed, because the GOP realizes their advantage and doesn't want it fixed."

And it can't be fixed. Like I said, the United States is a voluntary compact between the states. And the details of that compact are part and parcel to the integrity of the United States.

It can be done...34 states could convene a new constitutional convention, at which point you could try and get buy-in from the states to make these changes. But that would effectively end any sort of state sovereignty, and I can't imagine many states supporting that. And any other changes would be unconstitutional and illegal.

#95 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-30 09:46 AM | Reply

"Try seeing it without the partisan bent. Then you'll completely understand."

The Soviet Union was not unlike the United States in it's Organization. It was a Republic made up of many different Soviet States. In theory, they were all equal. In practice, Russia ruled. More specifically, Communist Russians in the population centers west or the Ural Mountains. The other states were the USSR's version of Flyover Country, and the Soviets exploited them mercilessly. And why not? A Soviet apparatchik was unlikely to ever visit Uzbekistan, so what loss is there in draining the Aral Sea in order to produce more cotton? What's the big deal about dumping nuclear waste in a lake in Kazakhstan? Empty, unpopulated areas full of unimportant people.

Try seeing it without the partisan slant. Then you'll completely understand.

#96 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-04-30 09:50 AM | Reply

You think the Constitution of the United States established the US as a democracy?
#94 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Naw, it just makes all decisions, i.e., legislation, appointments, and SCOTUS decisions are based on a majority vote of those eligible to decide. Sounds like democracy. It's not a "Democracy", but all decisions are arrived at democratically.

Sounds like a distinction without a difference. Not to mention, every President in my lifetime (beginning with Truman) has referred to this country as a democracy whenever speaking about it in speeches. Did they just not know?

BTW, what's the alternative, flip a coin? Or dictatorship?

#97 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2021-04-30 09:54 AM | Reply

90

Be honest about what bothers you.

It's not small populated states....it's republican states.

#98 | Posted by eberly at 2021-04-30 10:01 AM | Reply

In these whinefests about over represented states it's always Wyoming and the dakotas. Every single time

It's never Delaware, New Hampshire, Maine, or Vermont.

And that's because THOSE small states don't bother you nor anyone else apparently.

You probably think you're fooling everyone but you're not.

#99 | Posted by eberly at 2021-04-30 10:06 AM | Reply

And that's because THOSE small states don't bother you nor anyone else apparently.

They both bother me; red and blue. I think POTUS elections should be based on the popular vote.

#100 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2021-04-30 10:12 AM | Reply

-I think POTUS elections should be based on the popular vote.

Why? Because Wyoming and Vermont each get 3 electoral votes and that overrepresents them?

An easier solution would be to just take the senate votes from each state rather than bother counting all votes in California and New York. That would be a waste of resources just to end up in the same place if you just simply remove 2 electoral votes from each state.

#101 | Posted by eberly at 2021-04-30 10:49 AM | Reply

"'18 percent of the population controls 52 percent of the Senate seats. That's a fact.'
I question that. Sounds like some sort of contorting statistic type of answer.
#7 | POSTED BY BOAZ AT 2021-04-28 04:53 PM"

Current total US population of States with Senators is 330.6 million.

18% of 330.6 million = 59.5 million.

Current total number of Senate seats = 100.

52% 0f 100 = 52.

52 Senate seats come from 26 states.

Current total population of 26 states with the lowest population = 58.1 million.

58.1 million is actually 17.56% (slightly less than 18%).

worldpopulationreview.com

#102 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2021-04-30 10:51 AM | Reply

"I question that. Sounds like some sort of contorting statistic type of answer."

Every Republican's response to Actual Math.

#103 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-04-30 11:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

103

Boaz is not every republican

#104 | Posted by eberly at 2021-04-30 11:38 AM | Reply

"Boaz is not every republican"

But Republicans like Eberly are quick to defend Republicans like Boaz.

So Boaz might as well be every Republican.

#105 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-04-30 11:52 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-I think POTUS elections should be based on the popular vote.

Why? Because Wyoming and Vermont each get 3 electoral votes and that overrepresents them?

#101 | Posted by eberly

Because your power to choose your leader shouldnt depend on where you were born or live in the country.

Do you think it should?

Do you think all men are created equal, as the founders stated?

#106 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-30 12:02 PM | Reply

You think the Constitution of the United States established the US as a democracy?
#94 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

I think it's not that cut and dried.

Yes, of course we are a Constitutional Republic.

But we also have democratic processes and institutions.

Stop being so obtuse.

#107 | Posted by jpw at 2021-04-30 12:10 PM | Reply

In these whinefests about over represented states it's always Wyoming and the dakotas. Every single time

It's never Delaware, New Hampshire, Maine, or Vermont.

And that's because THOSE small states don't bother you nor anyone else apparently.

You probably think you're fooling everyone but you're not.

#99 | Posted by eberly

Actually when you make your arguments based on principle, not political advantage, you don't have to worry about those states. Or any states.

The principle is undeniable - everyone's power to choose the leader should be the same. Let that shake out however it may.

Only your side is terrified of doing what's right so they twist themselves into all sorts of ridiculous tortured logic arguments to justify doing what everyone knows is wrong. Just like they're doing with voter laws wherever they have the power to do so.

#108 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-30 12:14 PM | Reply

Every other Federal office is decided by a majority of voters in a particular jurisdiction. I see no valid reason (in today's world) why POTUS should be different, since he technically represents all voters (and even non-voters). Why does it matter where in the country they live?

#109 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2021-04-30 01:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Try seeing it without the partisan slant. Then you'll completely understand.

#96 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Do you really think that that absurd comparison rebuts my statement?

LOL if you have to be a whiny cooze you're not making a good argument.

#110 | Posted by jpw at 2021-04-30 02:13 PM | Reply

"you're not making a good argument."

Is anyone? On a thread about a problem that isn't going to change?

It's not even a remotely serious notion that we are ever going to address the problem of uneven representation in the US Senate.

Even though it's a stretch in our lifetimes, maybe a remedy for the electoral college being addressed.

But there is no money in solving that problem. Better to keep pretending we want to solve that problem.

#111 | Posted by eberly at 2021-04-30 02:26 PM | Reply

"I see no valid reason (in today's world) why POTUS should be different, since he technically represents all voters (and even non-voters)"

Corky mentioned 15 states who want to do that but what does it take for it happen in all 50? If it's a state decision......make it a Federal decision?

#112 | Posted by eberly at 2021-04-30 02:30 PM | Reply

Is anyone? On a thread about a problem that isn't going to change?

It's not even a remotely serious notion that we are ever going to address the problem of uneven representation in the US Senate.

Even though it's a stretch in our lifetimes, maybe a remedy for the electoral college being addressed.

But there is no money in solving that problem. Better to keep pretending we want to solve that problem.

#111 | Posted by eberly

Stop pretending it's a problem that both sides want solved. Your side wants to keep the problem of uneven representation because otherwise they'd have no power.

Your basic complaint is "my side is too anti democratic and immoral to ever allow this to be fixed so just shut up about it."

#113 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-30 02:36 PM | Reply

Although Carville is a schmuck, HE IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
"woke" bullshizz is going to ruin the Democrat party.

#114 | Posted by e1g1 at 2021-04-30 04:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Although Carville is a schmuck, HE IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
"woke" bullshizz is going to ruin the Democrat party.

#114 | Posted by e1g1

You could argue it already has, in that it led to hillary's nomination, which led to trump's victory, which led to republicans rigging the courts and election system to guarantee republican victories for decades.

#115 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-30 04:22 PM | Reply

"woke" simply means not dreaming of a return to 150, It's the new rightwing slur now that even the gooberati know the progressives aren't Marxists.
In the UK it's used even on centrist Conservatives.
Carville and his harridan spouse should move to somewhere they can be relevant.

#116 | Posted by northguy3 at 2021-04-30 06:38 PM | Reply

ake that 1950, though some righties would be fine with 150 and Emperor tRump.

#117 | Posted by northguy3 at 2021-04-30 06:39 PM | Reply

For those complaining about the Senate scam, it least it has a basis in the Constitution. The artificially frozen size of the House scam is as bad. And un-Constitutional.

#118 | Posted by northguy3 at 2021-04-30 06:44 PM | Reply

There are 50 states in the Union, each of them equal partners. The Senate is intended to represent equality,

0-2 Mad. They are not equal,unless you think Mississippi carries as much of the nations economic load as California.
And the senate was intended to allow state governments (who appointed the Senators originally) to countermand the great unwashed.It was part of the sausage making back when all 13 states were relatively equal in size and economic clout.

#119 | Posted by northguy3 at 2021-04-30 06:50 PM | Reply

"woke" simply means not dreaming of a return to 150
#116 | Posted by northguy3

That's a lie. I hate wokeness but I don't want to return to 1950.

I hate wokeness because it makes swing voters vote republican.

Is protecting millenials' feelings really worth another trump presidency?

#120 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-04-30 07:18 PM | Reply

It's funny that we have to agonize over what words we on the left use to express our ideas because we worry about what the Republicans will say or what the "Independent voter" will say about our use of a word. They, on the other hand, use whatever words they want, and defy you to complain about it. They have demonized words like "liberal" and "progressive". They call anything and everything "leftist" or "left-leaning". Get a clue. They will do the same to any word we choose to use. When are we going to stuff their words back down their lying throats?

#121 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2021-04-30 09:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Woke" is a stupid word to begin with.

#122 | Posted by REDIAL at 2021-04-30 09:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Redial, as always, says more in eight words than most say in 800.

#123 | Posted by madscientist at 2021-05-01 01:38 AM | Reply

The reason is simple: They've got a "messaging problem."

Carville is wrong. It's not a messaging problem. Assuming it to be a messaging problem means that the people the message is trying to reach would agree with the underlying premise of the message. The republican base doesn't agree with the underlying premise and no rephrasing it will make them agree e.g. How are democrats going to reword the message to convey the truth that Trump won? How are dems going to reword the message to state that abortion should be legal? How are dems going to reword the message to state that police should be held criminally and civilly responsible for their misdeeds? How are dems going to reword the message to state that the constitution applies to all citizens irrespective to race, gender, etc.?

If it were just a messaging problem, enough time has passed that we have been fighting these culture wars that the appropriate message would have been found. No, it's not a messaging problem but a fundamental difference between dems and repubs as to what America should be.

#124 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2021-05-01 10:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Whenever I think of James Carville, I remember him being interviewed about all the manufacturing jobs that would be lost through NAFTA. His response was a condescending, "Well, they'll just have to be retrained, won't they?"

I thought, easy for him to say. And I'm a liberal.

#125 | Posted by madscientist at 2021-05-01 10:49 AM | Reply

"BTW, what's the alternative, flip a coin? Or dictatorship?"

The flip coin is a democracy, where the will of 50.01% of voters becomes the law of the land.

#126 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-05-01 02:29 PM | Reply

"I think it's not that cut and dried."

And I think you're an idiot who needs to learn about the government the oversees the country in which you live. Assuming you live in the United States.

Clearly you have a computer. If you're smart enough to figure out Google this challenge shouldn't be terribly monumental.

#127 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-05-01 02:31 PM | Reply

"Every other Federal office is decided by a majority of voters in a particular jurisdiction. I see no valid reason (in today's world) why POTUS should be different, since he technically represents all voters (and even non-voters). Why does it matter where in the country they live?"

It's a valid point.

Not a constitutional point...but a valid point.

#128 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-05-01 02:32 PM | Reply

"Stop pretending it's a problem that both sides want solved. Your side wants to keep the problem of uneven representation because otherwise they'd have no power."

"They'd" have no power.

What you're missing is that the constitution ensures some level of proportionality with regards to population in the house, while protecting egalitarianism and equality in the Senate.

I'm starting to think that these concepts are only valid when they suit you and your causes.

#129 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-05-01 02:35 PM | Reply

"while protecting egalitarianism and equality"

The Senate doesn't do that.

egalitarianism
the doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.

People, not states.

#130 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-05-01 03:06 PM | Reply

"The flip coin is a democracy, where the will of 50.01% of voters becomes the law of the land."

Whereas in our system, 46.1% of the voters chose the President in 2016, and 48.2% of voters didn't.

#131 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-05-01 03:07 PM | Reply

There are 12 "blue" states with single-digit electoral votes.

There are 17 "red" states with single-digit electoral votes.

That's an average advantage of 10 Senators.

#132 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-05-01 03:11 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort