A word to the progressives out there.

As usual, it's just another load of manure

Decades ago, the left and right had differences, but managed to keep themselves and the system focused on t he most important needs of the nation.
The changes on the conservative side have been gradual and cautions. That's why they are known as conservative.
The changes on the left resemble mental breakdown and/or spoiled child tantrums. No reason logic, just demands based on the emotion of the moment.
Such people always demand their way, insist they are reasonable, and use and abuse all those who don't agree. "Liberal" seems to mean- anything goes, and democrats are not under that flag.

WHY does the general conduct of the left parallel childish tantrums of a 5 year old? Why Trump, of course. Or maybe the moon shifting, or aliens eating brains.

Couldn't be that the current generations on that side of the road just never were taught or accepted the obligations of personal responsibility, of self-discipline, of reason, of civility, or the critical value of self respect and respect for others.
No, couldn't be things like that. After all, if you don't get your way, burning down your own home is the only reasonable thing to do.....

 

The EC and Senate are unquestionably tilted in Repub's favor. It's why the EC must be abolished and states added. Once again I must stress we have to work at this. Look at what the Repubs have achieved while they are in the minority when it comes to their views on the issues.

 

Here are a couple of words to progressives: Give up.

You are NOT the majority. Liberal progressivism is a fad. Folks identify as such to fit in or the virtue signal. No one actually cares about your issues. You are a small minority.

People just want to live their lives and be left alone. They are not willing to sacrifice anything for your "cause".

 

Despite the POT descending in to cult-like status, lead by an immoral insurrectionist, it stands at the cusp of taking control of Congress.

 

No wonder your friend is giving up on politics.
Who wants to spend time listening to this stuff?

 

Clearly those who favor the current tyranny of the minority do not.

 

Right back at you.
Frankly I don't find this very convincing...
As you say, people just want to be left alone and nor have to listen to this kind of snowball fight over every national décision.

 

Not logical in à democracy.
Live with the peoples' choice.

 

Then you could do like me which is stop voting. Voting never fixes anything. We get the same garbage from government with different names on the doors. In fact democrats have held the power of government for a majority of the time in the past 50 years. In one day, that knowledge was lost to democrats. Amazing. Our system doesn't favor anybody. Voters do.

 

i know trump supporters who are now seriously angry over the SC decision, these women grew up with their personal rights protected and are not "hard core" political followers, they just feel betrayed so we shall see

 

Bill Maher and Joe Rogan, for examples, are more like communists than progressives. Notice how Maher and Rogan hate progressives. You're right, progressives want to take away power from the people and Maher and Rogan want to restore power to the people (unless it deals with economy).

 

How so?

 

You are correct. However most political terms have a different meaning when used colloquially within the US - I haven't found any that match up with the outside world.

I have been informed that within the US the term 'communist' has come to mean 'anti-Western'.

I think it was influenced by the communist scares of the pre and post-WW2 eras, and the meaning is related to the activities of the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

 

Thank God for the Federalist Society.

 

The term 'colloquial' I'm using to mean conversational but not accurate. So it is a blend between the inaccuracy of vulgar with the social acceptability of conversational.

Beware of all US political terms. Even the most basic description left vs right I was unable to get agreement after a fairly long thread on another forum. It appears 'left' is generally used to describe 'Democrat' which of course is way to the right, but basically beware of all political terminology.

The answer is to use specifics without generalized terminology. I hope.

 

The only people who tried to cheat in the last election were Trump and his goons. They failed. And hopefully they will end up behind bars for their attempt to steal the election.

 

Then why keep bellyaching? Roe v Wade is no longer the law of the land. It is settled.

 

Baloney.

 

I'm sorry you think that reality is "baloney," but those are the facts. Your boy lost. He tried to steal the election anyway. He failed.

 

Its not the amendment that breaches contract. Several states specifically refused to join a purely democratic union because they had small populations and knew that meant they would have no real voice. The EC was adopted as 'The Great Compromise' because those states would have stayed English and the Revolution would be pointless. They (and arguably all states since) joined with the understanding that the EC was the law of the land as opposed to pure majority rule. Even an amendment cant counter history.

 

You are too smart to ask this question, you know exactly how. This is just a pretend game that the GOP plays, as if the playing field was level. If THEY needed 40 million plus voters to even achieve parity in the Senate, the rules would have been long changed. However, since they have the advantage, they don't care. I f you don't care, that's fine, just at least don't take others for fools, by pretending that it is not so.

 

I asked this question sincerely, and it was in no way a game. 40 million plus voters? Surely you must mean population and NOT voters, which is a DRASTICALLY different figure.

OK, so you are talking about the Senate, and also making the assumption that of course smaller states vote Republican despite the fact that this is not etched in stone somewhere that small states have to vote Republican. This was not a built in advantage in the founding of our country. This also assumes that somehow states do not matter and that everything is supposed to be broken down by population rather than states, despite that notion being antithetical to the founding of this nation. As far as how that equates to 40 million in population, I am not exactly sure how you arrived at that figure, but I do realize that small states get 2 Senators which is the same number that California gets and that equates to some advantage in the Senate if you are going to assume for some odd reason that it is supposed to be about population in a state rather than states rights (You do realize the Senate is supposed to represent the states and the House represents the people?)

You say that the rules would have long ago been changed if this favored Republicans? What does that even mean? Are you insinuating that Republicans would have pushed for and succeeded in passing an amendment to the Constitution? I would retort that you are too smart to honestly believe that would have happened. Passing an amendment is darn near impossible, and have you forgotten that Democrats controlled the house for something like 50 straight years prior to the Gingrich revolution in 96?

You are right in that I do not care. I believe in the Constitution, and you do not see me bitching and moaning that it needs to be changed. I believe in states rights and this is an extension of that. Whether this bothers the left is of zero consequence to me, and if this went against the right, I can assure you that in no way would I be complaining about it because I do not complain about the Constitution, especially in the hopes that it will give my side some sort of competitive advantage. You have never seen me do it, and you never will. That tends to be the domain of the left, and obviously you are not an exception. I am sorry if you do not like the constitution of our government. That is not my problem, and you are 100% correct in that I do not care that you or anyone has this dislike. I would encourage you to push for an amendment if it bothers you that much, because that is how our Constitution is designed to be changed. I wish you great luck in that endeavor.

While I am sure you can see this purported Senatorial advantage broke down and twisted every which way on various leftist websites, however they choose to quantify this advantage, I will acknowledge that it does provide some advantage if one is going to ignore states and focus solely upon population. With all of that being said, I would HAPPILY trade this advantage to have 95% of the media, all of Hollywood, and all of academia in my back pocket. If being patently unfair is the complaint, THAT advantage is patently unfair ( although you will never see me arguing that this needs to be changed either). We all have our crosses to bear, and all any of us can do is play the hand that we are dealt. Thus, you will have to excuse me if I do not shed a tear for your terrible DISADVANTAGE. How do you poor leftists manage to compete? It must be really tough (sarcasm)

 

No he didn't try to steal anything. Biden didn't win. Too many illegal votes cast for Biden.

 

And if you had evidence for your accusation, it would be relevant. You don't. It isn't.

 

What you're describing is the kind of democracy, lacking in active engagement and participation by the citizenry, that resulted in the 4 year disaster called the Trump presidency.........followed by an attempted coup.