Republicans are like Holocaust Deniers.

StoneByStone said:
Don't you think it's kind of sad that you're anonymous and still lack the balls to be honest?
If President AOC did exactly what Trump did with Ukraine, would you be fine with it?
Click to expand...

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that he'd be okay with it. His head would have exploded on Election Night when AOC won. Corpses don't worry about what the POTUS does. lol
 
gfm7175 View Post Yup... That's why liberals are clamoring for a socialist oligarchy to rule over them.

Jimmy So, yes, gfm, you don't know what is socialism, so define it for us, you Trump right goober, which I right in all gentleness. :)
 
gfm7175 said:
What "statement"?? It was YOU who claimed that people on the far right don't know what socialism is. That claim implies that you DO know what socialism is. Define "socialism".
Click to expand...

Stop the false statements. AS I posted above, you used the term. I called you on it, not the far right, and you have been crying 'boo hoo' every since.

You have no idea what is 'socialism', and you will have to educate your almost-brainless self. gfm. :)
 
This is what will happen in state court to Trump.

Paul Manafort -- Trump's Campaign Chairman

Paul Manafort -- Serving time in prison.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Wednesday nearly doubled the prison sentence of President Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, to seven and a half years, denouncing him as a man who “spent a significant portion of his career gaming the system.”

Minutes later, the Manhattan district attorney filed a raft of state criminal charges, including mortgage fraud, that could ensure that Mr. Manafort remains behind bars even if the president decides — as he has appeared to hint — to pardon Mr. Manafort for his crimes. Convictions for state crimes are not subject to federal pardons.
Paul Manafort’s Prison Sentence Is Nearly Doubled to 7½ Years
Manafort sentence reaches 7.5 years in Mueller case

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/13/us/politics/paul-manafort-sentencing.html
 
RB 60 said:
Boo Hoo yourself

"From impeachment inquiry public hearings to the latest Democratic debate, the past week has offered political news junkies dozens of hours of must-watch television. Amid the bold-faced headlines and electric red BREAKING NEWS banners, one thing remained steady and that was President Donald Trump’s odds to win re-election.

Despite all signs pointing to his inevitable impeachment, Trump is once again a heavy favorite to win the 2020 U.S. presidential election as his odds held at +130 for a third consecutive week."

https://www.oddsshark.com/other/2020-usa-presidential-odds-futures

Are you a betting man? Put your money down :laugh:
Click to expand...

Why are you answering for USF?
FYI,I'm not a Democrat
 
StoneByStone said:
First of all, abolishing the Electoral College wouldn't mean we become mob rule. We would still have checks and balances. Yes, the people would theoretically have control over the government, but that's how it should be. That's how America was established.
Secondly, if you want to go by the Founding Fathers, they also thought that the only people who should be allowed to vote are white men who own land. Should we go back to that?
Finally, if you don't believe in "one person, one vote" then why have elections at all? Why not just have an oligarchy that chooses the president? The point of democratic elections are to hold the government accountable.
Click to expand...
Yes it does mean that very thing. This country is supposed to be a Representative Republic, not a Democracy. We did not refer to ourselves as a Democracy until the super progressive Wilson administration who ushered in the first of the morons we see telling us men are women and up is down. Without the Electoral College the votes from just five states could determine the outcome of every election. That would effectively nullify the other 45 states and just like Vermont pushed for Liberals to move to the State and then took over the entire political structure. Those five states would be controlling the rest and we would all do the bidding of the worst of the progressive socialist.

The Founding Fathers wanted only land owning men of any color to have the right to vote. It wasn't until the early 1800's that Pennsylvania and New Jersey took that right away from them. I have found no information regarding the Southern States doing the same for its Freemen until after Reconstruction (there were almost 300,000 free blacks in the Slave States at the beginning of the Civil war.).

The "one man, one vote" applies to electing your Representative. I know you are probably too young to have been taught this but as originally created only the House of Representatives were elected directly by the people. The Senate was appointed by the state legislature since the Senate was established for the several states, not to pass laws that affect the entire nation. The Supreme Court was appointed by the President. This was set up this way for a reason and if I had my way I would return the nation to the appointment of Senators and take it away from the vote of the people as envisioned by the Constitution's original creators.

Before you sling mindless accusations you really should avail yourself of some early American history lessons.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
"Decisive"? Wow, pretty nice compliment. lol

I bet there were NO arguments on this forum before we showed up. They all sat around typing kumbaya and posting smiley emojis and hearts at each other. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yeah. The picture USF paints is that everyone was in agreement with HIS point of view. And then ... out of the blue, on a political forum, someone voiced a different opinion ... and USF went BERSERK!
 
Jack said:
Yeah. The picture USF paints is that everyone was in agreement with HIS point of view. And then ... out of the blue, on a political forum, someone voiced a different opinion ... and USF went BERSERK!
Click to expand...

I've never seen such a pack of easily-triggered RWers on any other forum. Do you think it's too much soy?
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
I've never seen such a pack of easily-triggered RWers on any other forum. Do you think it's too much soy?
Click to expand...

:) hahahaha ... (I have to thank sirthinksalot for that)

"Soy Boy
Slang used to describe males who completely and utterly lack all necessary masculine qualities. This pathetic state is usually achieved by an over-indulgence of emasculating products and/or ideologies.
The origin of the term derives from the negative effects soy consumption has been proven to have on the male physique and libido."
 
ZILCHMONGER said:
Yes it does mean that very thing. This country is supposed to be a Representative Republic, not a Democracy.
Click to expand...

Exactly how would we no longer be a Representative Republic if we eliminated the Electoral College?

Without the Electoral College the votes from just five states could determine the outcome of every election.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much the situation we're in now. The swing states determine the outcome of every election. Voting in New York or Wyoming doesn't matter. However, if this stupid system was eliminated, every single vote would count.

The Founding Fathers wanted only land owning men of any color to have the right to vote. It wasn't until the early 1800's that Pennsylvania and New Jersey took that right away from them. I have found no information regarding the Southern States doing the same for its Freemen until after Reconstruction (there were almost 300,000 free blacks in the Slave States at the beginning of the Civil war.).
Click to expand...

It was actually only in a few states that free Blacks were allowed to vote before the Civil War, but that's beside the point. The Founding Fathers thought only white men that owned land should be allowed to vote. So is that what you want?
Since the beginnings of America, we've changed the voting laws in order to ensure that elections better represented the country. Eliminating the Electoral College would just be another step in doing that.

The "one man, one vote" applies to electing your Representative. I know you are probably too young to have been taught this but as originally created only the House of Representatives were elected directly by the people.
Click to expand...

I'm aware. What I'm saying is that we should have a "one person, one vote" attitude when it comes to electing the president too, that way every vote counts.

Before you sling mindless accusations you really should avail yourself of some early American history lessons.
Click to expand...

From what I've read here, I seem to know more about early American history than you. But I blame the American education system for that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top