House Democrats on Wednesday elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as minority leader after he repeatedly denied the legitimacy of the 2016 election.
At least nine times has Jeffries denied the legitimacy of United States elections. He falsely claimed the 2016 election was “illegitimate,” and that it “artificially” made former President Donald Trump president.
In 2020, he tweeted Trump’s presidency will never be accepted as legitimate. “History will never accept” Trump “as a legitimate President,” he said.
Jeffries’s election-denying rhetoric matches Pelosi’s own position on the 2016 election. In 2017, Pelosi falsely claimed that “our election was hijacked. There is no question.”
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
House Democrats on Wednesday elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as minority leader after he repeatedly denied the legitimacy of the 2016 election.
At least nine times has Jeffries denied the legitimacy of United States elections. He falsely claimed the 2016 election was “illegitimate,” and that it “artificially” made former President Donald Trump president.
In 2020, he tweeted Trump’s presidency will never be accepted as legitimate. “History will never accept” Trump “as a legitimate President,” he said.
Jeffries’s election-denying rhetoric matches Pelosi’s own position on the 2016 election. In 2017, Pelosi falsely claimed that “our election was hijacked. There is no question.”
That's not it. Jeffries 2016 denial was based on Trump's loss of the popular vote; a completely legitimate and reasonable complaint thanks to the antiquated electoral college system. In 1790 conditions demanded a presence of live physical bodies to vote on anything. Such is no longer the case. Don't put different problems into one overly broad category. Jeffries denial vs that of Trumpist Republicans is an entirely different thing. It's like saying "car A is junk and car B is OK, but ALL cars are junk." Non-sequitur.
There are better things to be concerned about regarding elections though. Moore vs Harper is of extreme significance. Do you want state legislators to take election rights from the voters and evade court supervision? That is the greatest threat to democracy right now. If the voters in a state choose candidate A over candidate B by a 55:45 ratio, but the legislature is 52% party B and sends the electoral college votes in for candidate B, are you happy with that?
Face it, that is the Republican dream. It would be mathematically to capture the 26 smallest states and control the Senate with only 16.5% of the popular vote. Don't explode and tell me I'm nuts, I have done the math. The average population (2020) of the 26 smallest states is 2,244,392. The average of the 24 remaining states is 11,369,563. Absolutely unjustifiable by any moral ethic. Do you let 3 people in your HOA outvote the other 12?
Many parts of the Constitution are antiquated and outdated. The founding fathers were wise enough to know that, and even the Bill of Rights are AMENDMENTS, not carved in stone and brought down from Mt. Sinai. They PURPOSELY left us an amendable constitution KNOWING they did not have the clairvoyance to see 230 years into the future. They did the best they, based on the conditions of the times and left us an amendable, adjustable constitution.
Antiquity 1: The U.S. Senate has ALWAYS been in violation of the one-person-one vote principal.
According to the 2020 census California out populates Wyoming by 67:1
Senate representations? EQUAL
I have a couple great plans for equalizing voting rights (and representation) throughout the the U.S., but I won't express them unless someone (preferably more than 1) expresses interest. Meanwhile I will to to get a respected journalist to pay attention.
Have a nice day
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
@lovethedough
That's not it. Jeffries 2016 denial was based on Trump's loss of the popular vote; a completely legitimate and reasonable complaint thanks to the antiquated electoral college system. In 1790 conditions demanded a presence of live physical bodies to vote on anything. Such is no longer the case. Don't put different problems into one overly broad category. Jeffries denial vs that of Trumpist Republicans is an entirely different thing. It's like saying "car A is junk and car B is OK, but ALL cars are junk." Non-sequitur.
There are better things to be concerned about regarding elections though. Moore vs Harper is of extreme significance. Do you want state legislators to take election rights from the voters and evade court supervision? That is the greatest threat to democracy right now. If the voters in a state choose candidate A over candidate B by a 55:45 ratio, but the legislature is 52% party B and sends the electoral college votes in for candidate B, are you happy with that?
Face it, that is the Republican dream. It would be mathematically to capture the 26 smallest states and control the Senate with only 16.5% of the popular vote. Don't explode and tell me I'm nuts, I have done the math. The average population (2020) of the 26 smallest states is 2,244,392. The average of the 24 remaining states is 11,369,563. Absolutely unjustifiable by any moral ethic. Do you let 3 people in your HOA outvote the other 12?
Many parts of the Constitution are antiquated and outdated. The founding fathers were wise enough to know that, and even the Bill of Rights are AMENDMENTS, not carved in stone and brought down from Mt. Sinai. They PURPOSELY left us an amendable constitution KNOWING they did not have the clairvoyance to see 230 years into the future. They did the best they, based on the conditions of the times and left us an amendable, adjustable constitution.
Antiquity 1: The U.S. Senate has ALWAYS been in violation of the one-person-one vote principal.
According to the 2020 census California out populates Wyoming by 67:1
Senate representations? EQUAL
I have a couple great plans for equalizing voting rights (and representation) throughout the the U.S., but I won't express them unless someone (preferably more than 1) expresses interest. Meanwhile I will to to get a respected journalist to pay attention.
@lovethedough That's not it. Jeffries 2016 denial was based on Trump's loss of the popular vote; a completely legitimate and reasonable complaint thanks to the antiquated electoral college system. In 1790 conditions demanded a presence of live physical bodies to vote on anything. Such is no longer the case. Don't put different problems into one overly broad category. Jeffries denial vs that of Trumpist Republicans is an entirely different thing. It's like saying "car A is junk and car B is OK, but ALL cars are junk." Non-sequitur. There are better things to be concerned about regarding elections though. Moore vs Harper is of extreme significance. Do you want state legislators to take election rights from the voters and evade court supervision? That is the greatest threat to democracy right now. If the voters in a state choose candidate A over candidate B by a 55:45 ratio, but the legislature is 52% party B and sends the electoral college votes in for candidate B, are you happy with that? Face it, that is the Republican dream. It would be mathematically to capture the 26 smallest states and control the Senate with only 16.5% of the popular vote. Don't explode and tell me I'm nuts, I have done the math. The average population (2020) of the 26 smallest states is 2,244,392. The average of the 24 remaining states is 11,369,563. Absolutely unjustifiable by any moral ethic. Do you let 3 people in your HOA outvote the other 12? Many parts of the Constitution are antiquated and outdated. The founding fathers were wise enough to know that, and even the Bill of Rights are AMENDMENTS, not carved in stone and brought down from Mt. Sinai. They PURPOSELY left us an amendable constitution KNOWING they did not have the clairvoyance to see 230 years into the future. They did the best they, based on the conditions of the times and left us an amendable, adjustable constitution. Antiquity 1: The U.S. Senate has ALWAYS been in violation of the one-person-one vote principal. According to the 2020 census California out populates Wyoming by 67:1 Senate representations? EQUAL I have a couple great plans for equalizing voting rights (and representation) throughout the the U.S., but I won't express them unless someone (preferably more than 1) expresses interest. Meanwhile I will to to get a respected journalist to pay attention. Have a nice day
Very interesting....count me as 1 who would like to hear more As far as a "respected journalist" goes, those are few and far between these days...
Time is a flat circle....
Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:
@lovethedough That's not it. Jeffries 2016 denial was based on Trump's loss of the popular vote; a completely legitimate and reasonable complaint thanks to the antiquated electoral college system. In 1790 conditions demanded a presence of live physical bodies to vote on anything. Such is no longer the case. Don't put different problems into one overly broad category. Jeffries denial vs that of Trumpist Republicans is an entirely different thing. It's like saying "car A is junk and car B is OK, but ALL cars are junk." Non-sequitur. There are better things to be concerned about regarding elections though. Moore vs Harper is of extreme significance. Do you want state legislators to take election rights from the voters and evade court supervision? That is the greatest threat to democracy right now. If the voters in a state choose candidate A over candidate B by a 55:45 ratio, but the legislature is 52% party B and sends the electoral college votes in for candidate B, are you happy with that? Face it, that is the Republican dream. It would be mathematically to capture the 26 smallest states and control the Senate with only 16.5% of the popular vote. Don't explode and tell me I'm nuts, I have done the math. The average population (2020) of the 26 smallest states is 2,244,392. The average of the 24 remaining states is 11,369,563. Absolutely unjustifiable by any moral ethic. Do you let 3 people in your HOA outvote the other 12? Many parts of the Constitution are antiquated and outdated. The founding fathers were wise enough to know that, and even the Bill of Rights are AMENDMENTS, not carved in stone and brought down from Mt. Sinai. They PURPOSELY left us an amendable constitution KNOWING they did not have the clairvoyance to see 230 years into the future. They did the best they, based on the conditions of the times and left us an amendable, adjustable constitution. Antiquity 1: The U.S. Senate has ALWAYS been in violation of the one-person-one vote principal. According to the 2020 census California out populates Wyoming by 67:1 Senate representations? EQUAL I have a couple great plans for equalizing voting rights (and representation) throughout the the U.S., but I won't express them unless someone (preferably more than 1) expresses interest. Meanwhile I will to to get a respected journalist to pay attention. Have a nice day
Very interesting....count me as 1 who would like to hear more As far as a "respected journalist" goes, those are few and far between these days...
I think the top 9 states out-populate the remaining 41 states.
Theoretically, the Democrats could lock up those states completely and control the House.Therefore, having a minority of states determining policy for the vast majority of states.
Is that fine, just because they would have the population majority?
Sure, the Founding Fathers knew some things might need to change; they also knew some things should not change. They also had the foresight to realize that ‘majority rules’ is not a completely good policy in some cases.
This is, obviously, why in one part of Congress they have the majority-rules representation and in the other part they have the balance set up for State representation.
The United States is not set up as one country like others are set up — it has a large setup contingency of 50 individual states being United and as equally represented as possible.
So, in your HOA example, you could have 9 states ‘out-voting’ the remaining 41.
The Founding Fathers set things up so everything would not be just a majority-rule decision-making.
If you live in Nebraska and have a large agriculture interest for you and your state’s well-being — you do not want the more populous states NC, FL, NY, CA, TX determining what you do completely.They would not always have your interest at heart, if at all. Now imagine if you are WY, AK, or even RI or DE.
Too often people see population as the key factor when it should not be — especially in a very large and very diverse country.There has to be a balance of some sort and it seems you have that.It swings back and forth — but that is another sign of it largely working as intended.
@KeyElement
I think the top 9 states out-populate the remaining 41 states.
Theoretically, the Democrats could lock up those states completely and control the House.Therefore, having a minority of states determining policy for the vast majority of states.
Is that fine, just because they would have the population majority?
Sure, the Founding Fathers knew some things might need to change; they also knew some things should not change. They also had the foresight to realize that ‘majority rules’ is not a completely good policy in some cases.
This is, obviously, why in one part of Congress they have the majority-rules representation and in the other part they have the balance set up for State representation.
The United States is not set up as one country like others are set up — it has a large setup contingency of 50 individual states being United and as equally represented as possible.
So, in your HOA example, you could have 9 states ‘out-voting’ the remaining 41.
The Founding Fathers set things up so everything would not be just a majority-rule decision-making.
If you live in Nebraska and have a large agriculture interest for you and your state’s well-being — you do not want the more populous states NC, FL, NY, CA, TX determining what you do completely.They would not always have your interest at heart, if at all. Now imagine if you are WY, AK, or even RI or DE.
Too often people see population as the key factor when it should not be — especially in a very large and very diverse country.There has to be a balance of some sort and it seems you have that.It swings back and forth — but that is another sign of it largely working as intended.
House Democrats on Wednesday elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as minority leader after he repeatedly denied the legitimacy of the 2016 election. At least nine times has Jeffries denied the legitimacy of United States elections. He falsely claimed the 2016 election was “illegitimate,” and that it “artificially” made former President Donald Trump president. In 2020, he tweeted Trump’s presidency will never be accepted as legitimate. “History will never accept” Trump “as a legitimate President,” he said. Jeffries’s election-denying rhetoric matches Pelosi’s own position on the 2016 election. In 2017, Pelosi falsely claimed that “our election was hijacked. There is no question.”
I agree, every single American intelligence agency concluded that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election to help Donald Trump. Donald Trump disagreed because he’s anti-American, hates our service members, and is unintelligent.
Quote Originally Posted by lovethedough:
House Democrats on Wednesday elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as minority leader after he repeatedly denied the legitimacy of the 2016 election. At least nine times has Jeffries denied the legitimacy of United States elections. He falsely claimed the 2016 election was “illegitimate,” and that it “artificially” made former President Donald Trump president. In 2020, he tweeted Trump’s presidency will never be accepted as legitimate. “History will never accept” Trump “as a legitimate President,” he said. Jeffries’s election-denying rhetoric matches Pelosi’s own position on the 2016 election. In 2017, Pelosi falsely claimed that “our election was hijacked. There is no question.”
I agree, every single American intelligence agency concluded that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election to help Donald Trump. Donald Trump disagreed because he’s anti-American, hates our service members, and is unintelligent.
House Democrats on Wednesday elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as minority leader after he repeatedly denied the legitimacy of the 2016 election. At least nine times has Jeffries denied the legitimacy of United States elections. He falsely claimed the 2016 election was “illegitimate,” and that it “artificially” made former President Donald Trump president. In 2020, he tweeted Trump’s presidency will never be accepted as legitimate. “History will never accept” Trump “as a legitimate President,” he said. Jeffries’s election-denying rhetoric matches Pelosi’s own position on the 2016 election. In 2017, Pelosi falsely claimed that “our election was hijacked. There is no question.”
I agree, the difference is that the Dems who verbally disputed the election results didn’t:
- give rioters tours of the Capitol
- vote not to certify states electors
- file 64 failed lawsuits
- urge a crowd of rioters to stop the certification of the election results and urge the lawless rioters to attack the police and murder their political enemies
- call numerous secretaries of state and urge them to eliminate tens of thousands of votes
- push for a defunding of the FBI in a failed attempt to avoid criminal prosecution
Now, that being said, which party’s members of Congress and the executive branch DID do all of those things? LOL
Quote Originally Posted by lovethedough:
House Democrats on Wednesday elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as minority leader after he repeatedly denied the legitimacy of the 2016 election. At least nine times has Jeffries denied the legitimacy of United States elections. He falsely claimed the 2016 election was “illegitimate,” and that it “artificially” made former President Donald Trump president. In 2020, he tweeted Trump’s presidency will never be accepted as legitimate. “History will never accept” Trump “as a legitimate President,” he said. Jeffries’s election-denying rhetoric matches Pelosi’s own position on the 2016 election. In 2017, Pelosi falsely claimed that “our election was hijacked. There is no question.”
I agree, the difference is that the Dems who verbally disputed the election results didn’t:
- give rioters tours of the Capitol
- vote not to certify states electors
- file 64 failed lawsuits
- urge a crowd of rioters to stop the certification of the election results and urge the lawless rioters to attack the police and murder their political enemies
- call numerous secretaries of state and urge them to eliminate tens of thousands of votes
- push for a defunding of the FBI in a failed attempt to avoid criminal prosecution
Now, that being said, which party’s members of Congress and the executive branch DID do all of those things? LOL
Based on the stutteringly stupid lack of response, I do agree that the MAGAs:
- oppose law enforcement
- are on the record about hating POWs
- are on the record about wining and dining Holocaust deniers, and babbling about Jewish space lasers
- are currently backing a Georgia candidate for the Senate who (checks notes) has been on the record about having his permanent residence in TX which would DQ him from the race (according to that little piece of paper called the Constitution)
- have openly endorsed pardoning the first convicted seditionist since Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, meaning they are pro-terrorist
- flee to Cancun at the first sign of a Republican power grid crisis (thanks Ted Cruz)
- are somehow quiet about Orange Dotard Chief of Staff Mark Meadows open admission to him personally being guilty of election fraud
Meanwhile, Matt Gaetz and Gym Jordan keep on grooming and grooming.
So much to be proud of. That’s today’s cowardly MEGADotard party lmaoooooooooo. Oh well, at least they have so many solutions to today’s existing problems, like …
(crickets)
(crickets)
(MOAR crickets)
Based on the stutteringly stupid lack of response, I do agree that the MAGAs:
- oppose law enforcement
- are on the record about hating POWs
- are on the record about wining and dining Holocaust deniers, and babbling about Jewish space lasers
- are currently backing a Georgia candidate for the Senate who (checks notes) has been on the record about having his permanent residence in TX which would DQ him from the race (according to that little piece of paper called the Constitution)
- have openly endorsed pardoning the first convicted seditionist since Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, meaning they are pro-terrorist
- flee to Cancun at the first sign of a Republican power grid crisis (thanks Ted Cruz)
- are somehow quiet about Orange Dotard Chief of Staff Mark Meadows open admission to him personally being guilty of election fraud
Meanwhile, Matt Gaetz and Gym Jordan keep on grooming and grooming.
So much to be proud of. That’s today’s cowardly MEGADotard party lmaoooooooooo. Oh well, at least they have so many solutions to today’s existing problems, like …
So there are only two kinds of people in this Country according to you???
MAGA and Woke Leftist ???
What if I am NEITHER ??? What derogatory name would you come up with for someone like me who does not identify by political party, but as an American ???
Time is a flat circle....
@Sidehatch
So there are only two kinds of people in this Country according to you???
MAGA and Woke Leftist ???
What if I am NEITHER ??? What derogatory name would you come up with for someone like me who does not identify by political party, but as an American ???
One problem is that US electoral system is designed to be undemocratic. States with large populations are under represented while states with small populations are over represented. Half of the population is represented by 18 senators and the other half by 82. 41 senators representing 10% of population can block legislation supported by senators representing 90% of population. As a result, public policies often don't reflect the will of the people.
One problem is that US electoral system is designed to be undemocratic. States with large populations are under represented while states with small populations are over represented. Half of the population is represented by 18 senators and the other half by 82. 41 senators representing 10% of population can block legislation supported by senators representing 90% of population. As a result, public policies often don't reflect the will of the people.
Quote Originally Posted by lovethedough: House Democrats on Wednesday elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as minority leader after he repeatedly denied the legitimacy of the 2016 election. At least nine times has Jeffries denied the legitimacy of United States elections. He falsely claimed the 2016 election was “illegitimate,” and that it “artificially” made former President Donald Trump president. In 2020, he tweeted Trump’s presidency will never be accepted as legitimate. “History will never accept” Trump “as a legitimate President,” he said. Jeffries’s election-denying rhetoric matches Pelosi’s own position on the 2016 election. In 2017, Pelosi falsely claimed that “our election was hijacked. There is no question.” I agree, every single American intelligence agency concluded that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election to help Donald Trump. Donald Trump disagreed because he’s anti-American, hates our service members, and is unintelligent.
Mommy, Mommy it's Russia Russia
You need a shrink
Quote Originally Posted by Sidehatch:
Quote Originally Posted by lovethedough: House Democrats on Wednesday elected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as minority leader after he repeatedly denied the legitimacy of the 2016 election. At least nine times has Jeffries denied the legitimacy of United States elections. He falsely claimed the 2016 election was “illegitimate,” and that it “artificially” made former President Donald Trump president. In 2020, he tweeted Trump’s presidency will never be accepted as legitimate. “History will never accept” Trump “as a legitimate President,” he said. Jeffries’s election-denying rhetoric matches Pelosi’s own position on the 2016 election. In 2017, Pelosi falsely claimed that “our election was hijacked. There is no question.” I agree, every single American intelligence agency concluded that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election to help Donald Trump. Donald Trump disagreed because he’s anti-American, hates our service members, and is unintelligent.
As far as a "respected journalist" goes, those are few and far between these days... 
Hot Forum Topics
