POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

[rufus]

Don't think so. First, I think that these are grassroots decisions...just an opinion. Second, it appears you'd need a constituency that is close to 50/50 or greater in favor of the GOP to maintain it - which the US is not. The national GOP can't keep either house indefinitely like it can in states like WI or ND. Of course, I could be wrong.

Grassroots my azz.

The whole GOP long term agenda was to pack the courts and then the state houses, and then convene a Constitutional Convention, amend the Constitution to support their pet agenda, and then ram approval through the states.

And they were only like five or six states away from making it happen. Until the disgust with Red Don trumped their plans.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Grassroots my azz.

The whole GOP long term agenda was to pack the courts and then the state houses, and then convene a Constitutional Convention, amend the Constitution to support their pet agenda, and then ram approval through the states.

And they were only like five or six states away from making it happen. Until the disgust with Red Don trumped their plans.

Truth. They were very very close.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Grassroots my azz.

The whole GOP long term agenda was to pack the courts and then the state houses, and then convene a Constitutional Convention, amend the Constitution to support their pet agenda, and then ram approval through the states.

And they were only like five or six states away from making it happen. Until the disgust with Red Don trumped their plans.

To me, it sounds less like the evil mastermind project by a handful of oligarchs driven by the top down. If it were just willing accomplices executing this high level master plan...I would think someone, somewhere would have outed it. I believe that the extreme players are in the state legislatures and are driving this from the bottoms up...cuz that's where its happening. That doesn't mean that the national GOP won't seize upon it. Again, who knows for sure.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

To me, it sounds less like the evil mastermind project by a handful of oligarchs driven by the top down. If it were just willing accomplices executing this high level master plan...I would think someone, somewhere would have outed it. I believe that the extreme players are in the state legislatures and are driving this from the bottoms up...cuz that's where its happening. Again, who knows for sure.

The Koch's. They've been at the center of it for decades. They almost pulled it off. This latest setback may be the end of it all. We can only hope.

 

[BassAle]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

I'm guessing you're talking about the House.

The Senate is even worse as Wyoming gets the same number of votes as California.

no, I'm talking about the Senate. The Republicans have an advantage in the senate because even though fewer people vote for Republican senators, the people that vote for democratic senators are crammed into fewer states. Our urban/rural political divide has effectively (not literally) gerrymandered the senate. For example, Wyoming == California as far as the Senate is concerned -- the advantage the republicans have in the Senate will be difficult to overcome.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

no, I'm talking about the Senate. The Republicans have an advantage in the senate because even though fewer people vote for Republican senators, the people that vote for democratic senators are crammed into fewer states. Our urban/rural political divide has effectively (not literally) gerrymandered the senate. For example, Wyoming == California as far as the Senate is concerned -- the advantage the republicans have in the Senate will be difficult to overcome.

Semantics.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Every Republican, Centrist, and people who voted for Trump. **** you and your anti-immigrant stance.

BEDMINSTER, N.J. — During more than five years as a housekeeper at the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J., Victorina Morales has made Donald J. Trump’s bed, cleaned his toilet and dusted his crystal golf trophies. When he visited as president, she was directed to wear a pin in the shape of the American flag adorned with a Secret Service logo.

Because of the “outstanding” support she has provided during Mr. Trump’s visits, Ms. Morales in July was given a certificate from the White House Communications Agency inscribed with her name.

Quite an achievement for an undocumented immigrant housekeeper.

During the presidential campaign, when the Trump International Hotel opened for business in Washington, Mr. Trump boasted that he had used an electronic verification system, E-Verify, to ensure that only those legally entitled to work were hired.

“We didn’t have one illegal immigrant on the job,” Mr. Trump said then.

You're a ****ing liar.

But throughout his campaign and his administration, Ms. Morales, 45, has been reporting for work at Mr. Trump’s golf course in Bedminster, where she is still on the payroll. An employee of the golf course drives her and a group of others to work every day, she says, because it is known that they cannot legally obtain driver’s licenses.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/06/...I5ApsTZY6e428yBY2ACTnLjbIy9REGTqihuRRrFI_pF5Y

 

[BassAle]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Semantics.

my point was Rover said the senate can't be gerrymandered, but it doesn't matter -- it is already effectively gerrymandered

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

my point was Rover said the senate can't be gerrymandered, but it doesn't matter -- it is already effectively gerrymandered

Yeah, I get the logic.

 

[unofan]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

That's my thinking as well, since this trend started.

Dems made it easier nationally by invoking the Nuclear Option a few years back, Republicans returned the favor. I can honestly see it swinging to a simple majority if the Repubs get super power once again.

Oh god, this crap again? The GOP goes full tilt party over country, and it's the Dems fault because Harry Reid made a tactical decision 8 years ago?

Just stop. It's the political equivalent of victim blaming.

 

[unofan]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Grassroots my azz.

The whole GOP long term agenda was to pack the courts and then the state houses, and then convene a Constitutional Convention, amend the Constitution to support their pet agenda, and then ram approval through the states.

And they were only like five or six states away from making it happen. Until the disgust with Red Don trumped their plans.

They were closer than that. They were something like 1 governor's seat and 5 legislative seats away at their peak.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

That's my thinking as well, since this trend started.

Dems made it easier nationally by invoking the Nuclear Option a few years back, Republicans returned the favor. I can honestly see it swinging to a simple majority if the Repubs get super power once again.

No. The GOP does whatever it wants without help from the Democrats. They needed no cover. Stop pretending they did.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

They were closer than that. They were something like 1 governor's seat and 5 legislative seats away at their peak.

Yeah, I remember posting about that a year or two ago. Or there might have been a series of posts on it. It was a story that got almost zero coverage but was a monumentally dangerous moment for the country. We were driving on the edge of the cliff and we had no idea.

 

[joecct]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Nice camera work covering the funeral rail trip of 41.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Nice camera work covering the funeral rail trip of 41.

Is it just me, or does it seem excessive to anybody else when we have end-to-end coverage of GHWB's corpse from one destination to the next? Give people the ceremonies, but the train ride is just too much.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Is it just me, or does it seem excessive to anybody else when we have end-to-end coverage of GHWB's corpse from one destination to the next? Give people the ceremonies, but the train ride is just too much.

Can we film the operation?
Is the head dead yet?

 

[joecct]

Is it just me, or does it seem excessive to anybody else when we have end-to-end coverage of GHWB's corpse from one destination to the next? Give people the ceremonies, but the train ride is just too much.

You should have seen Bobby Kennedy's.

 

[bronconick]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

Is it just me, or does it seem excessive to anybody else when we have end-to-end coverage of GHWB's corpse from one destination to the next? Give people the ceremonies, but the train ride is just too much.

What else is 24/7 news going to do?

 

[Rover]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

The Senate is already effectively gerrymandered through the increasing urban/rural political divide -- more Democratic voters are crammed into fewer states.

Meh, yes and no. Texas gets 2 Senators and so does Vermont. Look, that's the way the system works. But saying Dems have a structural disadvantage is Kepler/Scooby type fear mongering. Bill Clinton won 31 states in 1996. Obama won the same amount in 2008. The bottom line is some years you'll have an advantage and some years you won't, but its a 50/50 Senate because its a 50/50 country. IIRC from 1992-2016 Dem Prez candidates won about 23 states 5 out of 7 times. That would give them a hypothetical advantage to get 46 seats. Then they've split 3 states (OH, VA, FL). So, about a 50/50 split depending on whether its a good year or not. Note this does not include states like NC or AZ which have either been close losses or potential new battlegrounds.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.44: "That's Not Law" said Trump

And where are the conservatives who don’t like this? Perhaps I’m not searching enough but where are the Rs saying how this is wrong? Or is it really condoned so they can keep power? Because they won’t stop at three states . They are literally ignoring the will of the voters

Is this just a deliberately obtuse post, or do you really not get this?

Some of you here, along with a bunch of halfwits in Wisconsin, Michigan and elsewhere don't get that this is lame duck legislation?? Lame duck legislation occurs literally every single time there is a change in power from one party to the other at either the state or federal level. The outgoing party knows "it's now or never" and the incoming party screams "foul" (although admittedly not with the shrillness of some of the D's in Wisconsin).

There is nothing illegal about it. There is nothing evil about it. It's no different than if they had passed the legislation last February. Personally I wouldn't pass a bunch of legislation like Wisconsin's since it's shortsighted -- there will almost certainly come a time when the Wisconsin legislature is controlled by the D's and the Governor is an R, but that's really their problem.