Once again, if the Trump administration hadn’t perjured itself, it might have been able to get away with this. But it did. So it won’t.
Uh-oh. Even Chicago Trib running op-eds that the citizenship question is legit
-
^ It will actually. They're just going to rephrase the question. And there's nothing you lying, cynical, disingenuous f*cks can do about it.
It’s not me who has what Roberts called “contrived” and “shifting” rationale for the question. That would be the Trump administration.
-
It would have been trivial to put the question in if they had come up with a plausible cover story and stuck to it. But they were just sooo incompetent and transparently lying that even Roberts wasn’t willing to go along. Only the best people!
Hahahahahahahahaha. Anything to avoid talking about how the Dems are now anti-majority rule.
What a hack.You don’t really understand the issue at all, do you? Undergrad or Russian troll?
-
A majority of people want to pay $0 in taxes but taxes arent illegal in the minds of anyone but the dumbest of libertarians
This. I shudder to think of what a majority of the American public wants. It's almost like James Madison addressed this very issue 250 years ago, and Socrates 2500 years before him.
But that's Hahaha Troll for you.
-
https://www.chicagotribune.com/columns/john-kass/ct-census-citizenship-question-kass-20190710-xzofchbyf5atpmupxla6bvd2aq-story.html
88% of Rs
52% of Ds
63% o Is
That's majority support across the board. So why the f*ck are the "majority rule" Democrats wanting to block the question? Put your f*cking money where your f*cking mouth is, Dems.America is a republic, not a democracy
-
1) Trump supporters are a minority of America
2) The census is conducted every 10 years meaning Trump won't get the chance to implement this question even if he wins a 2nd term
3) Most newspapers run opinion pieces with views ranging across the political spectrum, so one editorial that agrees with you is not vindication of anything, but merely a OPINION
4) Your impotent rage makes me smile
-
Wow, wingnut OP is so ignorant of politics he thinks believing in "majority rule" means that you can only do things that a majority agrees with in a specific poll. I guess that means if something moves from 51% to 49% support, you have to implement it and then reverse it a couple days later. Sure!
-
Wow, wingnut OP is so ignorant of politics he thinks believing in "majority rule" means that you can only do things that a majority agrees with in a specific poll. I guess that means if something moves from 51% to 49% support, you have to implement it and then reverse it a couple days later. Sure!
Yes, I actually brought up that same point a few months ago. In my hypothetical, I asked if the liberal position was that a president falling under 50%+1 percent should immediately trigger an election.
You know what the unanimous liberal response was here? Yes.
So all I'm trying to figure out is why you liberals are suddenly anti-majority rule? The obsequiousness to majority rule is is your position since 2016, not mine.
-
Wow, wingnut OP is so ignorant of politics he thinks believing in "majority rule" means that you can only do things that a majority agrees with in a specific poll. I guess that means if something moves from 51% to 49% support, you have to implement it and then reverse it a couple days later. Sure!
Yes, I actually brought up that same point a few months ago. In my hypothetical, I asked if the liberal position was that a president falling under 50%+1 percent should immediately trigger an election.
You know what the unanimous liberal response was here? Yes.
So all I'm trying to figure out is why you liberals are suddenly anti-majority rule? The obsequiousness to majority rule is is your position since 2016, not mine.You're a liar. It was not the unanimous liberal response. Link to the threads.
In any event, you're calling for majority rule over policy proposals, not elections. I know you're a re**rd who doesn't understand the distinction, but what have you.
Majority rule even for presidential elections is still a bad idea, though you can't really blame supporters of a party who won the popular vote but not the presidency twice in a generation for being a little frustrated. As someone who called the last president an African terrorist with a wh+re mother, I'm sure you understand perfectly.
-
<The trib is republican in slant. #FakeNews /blockquote>
Came here to say this. The Chicago Tribune is a long time right wing newspaper. And John Kass is a longtime right wing racialist columnist. Of course he and the paper support this. OP confirmed undergrad.All Hahaha Troll knows is that the Trib endorsed HRC - because Trump's, you know, an oranj sh**gibbon. As such, they're to the left of MSNBC. He only learned to read in 2015.
-
A majority of people want to pay $0 in taxes but taxes arent illegal in the minds of anyone but the dumbest of libertarians
This. I shudder to think of what a majority of the American public wants. It's almost like James Madison addressed this very issue 250 years ago, and Socrates 2500 years before him.
[...]1) which is why we don't do plebiscites on the Federal level, tho some (most? all?) states run referenda ... and
2) We Need More THEORY !!!