|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Who are all these fucks replying with praise for the NYPD? They’re paid to do it, dude. It’s loving twitter.
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 07:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 01:33 |
|
|
I mean if you don't pretend it might happen it's even harder to get the pressure on the house to pass it in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 07:49
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:How do you even abolish the Senate? i'm 300% certain we've been over this but the non-amendment version would involve stripping it of a lot of its powers but yeah, it'd require either a constitutional amendment or an extremely fragile Senate Rules institution
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 07:52
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:Nope! Good messaging for 2020 though! Okay, gotcha. However, I'm not sure it is good messaging at this point. Like, everyone knows they're dead set against any non-regressive policy. Maybe time to just give up the pretense and start directly calling them out on their bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 07:52
|
|
|
Otteration posted:Addendumb: unmute the spice. That's a pretty good Godzilla impression.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 07:53
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:Okay, gotcha. Plausible suggestion! paging kirsten gillibrand
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 07:55
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:gently caress That's a pro-click. Also, if you're in California, find your filter mask before you start reading. It gets awful dusty in there awful fast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 07:59
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:He'll slink off like the coward he is after weaseling out of / not being invited to the inauguration of the next President.  
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:19
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:How do you even abolish the Senate? Yes, it would require a constitutional amendment. GreyjoyBastard posted:i'm 300% certain we've been over this but the non-amendment version would involve stripping it of a lot of its powers Its main powers are constitutional, so you'd still need an amendment. Lycus fucked around with this message at 08:29 on Dec 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:22
|
|
|
Lycus posted:Yes, it would require a constitutional amendment. well then time for a revolution
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:23
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:well then As if we wouldn't end up with a fascist ruler after the revolution.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:25
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:How do you even abolish the Senate? Worse, it would require an amendment that was unanimously approved, because it is unconstitutional to deprive a state of their equal representation in the senate without their consent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:28
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Worse, it would require an amendment that was unanimously approved, because it is unconstitutional to deprive a state of their equal representation in the senate without their consent. Just amend that sentence out first while you're amending. Edit: Though "zero for everyone" is equal, right? But easier to strip it of its powers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:31
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:well then I think I've said it before, but I don't see how the Senate goes away without a civil war. The states that've come to rely on the disproportionate amount of representation it provides will not relinquish that power gladly, regardless of which political party happens to be in control of those "flyover" states. Something's gotta give in the next few decades, though. I don't think our government can function when less than a third of the population control more than two-thirds of the Senate. Skippy McPants fucked around with this message at 08:45 on Dec 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:32
|
|
|
looks like this guy tried: https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/House_Member_Introduces_Resolution_To_Abolish_the_Senate.htm
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:32
|
|
|
Nah itd just take two non-unanimous constitutional amendments. One to make it constitutional to strip a state of its equal representation in the Senate, and one to actually strip it of its equal representation in the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:32
|
|
|
Like, within our lifetimes, the Senate will cause the greatest constitutional crisis we've faced since the Civil War. I guess the only good news is we might all be dead from climate change by then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:34
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:I think I've said it before, but I don't see how the Senate goes away without a civil war. The states that've come to rely on the disproportionate amount of representation it provides will not relinquish that power gladly, regardless of which political party happens to be in control of those "flyover" states. Yeah, that's the problem with any amendment. Too many states benefit from disproportionate representation. That's a barrier in both passage and ratification. An insurmountable one, really.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 08:38
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:pff, look at this limp-wristed  that contemporary politicians place  over substance which then leads to that abysmal figure is the very thing we're upset aboutIt's pretty telling that it doesn't even occur to you that there might be a tangible reason, in terms of quality of life and political responsiveness, that the figure was higher before. Policy doesn't matter to you - only appearances. Of course there were a lot of things really terrible about American government in 1958, of course, which John Dingell would also readily admit. Things which it is much better about now. But can't we have both? We should be able to demand improvements i.e. keeping the good things and losing the bad, without endless snarky bullshit from privileged assholes such as yourself all the time. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 09:02
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:How do you even abolish the Senate? vvv oh what's this? posting about posting from the peanut gallery? how utterly expected 
MSDOS KAPITAL fucked around with this message at 09:18 on Dec 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 09:09
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 09:12
|
|
|
Just make a bunch of places states like guam, Puerto rico, dc, etc and they get in the senate too. Water down the Senate's power through equal representation by adding more states. The various colonies deserve a say anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 09:43
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:Um.... I love you Bernie but that ain’t gonna happen. No way in hell Mitch would allow it. They will vote (to deny cloture)
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 10:06
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:Um.... I love you Bernie but that ain’t gonna happen. No way in hell Mitch would allow it. Bernie, bu-uhddy. Let me offer a counter argument in just five words: Supreme Court Justice  Why are leftists so loving dense when it comes to figuring out how implacably evil Republicans are? How many time do they have to be stung by the scorpion to learn it's in the scorpion's nature?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 10:21
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:
Accepting that means accepting the inevitability of violent, bloody civil war to pry power out of their hands. It's a hard ask.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 10:28
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:
I think a decent number of them know, but a lot of them still believe that appearing bipartisan is the best political play. As I said earlier, I think we're past the point where that sort of posturing provides any significant advantage. People know these fuckers are evil and their either down with that or not, we can stop appealing to the ~*Undecided Moderates*~
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 10:28
|
|
|
Aoc should definitely take old bern under her wing
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 10:28
|
|
|
Not that I blame Sanders for talking that way. Even if things are changing, decades of decorum politics leaves one hell of a groove and the guy does have presidential ambitions. The left still struggles mightily with the idea that they could go full firebrand without alienating voters.Google Butt posted:Aoc should definitely take old bern under her wing I do hope she can serve as a model for a new wave of progressive legislators. People who aren't just intelligent and engaged, but also loving pissed and ready to do something about it. Someone posted a little while ago that they knew plenty of activists like her, but that those people have traditionally gotten frozen out of actual policymaking because the larger establishment considers them electorally non-viable. Skippy McPants fucked around with this message at 10:41 on Dec 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 10:38
|
|
|
Did not notice this earlier when I first read his drivel, but gently caress is he dumb. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1070879369432850433 Border Patrol vs Boarder Security.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 10:45
|
|
|
eke out posted:NYPD confirms the bomb threat was called in like twenty minutes after the FAKE NEWS ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE tweet Well poo poo, guess the media needs to do another "Nazis are regular people too" stories
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 11:20
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:Um.... I love you Bernie but that ain’t gonna happen. No way in hell Mitch would allow it. Yeah, that's not how Republicans work. "Oh, this Rep is a kiddie diddler? He should be kicked out and prosecuted" = sane person. "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! VOTE FOR HIM!" = Republicans Or the push against judge beer getting put on SCOTUS and Reps doing it anyways
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 11:28
|
|
|
Quote the craven "Nothing Matters."
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 11:44
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:Um.... I love you Bernie but that ain’t gonna happen. No way in hell Mitch would allow it. I haven’t seen the interview, but Dovere’s been a pretty vocal Never-Bernie for a while now. I’m guessing he’s leaving out a bit of context here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 11:45
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:Yeah, that's not how Republicans work. "Oh, this Rep is a kiddie diddler? He should be kicked out and prosecuted" = sane person. "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! VOTE FOR HIM!" = Republicans I will at least allow that most of the GOP did eventually come out against Doug Jones, asking that he withdraw from the race and even speculating about not seating him if elected. I guess saying that "most of their establishment will support a Democrat over a pedophile" is damning with faint praise, but well, that's where we're at now!
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 11:47
|
|
|
eke out posted:NYPD confirms the bomb threat was called in like twenty minutes after the FAKE NEWS ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE tweet At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if the threat was called in by one John Barron E: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1071001119697108992?s=19 I saw Mueller and Leakin' Lyin' Slim Jim Comey making babies in the supply closet and then the baby looked at me! Failed Imagineer fucked around with this message at 12:25 on Dec 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 12:14
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if the threat was called in by one John Barron he's doing a great job making sure we know some news is coming today https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1071003598023221248 eke out fucked around with this message at 12:31 on Dec 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 12:28
|
|
|
eke out posted:he's doing a great job making sure we know some news is coming today I live for Fridays
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
eke out posted:he's doing a great job making sure we know some news is coming today It's DJTJ Indictment Day, a day that shall live in infamy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 01:33 |
|
|
i'm lolling at Weissman taking down "great companies" the man is famous for being the guy who convicted Enron executives yall we're five minutes away from tweets like JEFFREY SKILLING INNOCENT eke out fucked around with this message at 12:35 on Dec 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2018 12:31
|
|