Shoot The Breeze

Status
Not open for further replies.
I give more objectivity than is due to Trump's policies and actions.

Where I stray is that he is blatantly a narcissistic fuck that isn't above pushing a woman down the stairs and laughing about it. (Not saying he's done it, just that he's not above it).

Biden has his whole own set of issues, and clearly the Republicans would rather have the guy that pushes the woman down the stairs then the guy that might at any moment trip on his own shoelace and fall down the stairs.

Seems pretty straightforward that we shouldn't vote for either of them.

Funny that everyone always says voting for a third party is wasting a vote, but it feels more to me like voting for either of these turd buckets is the waste.
First I’d ask what did the woman do to be pushed? Maybe it’s justified? She has a right to be heard. Also I would add that most would prefer someone pushing her down the stairs which is hypothetical, vs a proven creep sniffin kids 0F2631D8-2C7B-4679-9D89-5AC128262B0B.jpeg
 
I’ve gotten CPC before. Thanks though
So your a CPC IT? I was once trash as well. You soon shall return to CPC, here or at the old place. Have faith captain

Since you say I never respond to your posts....

The electoral college is the only way to win the election. Popular vote doesn't mean squat. Trump lost the popular vote by a total of 2,868,686 votes. Big deal you say? What if I told you that one state kept Trump from winning the popular vote. Trump lost California by 4,270,378 votes. So if my math is correct, which it is, Trump carried the other 49 states by 1,401,692 votes.

Thank God we have the electoral college or we'd have coastal elites in NY and CA deciding the outcome to ever political race ever.

"My guy" has a very real chance of winning reelection. It is extremely hard to unseat a sitting president and sleepy Joe aint going to do it. The polls are wrong and have been wrong before. NONE of my conservative friends were polled in 2016 or have been pulled yet in 2020.
Just goes to show you how truly brilliant the founding fathers truly were.
 
Back in 2008, the argument against McCain was “He’s so old and he’s going to die in office!” even though he went on to live out the entirety of Obama’s presidency. Now 12 years later, after showing clear signs of mental decline, those same McCain critics are defending old man Joe blaming his “childhood stutter.”

Sure, you can say that the Dems are really voting for Kamala to take over, but shouldn’t that delegitimize the election? If she’s going to be such a great successor, why not put her up against Trump and skip a step?
 
Back in 2008, the argument against McCain was “He’s so old and he’s going to die in office!” even though he went on to live out the entirety of Obama’s presidency. Now 12 years later, after showing clear signs of mental decline, those same McCain critics are defending old man Joe blaming his “childhood stutter.”

Sure, you can say that the Dems are really voting for Kamala to take over, but shouldn’t that delegitimize the election? If she’s going to be such a great successor, why not put her up against Trump and skip a step?

Dems hate rich old white dudes and cops so much they nominated themselves a rich old white dude and a cop. Lol what a clown show.
 
Last edited:
And to top it off he chose his running mate based on race and sex.......to get votes.
Its identity politics at its finest. I really think dems have very little chance of winning. Absolutely nobody is excited about a Biden Harris ticket. Yet Trump still gets large crowds anywhere he goes.
 
Oh no, what if each person in the country had an equal say in electing their leader? What a terrible world that would be.

Maybe because the country as a whole elects the president. Not just major population centers. Without the electoral college the wants of a few large cities would over rule entire states. That’s the whole point of the electoral college. I mean do you really think one city should have exponentially more power to decide whose president than multiple states combined?
 
Maybe because the country as a whole elects the president. Not just major population centers. Without the electoral college the wants of a few large cities would over rule entire states. That’s the whole point of the electoral college. I mean do you really think one city should have exponentially more power to decide whose president than multiple states combined?
1 person 1 vote. If you can’t get the majority of the people to vote for you then you shouldn’t win. Simple.

you’re saying it’s better to have the wants of the minority elect the president?

that someone in Wyoming should have a vote several times more powerful than someone in California or Texas (I added texas to make it non partisan.

the senate is what protects the smaller states. They have equal representation in the senate
 
I mean do you really think one city should have exponentially more power to decide whose president than multiple states combined?

Fuck yes I do. If exponentially more people live in that city. I'll flip it around, why should a town of 40k people in BFE, Wyoming have exponentially more power to decide who's president than the city of Los Angeles?

We already allocate two Senators per state regardless of population or area. We already have tinier states over-represented in the House of Representatives because there's a floor on the number of Reps in the smaller states (one) and a cap on the number of Reps in the larger states because the number of Reps hasn't been increased since the 1920s, despite the population having grown by more than 200%.
 
Fuck yes I do. If exponentially more people live in that city. I'll flip it around, why should a town of 40k people in BFE, Wyoming have exponentially more power to decide who's president than the city of Los Angeles?

We already allocate two Senators per state regardless of population or area. We already have states over-represented in the House of Representatives because there's a floor on the number of Reps in the smaller states (one) and a cap on the number of Reps in the larger states because the number of Reps hasn't been increased since the 1920s, despite the population having grown by more than 200%.
Wow dude they are gonna find out about the soros talking points after they read our posts
 
1 person 1 vote. If you can’t get the majority of the people to vote for you then you shouldn’t win. Simple.

you’re saying it’s better to have the wants of the minority elect the president?

Except then 4 to 5 population centers which all hold the same general views decide who’s president. That’s the whole point. Major population centers aren’t able to completely over ride small states.
 
  • Love
Reactions: twn
Except then 4 to 5 population centers which all hold the same general views decide who’s president. That’s the whole point. Major population centers aren’t able to completely over ride small states.
Here’s the problem. The house wasn’t supposed to be capped so the big states are underrepresented in the electoral college. Constitutionally the big states should have more electors.
 
I’ve never reported my semi-annual speeding tickets. But you should fight that shit. And get a radar detector if you like to drive fast.

Lol not in this state. There aint shit to fight. No plea down and its either guilty or not guilty which means you're guilty
 
Except then 4 to 5 population centers which all hold the same general views decide who’s president. That’s the whole point. Major population centers aren’t able to completely over ride small states.

How the fuck can you begin to make this argument. Empty land shouldn't have a say in who gets to be president. Population centers should have more of a say because they're population centers i.e. more people fucking live there. If you're so concerned that the population centers are too skewed one way in their political ideology, convince 500,000 of your closest buddies to move there with you and you can un-skew it. Because that's how democracy works.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom