"Liberal Logic 101"

[shadow9d9]

The democrats never controlled congress this time around. They never had the 60 votes in the senate required to break the republicans' record breaking filibusters. If you add someone that was kicked out of the democratic party, they still only would have had 60 votes for a matter of weeks.

Stop repeating debunked talking points and learn to think for yourself.

 

[werepossum]

The democrats never controlled congress this time around. They never had the 60 votes in the senate required to break the republicans' record breaking filibusters. If you add someone that was kicked out of the democratic party, they still only would have had 60 votes for a matter of weeks.

Stop repeating debunked talking points and learn to think for yourself.

By that "logic" the Republicans have never controlled Congress.

 

[shadow9d9]

By that "logic" the Republicans have never controlled Congress.

If they didn't have 60 in the senate, then no they didn't. However, democrats didn't break records with filibusters. The republicans since 2008 have doubled the previous filibuster records.

 

[Agent11]

If the state legislature was responsible for choosing senators as in the past do you think we would have the problems in the senate we are having now?

 

[Jhhnn]

If the state legislature was responsible for choosing senators as in the past do you think we would have the problems in the senate we are having now?

That matters how, exactly, other than as a diversionary tactic?

It's remarkable how Teahadis allow themselves to be told how "Liberals" supposedly think by people who obviously intend to keep them radicalized & irrational. They're at the far end of a game of "Telephone" with a lot of malicious players in between. Not that they're capable of noticing in their irrational state, which makes them easy marks for their deceivers.

I mean, "Liberal Logic 101"? The OP actually believes that's some sort of credible descriptor of "Liberal" ideology?

He's buying Arizona Oceanfront.

 

[Agent11]

It doesn't require a great leap of reasoning to come to the conclusion that if we were a bit more deliberate in selecting Senators then perhaps we wouldn't have so many filibusters.

The problem is Senators behaving badly, a problem that was considered in the original institution and which unfortunately seems to have been neglected in the current establishment.

 

[Jhhnn]

It doesn't require a great leap of reasoning to come to the conclusion that if we were a bit more deliberate in selecting Senators then perhaps we wouldn't have so many filibusters.

If gerrymandering Repubs got to pick their senators, they might control the Sanate as well as the HOR, even receiving a minority of votes in the process.

 

[Agent11]

But the system would work. . . And if the people didn't like it they would vote in a different state legislature.

 

[Jhhnn]

But the system would work. . . And if the people didn't like it they would vote in a different state legislature.

You're not really paying attention, are you? Gerrymandered statehouses can easily defy the will of the majority, turn even a minority of votes into a majority of representatives.

That doesn't work, obviously, when Senators are elected directly by the People.

 

[dainthomas]

Edit - since some are confused, this isn't MY list; taken from a FaceBook share and thought it'd be an interesting topic.

Well, if it was on Facebook it's oviously true.

 

[Agent11]

You're not really paying attention, are you? Gerrymandered statehouses can easily defy the will of the majority, turn even a minority of votes into a majority of representatives.

That doesn't work, obviously, when Senators are elected directly by the People.

Gerrymandering isn't a magic wand. It stacks the deck, but it is still possible to be defeated even with gerrymandering.