REPUBLICAN HYPOCRITES

I am truly disgusted by what the Republican senator snakes are doing.

I only hope and pray that karma exists and they will pay a major political price for what they are doing. Maybe not this year or next but someday they will pay the price

 

Unfortunately what the Republican senator snakes are doing has really made me lose a lot of faith in politics. I never thought that would happen but it's happened.

 

There is no hypocrisy there, Democrats wanted to have a vote in 2016 but a single man refused — they are simply asking for the logic that led to that refusal be applied evenly. Their mistake is believing the Republicans are operating in good faith — may they not make the same mistakes again. I hope your glee can contain itself when the Democrats eventually control congress and the White House again.

 

I think one way we can punish the Republican senator snakes for what they are doing, is to give statehood to Washington DC and to our territories in the Pacific and Caribbean.

That will add at least four more Democrat senators.

 

It indicates that more PEOPLE WANT DEMOCRATS than people want republicans for President, Congress, and the Senate, as democrats had overwhelmingly more votes for each

There is nothing you can say that will counter that fact, but you can say anything you want, if you feel the need to.

I'm just telling you what a majority wants, I don't give a damn about how the system is rigged for republicans. I also don't give a damn about founding fathers intent for the 'republic', who created the EC primarily to protect the interests of men of property, as they intentionally excluded blacks, women, and working class folks from becoming electors, the founding fathers who could not foresee a state of 40,000,000 people whereby such a state would deserve only two senators, and 20 other states (or whatever the precise number is), getting 40 senators (or so), whose combined populations do not equal that state, that had they foresaw it, it is entirely reasonable to assume the design of the 'republic' would be upwardly scalable in such as way that, under a doctrine we might call 'fairness' the apportionment would be different. I'm not saying they would agree for it to be proportional, and yes, I understand the design difference of the Senate, an upper chamber of sorts, and the House, ie. the 'people's house' but with a populations above and beyond anything in their wildest imagination, it is not unreasonable to assume they'd design the republic in an scalable, more equitable fashion, and to do it in a way that would not violate the integrity of the Senate vs House concept..

In the future, as the country moves further to the left, and it IS moving futher to the left, I regret to inform you that Democrats, if we get control, we will be having these discussions. Count on it, as we are motivated by decency and fairness. Apparently republicans are not.

.

 

I think you'll find that statehood for Washington DC is a larger constitutional thicket than you've previously realized. Luckily for us, we're about to have a Supreme Court controlled by constitutional originalists to decide the matter.

 

The Senate vote, in particular, doesn't indicate any such thing, as only about one third of the Senate is up for election at any given time. The 'total votes cast for Senate' in any given year is controlled largely by which states happen to fall in that particular senate class, and how their primary processes work. It's meaningless, as a measure of popularity, and you trying to use it to burnish your argument is a perfect illustration of how incredibly weak your argument is.

Have all the discussions you want. IDGAF. But you ought to know that when you get to the point where you want to propose a change to the Constitution, conservatives are unlikely to support stripping them of political power in exchange for nothing just because you said it aligns with your opinion on what's "fair".

I happen to think the Senate, and the Electoral College, do a fantastic job of striking a "fair" balance between the power that large-population states have in the House and the interest less-populous states have in defending their rights.

 

Is this a joke? They wanted to do in 2016 exactly what they are advocating against right now. Yea, hypocrisy. If not, then not for republicans either. You don't get to have it both ways.

Also, with the Russian investigation nonsense and the bogus impeachment, the left doesn't get to complain about anybody 'operating in good faith'.

Sorry, your attempt at justifying the lefts actions doesn't even qualify as this, it's non existent.

 

sorry but the Republican-led Senate investigation found that Russia did indeed collude with the Trump campaign through Paul Manafort and Roger Stone.

 

Eh, everything the Dems say against allowing current rebublicans to choose a Justice would do the same damn exact thing if the roles were reversed.

 

And Trump is still running for a second term, something is wrong with this picture

 

Sometimes, I dig watching the conspiracy chanlel. Great propaganda to pass the time. T

 

the Republican Senate are conspiracy theorists?

But the report showed extensive evidence of contacts between Trump campaign advisers and people tied to the Kremlin — including a longstanding associate of the onetime Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Konstantin V. Kilimnik, whom the report identified as a “Russian intelligence officer.”

The Senate report was the first time the government has identified Mr. Kilimnik as an intelligence officer — Mr. Mueller’s report had labeled him as someone with ties to Russian intelligence. Most of the details about his intelligence background were blacked out in the Senate report.

Mr. Manafort’s willingness to share information with Mr. Kilimnik and others affiliated with the Russian intelligence services “represented a grave counterintelligence threat,” the report said.

The Senate investigation found that two other Russians who met at Trump Tower in 2016 with senior members of the Trump campaign — including Mr. Manafort; Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law; and Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son — had “significant connections to Russian government, including the Russian intelligence services.”

Links between the Kremlin and one of the individuals, Natalia V. Veselnitskaya, “were far more extensive and concerning than what had been publicly known,” the report said.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/politics/senate-intelligence-russian-interference-report.html

 

The NY Times is an extremist left wing hate group dedicated at eradicating republicans. Hence, conspiracy news. If there was a shred of truth to those lies, then Trump would have been impeached. Move on already. Extreme left wingers don't lose, they throw tantrums while promoting rioting, looting and hatred. That in itself is the definition of Fascism. Forcing people to agree with you with violence and hate. Please don't go down that path.

 

This is a very clear demonstration of why the WH and The Senate should never be the same party. Ever. It's best for Americans when these are split. I also prefer a split Congress, where The House and the WH are the same party.

That's the best for all Americans. We absolutely need The Senate to approve nominations, but if they are just rubber stamping, they are being derelict in their duties.

Opposition is GOOD for Americans. Straight party ticket voting is bad.

 

They don't care about the hypocrisy. It is only important if the voters care. The voters do not care. They will continue to be re-elected at a 90%+ rate. If you were constantly getting praised at your job, you'd keep doing what you are doing, too.

 

LOL!!!

sorry, just had to laugh

 

Call it hypocrisy, immoral, dastardly, cheating, unconstitutional, call it whatever you want. It's Trumps OBLIGATION to nominate and the SENATE'S duty to advice and consent. Just like they did for Garland. As for Garland you didn't get the advise and consent you wanted so you throw a fit. NOTHING you can do but threaten future tantrums.

 

I was ready to like your post, until you said it's a sham argument. The argument is good. The fact that the argument is only used when it's convenient to do so is what's true. All DC scum do this, and not infrequently. Hypocrisy is the #1 trait of most Congress Creatures. (Or perhaps it's licking the boots of their corporate owners.)

Other than that one point, I agree with everything you said.

I'm 50/50 on Trump's SCOTUS picks. I'm not crazy about the front runner. More Gorsuch types; less of all the other types.

 

I agree. My problem with the argument is that they don't consider what they've done. I guess you could say it's not the argument itself, but them acting like they're behavior is pure.

 

Such a garbage conclusion you've drawn.

You are essentially arguing that any contact whatsoever = collusion. That is total nonsense.

You have nothing, which is why the investigation turned out to be nothing....

 

That's for the voters who don't actually pay attention, and just vote for the letter next to the name on the ballot, based on what Aunt Melva told them 27 years ago.

 

Did you get that from QAnon or the Kremlin directly?

 

Dems expected a vote and got none...even though it was almost a year away . So you think it's hypocritical of DEMS to expect the GOP to follow its OWN precedent?

Interesting "logic" there

 

Oddly...that wasn't the case in 2016?

Hmmmm