Angrymesscan
DCC 4Life
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 3,796
Gerrymandering is a wonderful thing isn’t it?
Gerrymandering is a wonderful thing isn’t it?
If we didn't have a retarded ass populace, we would vote these morons out. That's the check that is supposed to keep these politicians in check and working for us instead of them getting to go against the will of the people. This is going to take a complete overhaul.Politicians going against the will of the people is about as anti-democratic as it gets.
He's the creator of the Dilbert comic strip and has become a popular conservative voice in the past couple years.Who is Scott Adams?
Right, he's saying we can't tell them what we're going to do because it's so unpopular we know we'd lose if we outright stated it.The issue I see with what he said, and it's a huge issue that's long been out in the open but no one seems to want to talk about, is that he's essentially saying, "I recognize defund the police and police reform is hugely unpopular among the populace, but I don't care what the people want I'm going to push it through anyway."
As do I."Safe place" my ass
I despise this mentality
Thing is, they aren't protecting anyone. They are protecting their own self-interests. Very similar to how the state press in Germany did with that regime.As do I.
It's extremely dangerous for a society to consider the free exchange of ideas to be harmful and something to protect people against.
Yep just like how they all labeled the NYPost story about Hunter Biden "Russian misinformation" and now after the election they are admitting it's trueThing is, they aren't protecting anyone. They are protecting their own self-interests. Very similar to how the state press in Germany did with that regime.
How does that work?
If I understand correctly she wants the House to refuse to seat her opponent as she is claiming there could still be more votes that aren't found yet even though they have already done a recount. It's basically a temper tantrumHow does that work?
Can they really do that? Seems crazy. What the hell is the rule on that?If I understand correctly she wants the House to refuse to seat her opponent as she is claiming there could still be more votes that aren't found yet even though they have already done a recount. It's basically a temper tantrum
I think there is an old ass rule where the House can refuse to seat someone but it was from civil war times and think they had to prove treasonous activityCan they really do that? Seems crazy. What the hell is the rule on that?