(01-15-2018 09:14 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:52 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:49 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:34 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 11:28 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/op...raw-truth/

Trump didn't lose a single vote by telling the truth.

Yea, says the 'fake news' paper owned by a foreign agent in Vegas. Whatever.

Its pretty simple. He didn't lose a single voter like you. You would never vote for him anyway. The rest know he is just saying the truth and putting Americans first.

LOL. Youre goint to find out rather shortly exactly how well your base is going to perform with every minority voter against you.

Pretty much every Black vote has been D for over a decade and the Republicans have taken over more state houses than ever. Other minorities aren't as wedded to the Ds. And Trump did do better with both Blacks and Hispanics than Romney did.

It's called Gerrymandering.

Republicans have majorities in government but they represent the fewest Americans in history.

They are basically hanging on by their fingernails to power. It's only a matter of time. Not even all the money from their rich supports will save them.

(01-15-2018 09:52 AM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  Anyone else find it funny how the mindless morons who believed everything Obama said for 8 years like Jim Jones cult now are "outraged" over a lie/ not lie?

the supply of kool-aid was at an all time low???

Everyone knows that Trump said what he said.

No one believes that it was a lie.

(01-15-2018 12:06 PM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:00 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Gays for Trump!

lol

what's really funny is that I personally know 1 gay person. Wife's co-worker. Other than being gay, he is as conservative as anyone I know and voted for DJT.

Small sample size but the gays I know overwhelmingly back trump

if one enjoys the USD, then it's hardly surprising 'they' would lean in that direction.....

this is the dippo's last ditch effort going into the midterms....

what a fk'n joke.....

they deserve every single criticism based on today's dem agenda.....

#fkDEMDATS

(01-15-2018 12:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Everyone knows that Trump said what he said.

No one believes that it was a lie.

#onlydipposgiveashite

we're simply laughing at ya.....

(01-15-2018 12:29 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It's called Gerrymandering.

How exactly do you gerrymander Governor's offices and the US Senate?

(01-15-2018 12:36 PM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:29 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It's called Gerrymandering.

How exactly do you gerrymander Governor's offices and the US Senate?

Heck I'm still waiting for Tom to tell me how the EC can be gerrymandered... You'll be waiting a long time for Fit to answer this.

(01-15-2018 12:29 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 09:14 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:52 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:49 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:34 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yea, says the 'fake news' paper owned by a foreign agent in Vegas. Whatever.

Its pretty simple. He didn't lose a single voter like you. You would never vote for him anyway. The rest know he is just saying the truth and putting Americans first.

LOL. Youre goint to find out rather shortly exactly how well your base is going to perform with every minority voter against you.

Pretty much every Black vote has been D for over a decade and the Republicans have taken over more state houses than ever. Other minorities aren't as wedded to the Ds. And Trump did do better with both Blacks and Hispanics than Romney did.

It's called Gerrymandering.

Republicans have majorities in government but they represent the fewest Americans in history.

They are basically hanging on by their fingernails to power. It's only a matter of time. Not even all the money from their rich supports will save them.

This is true. Instead of winning people over, they seek to reduce the will of the majority of voters.

We do have some recent examples of African American voting in the era of Trump.

Gerrymandering

The new buzzword for librocrites.

The buzzwords for libs in the real world are the words "losing bigly"

(01-15-2018 01:24 AM)Kronke Wrote:  Is a hellhole better or worse than a shitehole?

Of course it is simply because Graham is a member of the establishment clique.

(01-15-2018 12:36 PM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:29 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It's called Gerrymandering.

How exactly do you gerrymander Governor's offices and the US Senate?

Ok, wait a sec....


BAM!

(01-15-2018 12:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Everyone knows that Trump said what he said.

No one believes that it was a lie.

I don't fricking care. What he said was the *** **** truth about those places. They come here BECAUSE it's a ****hole. They may just even tell you as much!

God, this whole thing was a non-story from the start.

We all thought it, he may/may not have said it.

But hey if it's not a bad place, ship them their illegals back.

I would like to see all districts become neutral. No party can be dominate. This is a way for Republicans could win Nancy Pelosi seat, and a Democrat could win the Ted Cruz seat. This could eliminate the extremes of both sides and could lead to better cooperation, and bills to be passed.

(01-15-2018 07:36 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I would like to see all districts become neutral. No party can be dominate. This is a way for Republicans could win Nancy Pelosi seat, and a Democrat could win the Ted Cruz seat. This could eliminate the extremes of both sides and could lead to better cooperation, and bills to be passed.

?

I'm going to have a few more drinks before I reply to this. How... ...does this even become implemented?

(01-15-2018 07:36 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I would like to see all districts become neutral. No party can be dominate. This is a way for Republicans could win Nancy Pelosi seat, and a Democrat could win the Ted Cruz seat. This could eliminate the extremes of both sides and could lead to better cooperation, and bills to be passed.

You would have to eliminate party from the ballot. I've posted this before but I lived in a place that was so heavily democrat that the primary was the only election that mattered. If you didn't vote in the democrat primary, you were automatically voting for the loser because a Republican never won.

(01-15-2018 07:37 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 07:36 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I would like to see all districts become neutral. No party can be dominate. This is a way for Republicans could win Nancy Pelosi seat, and a Democrat could win the Ted Cruz seat. This could eliminate the extremes of both sides and could lead to better cooperation, and bills to be passed.

?

I'm going to have a few more drinks before I reply to this. How... ...does this even become implemented?

Make every seat a swing seat or swing state.

(01-15-2018 07:51 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 07:36 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I would like to see all districts become neutral. No party can be dominate. This is a way for Republicans could win Nancy Pelosi seat, and a Democrat could win the Ted Cruz seat. This could eliminate the extremes of both sides and could lead to better cooperation, and bills to be passed.

You would have to eliminate party from the ballot. I've posted this before but I lived in a place that was so heavily democrat that the primary was the only election that mattered. If you didn't vote in the democrat primary, you were automatically voting for the loser because a Republican never won.

The problem with that, the majority of the people have been alienated by both parties, and became Independent. In several states, Independents can't vote in the Primaries. California and New York are two prime examples. If the Independents could vote in the Primaries in those two states and others like Arizona and Ohio? Bernie Sanders would have beaten Hillary Clinton handily. We would have seen Bernie Sanders Vs Trump in the General.

(01-15-2018 07:55 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 07:51 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 07:36 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I would like to see all districts become neutral. No party can be dominate. This is a way for Republicans could win Nancy Pelosi seat, and a Democrat could win the Ted Cruz seat. This could eliminate the extremes of both sides and could lead to better cooperation, and bills to be passed.

You would have to eliminate party from the ballot. I've posted this before but I lived in a place that was so heavily democrat that the primary was the only election that mattered. If you didn't vote in the democrat primary, you were automatically voting for the loser because a Republican never won.

The problem with that, the majority of the people have been alienated by both parties, and became Independent. In several states, Independents can't vote in the Primaries. California and New York are two prime examples. If the Independents could vote in the Primaries in those two states and others like Arizona and Ohio? Bernie Sanders would have beaten Hillary Clinton handily. We would have seen Bernie Sanders Vs Trump in the General.

Sanders in the general election is what should have happened. Unfortunately, the 201x era DNC is NOT smarter than a business tycoon (even a poor one like Trump). That's why we have the President that we do.

(01-15-2018 07:55 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 07:51 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 07:36 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I would like to see all districts become neutral. No party can be dominate. This is a way for Republicans could win Nancy Pelosi seat, and a Democrat could win the Ted Cruz seat. This could eliminate the extremes of both sides and could lead to better cooperation, and bills to be passed.

You would have to eliminate party from the ballot. I've posted this before but I lived in a place that was so heavily democrat that the primary was the only election that mattered. If you didn't vote in the democrat primary, you were automatically voting for the loser because a Republican never won.

The problem with that, the majority of the people have been alienated by both parties, and became Independent. In several states, Independents can't vote in the Primaries. California and New York are two prime examples. If the Independents could vote in the Primaries in those two states and others like Arizona and Ohio? Bernie Sanders would have beaten Hillary Clinton handily. We would have seen Bernie Sanders Vs Trump in the General.

Each state is different I think. I don't know how what you are proposing implemented in a free society. The Germans have several parties and the so called leader of the free world hasn't been able to form a government.