- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
John Oliver discusses DC Statehood -- Agree or Disagree?
Posted on 8/3/15 at 9:57 am
Posted on 8/3/15 at 9:57 am
LINK
You can easily argue that DC statehood is long overdue and that it is probably time for it to happen.
Hang in there with the video, there is a pretty funny song at the end.
You can easily argue that DC statehood is long overdue and that it is probably time for it to happen.
Hang in there with the video, there is a pretty funny song at the end.
28
Posted on 8/3/15 at 9:58 am to GetCocky11
Of course a liberal would want it, it gives them 2 guaranteed Senate seats and an extra House seat.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 9:59 am to Cosmo
quote:
Of course a liberal would want it, it gives them 2 guaranteed Senate seats and an extra House seat.
This is the issue right here. DC statehood can't be discussed in 2015 without the issue of it being 3 Democratic electoral votes being brought up.
I saw this mentioned elsewhere...why not give the land back to Maryland and just make DC a city in Maryland? Do we need a special district for our capital on 2015?
Posted on 8/3/15 at 9:59 am to GetCocky11
quote:
You can easily argue that DC statehood is long overdue
You can, but you'd be wrong and ignorant.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:00 am to GetCocky11
quote:
why not give the land back to Maryland and just make DC a city in Maryland?
Why change the way it is now?
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:01 am to Breesus
quote:
Why change the way it is now?
Because over 650,000 have no real representation in the legislature?
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:01 am to Breesus
The founders wanted DC to be simply a seat of government, small city. They didnt want it to become a booming central govt bureaucracy metro area of 3 million.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:03 am to GetCocky11
There is no good reason for D.C. to be a state and plenty of good ones to keep it outside of state structure.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:04 am to GetCocky11
I have no interest in the opinion of a foreigner on our country's operations.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:04 am to GetCocky11
As a current DC resident, improving the spectacularly bad local governance is much more important to me, but there should at least be a voting member of the House. Same goes for the territories.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:07 am to Cosmo
quote:
The founders wanted DC to be simply a seat of government, small city. They didnt want it to become a booming central govt bureaucracy metro area of 3 million.
But DC is a booming central government metro area of 3 million people. Just because the founders didn't intend it doesn't mean that we should let it be. I'm sure there are lots of things that the founders didn't want that have happened.
That is a bad argument.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:08 am to GetCocky11
As a DC resident, I am against statehood. I don't think the federal government should be solely reliant on a single state for its operations. There is also no rural representation.
Also, this place is full of dipshits and asswipes of all varieties, and having them voting in 3 more members of Congress would be just plain bad.
Also, this place is full of dipshits and asswipes of all varieties, and having them voting in 3 more members of Congress would be just plain bad.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:10 am to Bluefin
quote:
As a DC resident, I am against statehood.
How would you feel about retrocession back to Maryland? Is that an alternative you could live with?
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:11 am to GetCocky11
quote:
Because over 650,000 have no real representation in the legislature?
Then they can move that's part of living in DC
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:13 am to Breesus
Only a Democrat wants this. Same reason they give criminals who cross the border the right to vote, and vote multiple times and for the long since deceased.What nonsense.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:14 am to Breesus
quote:
Then they can move that's part of living in DC
Do you have a practical response?
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:14 am to GetCocky11
Another "bad" argument is that DC gets an absurd amount of per capita spending from the Feds despite not being "represented" but I'm still going to use it. 
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:15 am to russpot
quote:
Only a Democrat wants this. Same reason they give criminals who cross the border the right to vote, and vote multiple times and for the long since deceased.What nonsense.
"Same reason they give criminals who cross the border the right to vote, and vote multiple times and for the long since deceased" <> Americans who live and work in an American city
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:15 am to GetCocky11
quote:
Do you have a practical response?
Moving isn't practical? Its 2015, its not that hard to move. This isn't exactly the Oregon Trail
Posted on 8/3/15 at 10:20 am to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
Moving isn't practical? Its 2015, its not that hard to move. This isn't exactly the Oregon Trail
They shouldn't have to move.
I know that most of you who are against this just look through the Republican/Democrat voting argument. That is what I expected.
I'm not a Democrat. I just can't think of a logical reason as to why DC should remain the way it is. All I've really heard from others is "that is the way it is in the Constitution" even though the Constitution has been amended many times and "if they don't like it, they can move". These aren't logical arguments.
This post was edited on 8/3/15 at 10:21 am
Page 1 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News