- 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
re: I’m just going to put this out there: We shouldn’t do population based Congress Reps
Posted on 5/1/26 at 1:05 pm to Rebel
Posted on 5/1/26 at 1:05 pm to Rebel
We have provided virtue given undue influence to the left coast and West Coast, which are two sides of the same bipolar insanity.
My case is that states rights proceeds population based we’ve gotten away from a republic into a democracy, and it was never intended to be a democracy because a democracy is mob rules and that’s what you have so I’m saying we need to get back towards a representative form of government and the way to do that would be too marginalize the undue influence of anyone’s state
My case is that states rights proceeds population based we’ve gotten away from a republic into a democracy, and it was never intended to be a democracy because a democracy is mob rules and that’s what you have so I’m saying we need to get back towards a representative form of government and the way to do that would be too marginalize the undue influence of anyone’s state
1
Posted on 5/1/26 at 1:16 pm to rebeloke
Damn dude. You really don’t understand do you?
What you are proposing is mob rule. Democracy is 2 wolves and 1 sheep voting on what’s for dinner.
What you are proposing is mob rule. Democracy is 2 wolves and 1 sheep voting on what’s for dinner.
Posted on 5/1/26 at 1:19 pm to Timeoday
I believe that prior to the direct election of senators, the state legislators could recall the senator the minute the senator stopped representing the interests of the states.
Posted on 5/1/26 at 1:20 pm to rebeloke
We should use an electoral system to elect Governors.
To prevent cities from controlling a state.
To prevent cities from controlling a state.
Posted on 5/1/26 at 1:38 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
That’s called the Senate.
Well, it USED to be the senate. Unfortunately that got thrown out the door when Senators were no longer appointed by the state legislatures and popular vote was used to elect US Senators. All a senator has been since 1919 is a US representative that sits in a different chamber and only has to run for reelection every six years instead of every other year.
Posted on 5/1/26 at 5:55 pm to Rebel
quote:
Damn dude. You really don’t understand do you?
Oh sucks. Sir please explain it to me. How 15 Trillion US Taxpayers dollars have been funneled through NGOs, the Pentagon did an audit and we had a 30 Trillion US Taxpayers dollars unaccounted for. Shortly afterwards 9/11 conveniently changed the narrative permanently.
2020 elections were rigged and probably every election for the last 100 years.
Our boarders are wide arse open.
Illegals are on Medicaid and voting.
But go ahead and give me a civics lesson.
Posted on 5/1/26 at 6:45 pm to rebeloke
quote:
Our forefathers for saw this as soon as you can vote yourself affluence the system crashes.Well? We’ve reached that point.
So forgive me for trying to say, maybe we should adjust the system to not have so much fricking corruption.
So your solution is to add more politicians to the corrupt system?
Posted on 5/1/26 at 6:47 pm to rebeloke
Only states’ governors should vote for President. 50 votes. Current President makes the tie breaking vote.
No more republic than that
No more republic than that
Posted on 5/1/26 at 7:01 pm to rebeloke
Except... that's what the Constitution requires
Posted on 5/1/26 at 7:03 pm to rebeloke
quote:
How 15 Trillion US Taxpayers dollars have been funneled through NGOs,
Holy fricking shite
Posted on 5/1/26 at 7:16 pm to rebeloke
quote:
It allows for too much gerrymandering, shenanigans and all of sorts of tomfoolery.
Every state should have the same number of districts and get the same number of votes.
Every vote should be counted the day of.
Every voter should be registered and have appropriate id.
The House is the peoples chamber i.e. pop based
The Senate is the states equal share chamber
Our forefathers designed it that way...
Posted on 5/1/26 at 10:35 pm to Harvey Vortac
Of course they could. For me, knowing a group of elected legislators are choosing the senators is proof a more intelligent body is electing a more intelligent person to serve as a US Senator.
Senators now cater to their lobbies.
Senators now cater to their lobbies.
Posted on 5/1/26 at 10:43 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
So your solution is to add more politicians to the corrupt system?
Well, that’s one take.
435 voting members In the House of Representatives. Check
50 states. Check
Let’s make is 9 per state. Check.
Each state would have the same influence. Check.
The diversity of the parties would be based on districts. Check
Same basic system but balanced to give more influence to the states. And less influence to urban metro cities.
Posted on 5/1/26 at 11:47 pm to rebeloke
The way to this is as follows. You don't change the number of seats per state. There is no reason North Dakota should have the same number of seats as Texas (or even Louisiana for that matter). But you scrap the congressional districts and have the vote distributed proportionately.
In other words state X has 10 seats (to keep it really simple). They have the election and 60 percent vote Republican and 40 percent vote Democrat. Just divide the seats and say 6 goes to the GOP and 4 go to the Dems.
The only weakness would be you would not have "your" House "guy" (or lady) but frankly that might be a good thing. It's those guys that really get entrenched and end up serving for like 30 years or something. Plus if you want something from a member of the House, just go to the one that is most similar to your line of thinking. If you care about maintaining gun rights you won't be stuck having to go to your guy (or lady) who doesn't care about them but is "your" representative. You go to some who thinks like you and with him or her to get things done.
In other words state X has 10 seats (to keep it really simple). They have the election and 60 percent vote Republican and 40 percent vote Democrat. Just divide the seats and say 6 goes to the GOP and 4 go to the Dems.
The only weakness would be you would not have "your" House "guy" (or lady) but frankly that might be a good thing. It's those guys that really get entrenched and end up serving for like 30 years or something. Plus if you want something from a member of the House, just go to the one that is most similar to your line of thinking. If you care about maintaining gun rights you won't be stuck having to go to your guy (or lady) who doesn't care about them but is "your" representative. You go to some who thinks like you and with him or her to get things done.
Posted on 5/1/26 at 11:55 pm to rebeloke
quote:
I’m talking about a change here because in case you haven’t noticed we’ve outgrown the government the way it was intended. It’s morphed and perverted no longer functions as it was originally intended.
Can you explain why you want to do what you proposed rather than just get rid of the House?
It sounds like you just want the Senate to function as the legislative branch. Have you considered what you'd get in that scenario?
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News