Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 97
  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: troutmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    21,792

    Should YOUR Vote Count?

    Leading up to the November 2016 election, Senate Majority leader McConnell delayed any vote on a President Obama Supreme Court justice nominee. Senator McConnell was correct that the Constitution did not provide specific confirmation instruction, and said any vote must be delayed until the people had voted.

    Good on ya mate!

    In a few months there is another election. Now Senator McConnell says is different, not for a President, and thus there is no justification to delay voting right away on a Trump SCOTUS nominee.

    Amazingly (well maybe not) now Senator McConnell inadvertently is overlooking that voters are electing a 1/3 of the Senate in a few months, and their votes may shift who runs the confirmation place, i.e., the US Senate.

    So patriots what say you. Does your vote count?

    Yes or NO
    I am 100% convinced the internet and social media are not the salvation to human civility.

  2. #2
    Adorable Furry Hombre
    Reputation: Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    26,361
    Nope. Our state is Red. And that isn't going to change. Our tool tea party idiot senator is getting re-elected...our tool District 1 GOP house rep is getting re-elected....our tool GOP governor is too as is his lieutenant....As is the AG.


    About the only good news...is that our GOP incumbent State Treasurer who was embezzling state funds somehow managed to get primaried


    I'll cast my ballot and do my civic duty...but LOL no one I vote for is going to see elected office who matters beyond the most local level.
    "Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity "

  3. #3
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: jimb100's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,507
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Nope. Our state is Red. And that isn't going to change. Our tool tea party idiot senator is getting re-elected...our tool District 1 GOP house rep is getting re-elected....our tool GOP governor is too as is his lieutenant....As is the AG.


    About the only good news...is that our GOP incumbent State Treasurer who was embezzling state funds somehow managed to get primaried


    I'll cast my ballot and do my civic duty...but LOL no one I vote for is going to see elected office who matters beyond the most local level.
    So onerous. Perhaps it's time to vote with your feet.

  4. #4
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: troutmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    21,792
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    So onerous. Perhaps it's time to vote with your feet.
    Here this may help explain why people have to take on the negative, victim persona.

     photo quote-most-cynics-are-really-crushed-romantics-they-ve-been-hurt-they-re-sensitive-and-their-cynicism-jeff-bridges-23697.jpg
    I am 100% convinced the internet and social media are not the salvation to human civility.

  5. #5
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Wookiebiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,488
    Quote Originally Posted by troutmd View Post
    Leading up to the November 2016 election, Senate Majority leader McConnell delayed any vote on a President Obama Supreme Court justice nominee. Senator McConnell was correct that the Constitution did not provide specific confirmation instruction, and said any vote must be delayed until the people had voted.

    Good on ya mate!

    In a few months there is another election. Now Senator McConnell says is different, not for a President, and thus there is no justification to delay voting right away on a Trump SCOTUS nominee.

    Amazingly (well maybe not) now Senator McConnell inadvertently is overlooking that voters are electing a 1/3 of the Senate in a few months, and their votes may shift who runs the confirmation place, i.e., the US Senate.

    So patriots what say you. Does your vote count?

    Yes or NO

    In the context of the SCOTUS delay during the Obama presidency and the current state of elections coming up in November that could change the balance of the House and Senate:

    Yes it should count, as should everybody else's. As McConnell stated "Let the people decide" if they decide they don't like Republicans running the House and Senate and vote in Democrats, so be it that's what the people wanted and it's a statement showing they are not happy with the Presidents decisions, nor those of the current House/Senate and that includes deciding who is placed on the SCOTUS.

    If Republicans hold the both the House/Senate ... then they get to move forward with their master plan.


    If you are going to change the rules to favor your situation at the time, you have to live by those rules when they pertain to you next time around. Such is life, but it's the crapstorm you started, live with it.
    Bikes:
    • 2017 Giant TCR Advanced Disc
    • 2017 Fuji Norcom Straight 2.1

  6. #6
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Snakebit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    68,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Wookiebiker View Post
    In the context of the SCOTUS delay during the Obama presidency and the current state of elections coming up in November that could change the balance of the House and Senate:

    Yes it should count, as should everybody else's. As McConnell stated "Let the people decide" if they decide they don't like Republicans running the House and Senate and vote in Democrats, so be it that's what the people wanted and it's a statement showing they are not happy with the Presidents decisions, nor those of the current House/Senate and that includes deciding who is placed on the SCOTUS.

    If Republicans hold the both the House/Senate ... then they get to move forward with their master plan.


    If you are going to change the rules to favor your situation at the time, you have to live by those rules when they pertain to you next time around. Such is life, but it's the crapstorm you started, live with it.
    The people now holding office were elected by the people to make these decisions for them.

  7. #7
    Adorable Furry Hombre
    Reputation: Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    26,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    The people now holding office were elected by the people to make these decisions for them.

    Except the POTUS wasn't elected by The People. Also 51% of the vote =100% of the representation...and 49% = 0% of the representation.


    So, all in all....you're completely wrong...and what is more, you will more than likely post right back at me claiming you're not and that the system is functioning exactly as it is supposed to because Go Team Red.
    "Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity "

  8. #8
    Cycling Addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    3,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    The people now holding office were elected by the people to make these decisions for them.
    And Barrack Obama had been elected by the people (a true majority of the voters) to make those decisions at that time. Mitch McConnell decided to change the rules. Party over country. That is the new norm.
    Life is short... enjoy the ride.

  9. #9
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: troutmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    21,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    The people now holding office were elected by the people to make these decisions for them.
    ^^^^^

    Fuzzy math noted
    I am 100% convinced the internet and social media are not the salvation to human civility.

  10. #10
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Snakebit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    68,206
    Quote Originally Posted by troutmd View Post
    ^^^^^

    Fuzzy math noted
    What's fuzzy about it? Are you saying those people now in office got their votes from say...........Russia?

  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: jimb100's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    3,507
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Except the POTUS wasn't elected by The People. Also 51% of the vote =100% of the representation...and 49% = 0% of the representation.


    So, all in all....you're completely wrong...and what is more, you will more than likely post right back at me claiming you're not and that the system is functioning exactly as it is supposed to because Go Team Red.
    You should take it up with the founders.

    It's a lot like baseball, only runs count. No one cares how many hits you got.

    If you don't like the rules, there is a mechanism in place to change them.

    Now saying you don't like the rules and so we should ignore them won't get you much agreement where it counts.

  12. #12
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Wookiebiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    The people now holding office were elected by the people to make these decisions for them.
    As noted by others The people in office during the Obama administration were elected by the people to make those decisions for them. McConnell decided he was more important than the POTUS and used the Senate majority to block his nomination to the supreme court, one that was rightfully Obama's to make.

    Change the rule and you have to play by the changed rules You can't just change them when they best benefit you though, for conservatives, I guess that's the only way you get what you want if they actually played by the rules, they likely would be a large minority in public office.
    Bikes:
    • 2017 Giant TCR Advanced Disc
    • 2017 Fuji Norcom Straight 2.1

  13. #13
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Snakebit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    68,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Wookiebiker View Post
    As noted by others The people in office during the Obama administration were elected by the people to make those decisions for them. McConnell decided he was more important than the POTUS and used the Senate majority to block his nomination to the supreme court, one that was rightfully Obama's to make.

    Change the rule and you have to play by the changed rules You can't just change them when they best benefit you though, for conservatives, I guess that's the only way you get what you want if they actually played by the rules, they likely would be a large minority in public office.
    We sere discussing whether or not our votes count. The people who are currently in office were elected by people which serves to show that, yes, our votes count.

    I agree that the change of rules has completely altered the process but it was Harry Reid that shot first. It was legal to do so when he did it and it is legal to do it now. It isn't cheating, it's just ruthless politics which is a sad statement on politics itself.

  14. #14
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: troutmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    21,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    We sere discussing whether or not our votes count. The people who are currently in office were elected by people which serves to show that, yes, our votes count.

    I agree that the change of rules has completely altered the process but it was Harry Reid that shot first. It was legal to do so when he did it and it is legal to do it now. It isn't cheating, it's just ruthless politics which is a sad statement on politics itself.
    More fuzziness noted

  15. #15
    feh
    feh is offline
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,634
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    The people now holding office were elected by the people to make these decisions for them.
    So, you opposed McConnell's maneuvering in '16?

    Or are you a hypocrite?
    What's the Matter with Kansas?

  16. #16
    Russian Troll Farmer
    Reputation: No Time Toulouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,682
    Quote Originally Posted by jimb100 View Post
    You should take it up with the founders.
    .....
    Well, the founders had a whole different set of problems to deal with. They decided that an electoral college would be needed to decide on who became president in a 3-way or 4-way race where no single candidate got a clear majority (like in 1860). they also had to placate the smaller states. they had to give southern states a greater power than the actual voting population should have had through the "3/5th rule" (and supposedly to protect them against slave revolts), they spelled out specifically that Native Americans had no vote, partly out of racism, but also partly because certain tribes were hostile, and/or allied with other nations.

    Back then, in most states, only property owning males could vote (that didn't change until Jackson), senators were elected by state legislatures (which didn't fully and until the 19-teens), and the runner-up in the election became vice-president, regardless of what party he was allied with.

    This is why I laugh at "originalists"; The founding fathers probably couldn't even imagine a world with a multi-ethnic society, female and minority empowerment, modern travel and communication, international trade and banking, etc. Also, a few of the founders were hypocrites (like Jefferson...), and hardly the demigods we tend to make them out to be.
    "L'enfer, c'est les autres"

  17. #17
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: troutmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    21,792
    ^^^^^

    And to add to the above, the US Senate format, election and duties were largely compromises to appease the South and its need to maintain slavery. The South knew if, like the House of Representative, the legislative and the executive branches of government we one man/one vote (No electoral college) proposition, they would be in jeopardy of always playing 2nd fiddle in the USA. They were just not going to have the population base to compete in standard election formats.
    .
    So with the 2 Senators for each state regardless of population, came the duties of confirming judges and vetoing legislation they found disfavor.

    So, in other words, slavery may have been abolished but some of this governing protocols still remain.
    I am 100% convinced the internet and social media are not the salvation to human civility.

  18. #18
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Snakebit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    68,206
    Quote Originally Posted by troutmd View Post
    ^^^^^

    And to add to the above, the US Senate format, election and duties were largely compromises to appease the South and its need to maintain slavery. The South knew if, like the House of Representative, the legislative and the executive branches of government we one man/one vote (No electoral college) proposition, they would be in jeopardy of always playing 2nd fiddle in the USA. They were just not going to have the population base to compete in standard election formats.
    .
    So with the 2 Senators for each state regardless of population, came the duties of confirming judges and vetoing legislation they found disfavor.

    So, in other words, slavery may have been abolished but some of this governing protocols still remain.
    The reasons for those governing protocols is still valid.

  19. #19
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: troutmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    21,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    The people now holding office were elected by the people to make these decisions for them.
    Yes your team announced they demands to have no vote on Obama's Supreme Court nominee eight months before the election. It only 4 months now. If it was only to wait wait 8 months to vote on a nominee, certainly 4 isn't a burden.
    I am 100% convinced the internet and social media are not the salvation to human civility.

  20. #20
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Snakebit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    68,206
    Quote Originally Posted by troutmd View Post
    Yes your team announced they demands to have no vote on Obama's Supreme Court nominee eight months before the election. It only 4 months now. If it was only to wait wait 8 months to vote on a nominee, certainly 4 isn't a burden.
    Who was it said elections have consequences?

  21. #21
    Adorable Furry Hombre
    Reputation: Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    26,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    The reasons for those governing protocols is still valid.
    Yup. Because Go Team Red.

    You just happen to have the dumb luck of the flawed system playing to your advantage. Could just as easily change and flip to your disadvantage. But you don't care about that-because Go Team Red.
    "Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity "

  22. #22
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Snakebit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    68,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Yup. Because Go Team Red.

    You just happen to have the dumb luck of the flawed system playing to your advantage. Could just as easily change and flip to your disadvantage. But you don't care about that-because Go Team Red.
    The system is not flawed, your perspective is.

  23. #23
    feh
    feh is offline
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,634
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    The people now holding office were elected by the people to make these decisions for them.
    Quote Originally Posted by feh View Post
    So, you opposed McConnell's maneuvering in '16?

    Or are you a hypocrite?
    < crickets >

    I take the lack of a response as an admission of hypocrisy.
    What's the Matter with Kansas?

  24. #24
    Adorable Furry Hombre
    Reputation: Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    26,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Snakebit View Post
    The system is not flawed, your perspective is.

    Yea...I don't have a TV hardwired to Fox News. I know. Y'all ought to know about old habits.
    "Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity "

  25. #25
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Snakebit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    68,206
    Quote Originally Posted by feh View Post
    < crickets >

    I take the lack of a response as an admission of hypocrisy.
    I missed your post, didn't mean to ignore you, a thousand pardons.

    I voted for Trump and I support the Republican agenda. You may take it as you please.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. VOTING: NEVER say your vote doesn't count!
    By xxl in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-05-2015, 11:28 AM
  2. Vote, Vote, Vote
    By Brushout in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 11-02-2010, 03:20 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-23-2010, 09:44 AM
  4. Proof that the Iran vote count was manipulated?
    By mohair_chair in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 06-24-2009, 10:37 AM
  5. Can Bush count on the military vote in Nov?
    By spyderman in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-13-2004, 01:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

roadbikereview.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.