|
Replies: 80
| visibility 1
|
Heisman Winner [137789]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63752
Joined: 10/22/00
|
Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 12:15 PM
|
|
The 5 least populous states, Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, North and South Dakota, have a combined 1.08% of the nations population. They also account for 10% of the votes and representation in the Senate.
Anything wrong with that? Or cool cool, because go team?
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [47795]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44515
Joined: 9/5/02
|
go amend the Constitution
Jan 19, 2022, 12:18 PM
|
|
otherwise, ####. of course, neither will happen
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: go amend the Constitution
Jan 19, 2022, 12:34 PM
|
|
What WILL eventually happen if this present trajectory continues is that the largest, most populous, and of course, by far the WEALTHIEST states decide: we're not going to participate anymore if we don't get fairer representation.
The red states need the blues - and especially their Federal tax dollars - a whole lot more than the converse.
Representative democracy only works as long as all sides are satisfied with their share of representation. If the blue states decide to take their football and go home, there's not a lot the reds can do about it.
Lexington, Kentucky is not going to bring Washington or Atlanta to heel if they decide Eff This I'm Out. A bunch of Meal Team 6 militias are not going to bring Chicago or LA or New York to heel.
I don't see an outright divorce since there's no geographical division that makes sense and we're desperately dependent on common defense anyhow, especially in the face of increasing Russian and especially Chinese aggression, but I do see separate bedrooms, with the blue states just forming their own interstate federation and pretty much ignoring the existing Federal government rather than bash their heads against the wall trying to reason with the likes of Trump, McConnell, and especially Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert. I think it's kind of inevitable at this point.
Of course, this means instantly this blue-state federation is going to have to fend off their own radicals like AOC and her Squad screaming in like banshees from the far left, but I still think in a decade the blue-state federation is going to look very different than the red one, and I'll be real curious to see where everyone's at, at that point. I really have no opinion there. It's likely going to be weird and different, for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: go amend the Constitution
Jan 19, 2022, 1:01 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34100]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33600
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Similar problem with the electoral college.
Jan 19, 2022, 12:20 PM
|
|
But this is the system we were born into. Might have made more sense when the largest and smallest states weren't so far apart, and when geographical boundaries had more meaning.
Message was edited by: spooneye®
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13006]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14024
Joined: 11/2/15
|
Re: Similar problem with the electoral college.
Jan 19, 2022, 2:54 PM
|
|
It makes sense, you just cannot see it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23969]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12093
Joined: 9/1/14
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 12:27 PM
|
|
That's cool. Each state has the same representation for part of the legislature. Their small population is made up for in House representation. They are not nearly as powerful as largely populated states when it comes to law making.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97664]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64804
Joined: 7/13/02
|
States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 12:45 PM
|
|
I know it's a hard concept today to understand today, but originally this was done on purpose to prevent (basically what is happening today) urban and populous states (and their politics) from running the country. The Senate was intended to be a check and balance against the House, who was popularly elected based on population. The thinking was/is that giving every state two senators is a check and puts all states on equal footing, despite their population, in making legislation and laws.
Long story short, it's because we were intended to be a republic and not a federal democracy. States (in the past) retained ultimate authority over just about everything NOT in the Constitution. The 10th Amendment was created for that purpose. The Senate keeps California and New York from setting national laws serving their interests, which may be antithetical to more rural or agrarian interests.
All of this is becoming a more and more foreign concept today in politics. We're not functioning as intended, and haven't for quite some time. As such, it ends very predictably. We will collapse as a true democracy. Not an if, but a when thing. If that's how we operate, we will fail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 1:15 PM
|
|
The urban and populous states are not running the country. Nobody's running the country...and the GOP is systematically gaming the system with partisan gerrymandering, grabbing court Supreme Court seats, and leaning on their natural +8 or +9 edge in the Senate.
And gerrymandered states are not "republics". There is no equality of representation in them. They're fake democratic entities in every sense of the word, already well down the same road Hungary is on - which is being held up by the GOP as a model. CPAC 2022 is being held...in Hungary. I do not joke. (I do not excuse the Democratic states that have gerrymandered from this.)
But the GOP will never be allowed to make decisions for blue states. Good luck forcing retrograde 1950's political and social mores on the likes of California or Chicago. You think we had riots this last summer? Sheesh. Conversely I think it's increasingly unlikely blue states will ever force their laws and outlook on rural areas and redder states. I just think the two sides are too far apart.
On the other hand, we can't divorce, either. So I think it's gonna be separate bedrooms, and an uneasy red-and-blue divide for awhile until something forces us back together or blows us all the way apart, or one side or the other decides they can't go it alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 1:21 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 1:25 PM
|
|
Try. I'd love that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 2:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 2:12 PM
|
|
Seriously, go sulk in a corner. You really are six years old, a lot of days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 2:14 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97664]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64804
Joined: 7/13/02
|
This isn't about republicans or democrats.
Jan 19, 2022, 1:40 PM
[ in reply to Re: States matter, beyond their population. ] |
|
Our Constitution was designed for any political faction.
Backing up a minute, the reason we're not functioning as intended is mainly due to our federal income tax. That was NOT a part of the original plan, nor was the concept of an oligarchy occupying Congress. Nor a President for life. All those things create more power and control in Washington, DC, and states are beholden to DC for ever more funding, as they take in much smaller amounts of income from state taxes.
I promise James Madison never envisioned the United States Congress changing the age at which someone can buy cigarettes, and making that law universal as an attachment to funding. That's not how it works. And it only works that way due to the federal income tax, which itself has been leveraged to the hilt to fund unsustainable levels of debt, so more money can be spent, so states can become more beholden, so laws can be coerced with funding. Money is control in Washington. It is power. That's why we existed for half our history without a federal income tax.
Abortion...should be a state issue. Gay marriage, should be a state issue. SLAVERY, should have been a state issue. Smoking age, SHOULD be a state issue. Drug laws should be a state issue.
The divide we have today has always existed, since day one. The only difference is today the stakes are higher, the power is greater, with unlimited money involved. We are debating politics over bills we don't even have the MONEY TO FUND. Just think about that for a second.
And yes, there is a streak of republicans today who would prefer an unworkable mess. There are also democrats who would take us down a road we WILL NOT travel into socialism. And there were democratic republicans who (at one time) would have done much the same as republicans would today, and federalists who would have done much of what democrats would want today. And their constituents were not that dissimilar than what we have today. Point is we should have a bigger dog in the fight at our statehouses, and a gerbil in the fight in Washington, DC.
Short of congressional term limits AND a balanced budget amendment (outlawing the use of our federal revenue to leverage debt), the writing is on the wall. This isn't political. Forget republicans or democrats. This is a money problem, a human nature problem, and a democracy problem. Same problems that have led to the demise of ALL OTHER democracies even close to our size and diversity. You can't centralize a diverse democracy. Doesn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: This isn't about republicans or democrats.
Jan 19, 2022, 1:47 PM
|
|
That's very much how I see it. I just see no real way these increasingly disparate states ever see eye-to-eye on universal solutions.
The Feds need to be impartial-as-possible refs, provide for a common defense...and that's about it. Short of that the power needs to repose in statehouses. Actually as a Small-Gubmint-Is-Better Libertarian I'd strongly prefer even the statehouses largely eff off and leave the big decisions to cities and counties.
The problem is both sides are hamstringing the other from doing anything right now, and that's a one-way road to civil war as frustration mounts. And that Mexican Standoff only lasts until it looks like one side might win. Then stuff really goes ape, IMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97664]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64804
Joined: 7/13/02
|
States don't need to see eye to eye. There are no
Jan 19, 2022, 2:03 PM
|
|
universal solutions. Just as there were no universal solutions in 1787 either. What there WAS though, is a LACK of money in Washington DC, and a wealth of money in state coffers, and the freedom to agree to disagree, among states. In fact, slavery only became a divisive issue as it was feared the Constitution would be amended outlawing it. Honestly, things would have been much different if we had our 50 states then. BUT, we were adding new states, so the stakes became greater in Washington than they should have been.
But for our problem today, there is really only one possible solution, because the others will not happen. Congress will never spend less money, they will never relinquish power, nor the money from federal taxes which buys them power and control. Nope. The only solution is to force the Congress to live off the people, NOT the other way around.
************************************************
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
Term limits and a balanced budget amendment. ONLY those two. Even then though, I'm not sure even if 75% of Americans favor both, I doubt state legislatures would vote for these amendments since it would deprive them of funding, that portion of our federal spending states receive through federal tax leveraged debt, would be deducted. BUT, it's the only real solution as I see it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [119571]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 54416
Joined: 6/24/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: Both parties gerrymander, quozz
Jan 19, 2022, 4:03 PM
|
|
I stated that several times. The problem is the GOP has systemically done it far more, whereas there's a lot of Dem-controlled states still trying to "do the right thing" and go with fair, independent-minded commissions...and it's cost them to the tune of 60-70 seats they could have if they did what the GOP is doing.
If the GOP keeps doing it and won't relent, they'll just respond in kind. At which point the idea of "representation" will be a complete farce since all Reps everywhere will be picking their own voters rather than the other way around.
And, oh yeah, owing to a massive edge in population, the Dems will control the House for the foreseeable future. By a huge margin.
That isn't a healthy or functional democracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Wut?
Jan 19, 2022, 4:06 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3509]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 4242
Joined: 12/5/06
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 1:57 PM
[ in reply to States matter, beyond their population. ] |
|
I agree with and support the way our government is set up and I think it has served us well for a very long time. However, I wonder if the framers could have anticipated something like partisan gerrymandering, that serves to disproportionately tilt representation within a given state? Do this in enough states and it becomes possible for the house to no longer reflect the popular will of the people, as you and both agree it was intended.
If the house has been chosen fairly, then I agree that the Senate serves a vital role as a check in the house as you have indicated. However, if the house representation has been skewed, as discussed above, our system of government actually allows for minority rule. I’m not sure that we are completely there yet, but I think it is telling that the last time a Republican won both the popular vote and electoral college was 2004 and that was the first time since 1988.
Of course, none of this has been by accident. Republicans saw these trends years ago and have been working hard at the local/state level to tilt the board in their favor through efforts like gerrymandering, voter suppression, sowing doubt in election results, etc.
With that said, I don’t actually blame them, because I would expect dems to do the exact same thing (and they probably have) when given the opportunity and faced with a fear of losing power/control. Regardless, our beautiful system of government has been bastardized and no longer works as intended.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 2:07 PM
|
|
Well said. We broke it by degrees without realizing we were doing it, and now the halls of Congress are filled with self-serving political creatures who cannot and will not agree on anything.
I mean, we're choosing between Joe Biden and Donald Trump now, careerist, pocket-lining vampires like Pelosi and Mitch are running their respective caucuses, and the lower ranks are filled with apesh!t partisans like AOC and Maxine Waters and Lauren Boebert and Matt Gaetz. The Founding Fathers these people are assuredly not.
So let's roll up the Federal government for a minute, take a pause, and see where we are in a few years. I don't see Washington getting any more rational anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31847]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37148
Joined: 11/22/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3509]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 4242
Joined: 12/5/06
|
Re: The suggestion that it's just the republicans that have....
Jan 19, 2022, 2:36 PM
|
|
I said as much…just happens that pubs are the ones engaging in most of these efforts at this time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: The suggestion that it's just the republicans that have....
Jan 19, 2022, 2:37 PM
[ in reply to The suggestion that it's just the republicans that have.... ] |
|
No, I know. The Dems have done it bigly in Maryland and Illinois. That's banana-republic crap wherever it happens. They actually gerrymandered away Kinzinger's district. Thanks, Adam!
But it's been done far more prevalently, and far more systemically, by the GOP. If both sides gerrymander to the absolute max we're probably talking a net 60-or-70-seat swing for the Dems. At which point any pretense any of us will have to actual "representation" will be long gone, when it's all the politicians sitting in their little ivory-tower safe seats choosing their own voters every 10 years.
Also at which point, whatever faith we have in the legitimate authority of our elected officials will long-since be gone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31847]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37148
Joined: 11/22/03
|
I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement....
Jan 21, 2022, 7:08 AM
|
|
"But it's been done far more prevalently, and far more systemically, by the GOP."
The whole idea started with the pre-curser to the dem party...look up the history of the term Gerrymander. Over the history of this country, an easy case can be made that the Democrat party have abused the process of congressional districting far more than Republicans. Just look to the South up through the 1960's.
You citing Maryland and Illinois are just examples of what's happening right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23969]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12093
Joined: 9/1/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23969]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12093
Joined: 9/1/14
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 2:34 PM
[ in reply to Re: States matter, beyond their population. ] |
|
House districts should look like a grid in each state. Only have a larger or smaller piece of the grid based on population size.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: States matter, beyond their population.
Jan 19, 2022, 2:49 PM
|
|
Exactly. Plenty of open-source software out there that can do that.
Of course, we'll still likely have screaming matches among these "independent commissions" about what gridline goes where, but it's still likely to come out a whole lot better and a whole lot fairer than these Rorschach tests gerrymandered districts are generating now.
Is it a penguin, or a fire-breathing dragon wearing a pointy hat? I can't decide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7185]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9394
Joined: 12/18/13
|
Hello Dan Crenshaw***
Jan 19, 2022, 3:56 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46312
Joined: 4/23/00
|
That's the way it's supposed to be. And no, not because
Jan 19, 2022, 1:00 PM
|
|
"go team".
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9646]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11399
Joined: 9/10/99
|
Yeah - that's by design. House of Reps is population-based,
Jan 19, 2022, 1:05 PM
|
|
Senate evenly distributed.
If you've got problems with it - take it up with our 4 Fathers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Yeah - that's by design. House of Reps is population-based,
Jan 19, 2022, 1:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: Yeah - that's by design. House of Reps is population-based,
Jan 19, 2022, 1:24 PM
|
|
The problem, as I see it, is that both sides are striving for a universal solution that they will then apply to the entire country...like there actually is a one-size-fits-all solution that works for everybody.
I don't see it. I think the real answer lies in the basic "Republic, not a democracy" language of our constitution, where states grab back their power from the Feds and largely run their own shows as they see fit.
I don't see any way that doesn't happen. Columbia, South Carolina is never going to be a bastion of liberal sentiment. But good luck forcing your viewpoint on Californians, either.
States doing their own thing is probably the only path forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23969]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12093
Joined: 9/1/14
|
Re: Yeah - that's by design. House of Reps is population-based,
Jan 19, 2022, 1:32 PM
|
|
Hence, why each state has 2 senators.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31847]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37148
Joined: 11/22/03
|
Isn't there a 3rd option....be cool with it...
Jan 19, 2022, 1:31 PM
|
|
because it is like that on purpose and it was part of a comprise during the founding of our country when exactly the same situation existed (small states/large states) and therefore support for the current structure has nothing to do with "go team"?
As part of the compromise during the Constitutional Convention, Congress was not designed to directly represent the people. The House was designed to more closely represent the people and the Senate was designed to more closely represent the State. The Senate is supposed to be a stabilizing body to the House...hence the 2 per state and 6-year terms.
Just because that structure is frustrating democrats from ramming through monumental changes to the role of our federal government (BBB) with extremely narrow margins in both houses of Congress, doesn't mean that the system is broken. In fact, it likely proves just the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: Isn't there a 3rd option....be cool with it...
Jan 19, 2022, 1:40 PM
|
|
I'm not crazy about a division, but right now it really does look like the two sides are about to kill one another, and are looking for people to "fight harder" on their behalf rather than statesmen who will talk things out.
Lauren Boebert is not going to "negotiate" a solution. I really don't see AOC negotiating with anyone either...and those voices are getting louder and louder.
Does a semi-separation not seem preferable to all-out war?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13006]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14024
Joined: 11/2/15
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 2:47 PM
|
|
If you want to know what "indoctrination" looks like. Read this thread.
Getting legislation through is SUPPOSED to be difficult.
There are SUPPOSED to be Checks and Balances.
There are SUPPOSED to be Co-Equal Branches of Gov't.
A bunch of gd morons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 2:55 PM
|
|
Remind me again what branch of government these guys belong to?
The system doesn't seem to be working well, Keowee. In fact it looks like, in the words of Senator John Kennedy, like a "cluster-type event." (Or maybe a "real goat rodeo", I like that one too.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13006]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14024
Joined: 11/2/15
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:00 PM
|
|
The system worked on that day, despite what went on outside. Anymore questions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:05 PM
|
|
Uh...yeah. It worked wonderfully. Great, even.
Hey, I bet there's a meme from 2010 that would work here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13006]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14024
Joined: 11/2/15
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:08 PM
|
|
Brandonham pulled you down to his level, I see. Congrats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:16 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:24 PM
|
|
Why would we, it's too much fun arguing with snowflakes like y'all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:31 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:34 PM
|
|
Snow ... flake!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:38 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:41 PM
|
|
LOL, I'm just calling em as I see em.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:47 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:49 PM
|
|
No that would be YOUR problem, I could give two shyts what you or anybody else thinks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Grown men don't care about points here.
Jan 19, 2022, 4:52 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 4:54 PM
|
|
Please don't pretend you have an ounce of toughness in you.
Nobody cares how many points you have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:04 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:08 PM
|
|
I would 100 percent say it to your face. Unless I was standing between you and a box of Krispy Kreme donuts. Then I might be in real danger.
Please do not pretend you are capable of preventing anyone here from speaking their mind to you in person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:12 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:17 PM
|
|
Oh, we're back to the ole "I'm gonna attack everyone here under the sun and then scream and cry foul when someone jabs back."
It's like the little kid who starts stuff and then goes running behind his big brother when someone finally responds.
Carry on, though. I thought for a second there you were going to challenge someone to a fight here, which wouldn't be the first time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:28 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:31 PM
|
|
You called him a psychopath and plenty of other things.
Quick, go delete it and claim you didn't just like you did on the fight post!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:50 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:18 PM
[ in reply to Re: Talk a tough game about what? ] |
|
Wow, it just dawned on me that that you and Cata have been on Tnet for roughly the same time period(20+ years) and he has roughly 10,000 more points than you T3. This must be a HUGE blow to your pride, no?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:22 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:30 PM
|
|
Man, that must hurt when you compare your points to the likes of people like Quoz and me.
Scoreboard, son.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Oh yeah?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:40 PM
|
|
What accolades am I lacking from here that I should have? I'm still trying to win the steak knives. Also hoping they let me hide in the bushes and take pics at the house of the next assistant coach who leaves us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:31 PM
[ in reply to Re: Talk a tough game about what? ] |
|
LOL, that's a lame as helll excuse! If I was a Trumptard, I'd have about as many cause there are way more of you wayward souls on here than normal folk. Anyway, done with you for the day so you have a free shot at the last word, which you always seem to require. BS coming in 3, 2, 1...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:44 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:48 PM
|
|
OK, one more. It was not the "fake independent", it was the "I hope if we do divorce, we kick your ### out of SC." line you gave to quozz. This line is UNAMERICAN!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Talk a tough game about what?
Jan 19, 2022, 5:52 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Dang, what domination!
Jan 19, 2022, 5:26 PM
[ in reply to Re: Talk a tough game about what? ] |
|
T3, that's almost like Clemson's domination over UofSC, wouldn't you agree?
I guess it means people really like what I have to say. Right? RIGHT?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Dang, what domination!
Jan 19, 2022, 5:30 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1763
Joined: 9/6/20
|
Re: Grown men don't care about points here.
Jan 19, 2022, 4:56 PM
[ in reply to Re: Grown men don't care about points here. ] |
|
Well, we'll put this one, like many of your posts, in the category of insecure and unmanly. LOL!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Grown men don't care about points here.
Jan 19, 2022, 4:58 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4005]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8019
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 5:56 PM
[ in reply to Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math. ] |
|
LOL at T3 calling people fake. Do you believe you are a "real" conservative? If you really do consider yourself a "real" and not a "fake" conservative, then why must Liz Cheney be purged from the party?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3509]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 4242
Joined: 12/5/06
|
Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:28 PM
[ in reply to Re: Was looking at state populations, and did some quick math. ] |
|
Maybe the only time I have said this…or will ever say it…you are correct about the way things are SUPPOSED to be. However, if you think the house is in any way representative of the popular will of the people at this point in time, then you are the moron here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93608]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
That sound fishy to me.
Jan 19, 2022, 3:42 PM
|
|
Of course there are many stats missing, such what percentage of population in those state participate in the election?.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7185]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9394
Joined: 12/18/13
|
Now do the % population with zero senators.***
Jan 19, 2022, 3:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13006]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14024
Joined: 11/2/15
|
Re: Now do the % population with zero senators.***
Jan 19, 2022, 5:27 PM
|
|
Everyone that voted for the loser, has no senator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30181]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31794
Joined: 9/13/01
|
Thanks, Connecticut***
Jan 19, 2022, 4:38 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 80
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
