[POLITICS] Republican Rand Paul blocks vote to help 9/11 victims because he is a horrible person

[Baffle]

No surprise here, Rand Paul is a hardass libertarian from what i know, so any kind of welfare and public spending is (un)necessary (d)evil to him, at best.

That's a lot of words to establish that someone is a twat.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

Because the larger point still stands. Between those three cities there are enough millions of votes to outsource and win every election

 

[Silvanus]

Well, it is for some people.

They appear to be moving to NH specifically because its local character already fits what they want, not because they want to vote differently to the locals.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

Just dropping by to say the idea someone should uplift their life, leave behind their friends and family, abandon current employment and/or education in order to move to another state solely for the purpose of casting a vote there is... not worth taking seriously one little bit.

It was an excellent derailment by somebody who seems to hold a grudge against Saelune as well a disingenuous attempt to call them to 'do something or shut up', hoping very much for the shut up choice to be chosen.
Probably because they don't like their posts on something else since they mentioned something about the 007 thread.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I live in a swing state and vote every time so I'm doing my part.

That's a sad and pathetic estimation of the scale of your part.

If you truly believe people aren't "allowed" to be angry about the abuses of this world, then what does your vote even mean? How are you capable of holding people to principles you don't feel people should be permitted to express?

not really. The most important thing you can do in a democracy is vote and in US elections the only states that matter are swing states. A single vote in a swing state matters more to an election than a thousand votes in a solid color state. Everyone knows Alabama is going red, and California is blue. Here in Missouri we went Obama twice, and Trump once. Our electoral points are up for grab and every vote counts

And people should be allowed to be angry. Good great! What are you going to do about it? My sister is huge anti Trump. My sister also didnt vote in 2018 and I'll never let her forget that.
The whole point of a democracy is to vote, to Express yourself that way. If all you do is rant and rave, but never vote when it matter, you might as well have never spoken up for all the good you did trying to stop evil things.

What's the phrase, evil happens when good men do nothing? Well the do nothing part is like voting.

Ah but if everybody left these states to go to swing states, wouldn't their home become the new swing state?

Anyway, reminder that America spends over $600 billion on Military spending when it could probably do the same job with half that.

No, not really. Between New York city, Chicago and LA that's half the population of the US. There are more people in LA than both Dakotas combined. Hell there are probably more people named Dakota in those three cities than the Dakotas combined.
You could take a million people from LA and flip Pennsylvania blue and 1 million each from New York and Chicago and flip Texas blue and that would be it. Democrats would win every national election for generations and California, Illinois and New York would still be liberal bastions voting blue until the end of time.

The red is LA city, the blue is every state with a smaller population. People really underestimate how many hundreds of millions of people live in like 3 cities

See, people *say* that Democrats would win every election forever if we went to a popular vote, but...

It wasn't too long ago that a conservative could win a popular vote. Even without starting a useless war after a terror attack.

It's true!

 

[Kwak]

It was an excellent derailment by somebody who seems to hold a grudge against Saelune as well a disingenuous attempt to call them to 'do something or shut up', hoping very much for the shut up choice to be chosen.

Kind of like "why don't they go back where they came from and fix that country instead of pointing out systemic problems in this one"

 

[Hades]

I don't really understand this. We know that the typical republican is kinda evil but this should be a matter of political self preservation for them. As I understand 9/11 is seen in America as a national tragedy and its victims are greatly honored and dearly missed. So isn't knowingly screwing over the victims of 9/11 akin to political suicide? So why do it?

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

I agree this is bad. You should move to Kentucky and cast a vote to get him out of office

Why do you wish me harm? I prefer to not go to states where abusing LGBT people is fine.

I don't wish you harm, I just want to see you do something productive. I live in a swing state and vote every time so I'm doing my part. Seems like you have a lot of valid complaints, but never any solution other that 'stop defending nazis' which always involved other people doing something.

You want to stop the kids in cages, but won't move to Texas to vote and help flip it blue. You want to stop Rand Paul, but won't move to Kentucky and vote him out. You want rapists to get harsher punishments, but won't research and vote for judges. You want to stop Trump, but won't vote in primaries for candidates that can beat him. You want to save the world, but won't move out of up state New York.

I mean by that logic you should pay all of Saelune's moving bills to get her to Kentucky instead of doing nothing but complaining about her

 

[Saelune]

I don't really understand this. We know that the typical republican is kinda evil but this should be a matter of political self preservation for them. As I understand 9/11 is seen in America as a national tragedy and its victims are greatly honored and dearly missed. So isn't knowingly screwing over the victims of 9/11 akin to political suicide? So why do it?

They literally keep voting against their own interests. That is what REALLY makes Trump support messed up, they aren't even making things better for themselves! It literally is just the bigotry!

They would go into the gas chamber with us if it let them watch us die.

 

[Erttheking]

It was an excellent derailment by somebody who seems to hold a grudge against Saelune as well a disingenuous attempt to call them to 'do something or shut up', hoping very much for the shut up choice to be chosen.

Kind of like "why don't they go back where they came from and fix that country instead of pointing out systemic problems in this one"

Shock of all shocks, people who respond to large concerns with quippy one-note "well just do (insert unfeasible thing here)" retorts are debating in bad faith and just want the other person to shut up.

I don't really understand this. We know that the typical republican is kinda evil but this should be a matter of political self preservation for them. As I understand 9/11 is seen in America as a national tragedy and its victims are greatly honored and dearly missed. So isn't knowingly screwing over the victims of 9/11 akin to political suicide? So why do it?

Because taxes. Simple. Republicans hate taxes above all. "Oh support our soldiers, we love them so much! But do it without raising taxes. What's that, they need expensive medical care? I said I loved soldiers, not losers."

 

[Silvanus]

So isn't knowingly screwing over the victims of 9/11 akin to political suicide? So why do it?

You would think so. Yet Trump's tenure has been characterised by approaches which have been long decried by Republicans and considered antithetical to traditional Republicanism-- appeasement of foreign dictators, undermining freedom of the press, etc.

Traditional Republican values have been shown to be unnecessary to keep the core vote: so long as you're bullish enough, loud enough, assertive enough, the core vote will stay even while you're doing the opposite of what the party used to stand for. I'm not surprised Rand Paul feels safe in abandoning those values (such as supporting the veterans) now.

The fact is, a significant number of Republican voters care more about "sticking it to the other guy". I don't doubt a lot of Democrat voters feel the same, but we're really getting an extreme illustration of the self-serving hypocrisy in the present Republican crop.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

'not too long ago' was 20 years ago. That's an entirely new, more liberal voting generation raised and an most of an entire generations worth of old conservative voters dead. TV shows like Glen Beck didn't get canceled because he was too outrageous, they went away because his average viewer was 70+ and died

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

SNIP

'not too long ago' was 20 years ago. That's an entirely new, more liberal voting generation raised and an most of an entire generations worth of old conservative voters dead. TV shows like Glen Beck didn't get canceled because he was too outrageous, they went away because his average viewer was 70+ and died

And we've got flocks of Shapiros and Crowders and Molyneauxs and Owens's to replace them.

Or at least, that's what they keep telling me.

I've yet to hear a good explanation for why my Montanan vote is worth more than a vote from Dallas or Oakland.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

'not too long ago' was 20 years ago. That's an entirely new, more liberal voting generation raised and an most of an entire generations worth of old conservative voters dead. TV shows like Glen Beck didn't get canceled because he was too outrageous, they went away because his average viewer was 70+ and died

And you've got flocks of Shapiros and Crowders and Molyneauxs and Owens's to replace them.

Or at least, that's what they keep telling me.

I've yet to hear a good explanation for why my Montanan vote is worth more than a vote from Dallas or Oakland.

Because Montana as a population of 1million, and Dallas has a population of 2 million. Your single montana vote is .001% of all montana votes, whereas a single vote in Dallas is .00005% of all Dallas votes.
A single vote in Montana has a higher impact than a single vote from Dallas

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

SNIP

'not too long ago' was 20 years ago. That's an entirely new, more liberal voting generation raised and an most of an entire generations worth of old conservative voters dead. TV shows like Glen Beck didn't get canceled because he was too outrageous, they went away because his average viewer was 70+ and died

And you've got flocks of Shapiros and Crowders and Molyneauxs and Owens's to replace them.

Or at least, that's what they keep telling me.

I've yet to hear a good explanation for why my Montanan vote is worth more than a vote from Dallas or Oakland.

Because Montana as a population of 1million, and Dallas has a population of 2 million. Your single montana vote is .001% of all montana votes, whereas a single vote in Dallas is .00005% of all Dallas votes.
A single vote in Montana has a higher impact than a single vote from Dallas

The problem is the system devaluing people's votes rather than that people need to be forced to move around all over the place in order for their votes to matter. There is no "good reason" why we should continue to use such a bad system in the first place.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

SNIP

'not too long ago' was 20 years ago. That's an entirely new, more liberal voting generation raised and an most of an entire generations worth of old conservative voters dead. TV shows like Glen Beck didn't get canceled because he was too outrageous, they went away because his average viewer was 70+ and died

And you've got flocks of Shapiros and Crowders and Molyneauxs and Owens's to replace them.

Or at least, that's what they keep telling me.

I've yet to hear a good explanation for why my Montanan vote is worth more than a vote from Dallas or Oakland.

Because Montana as a population of 1million, and Dallas has a population of 2 million. Your single montana vote is .001% of all montana votes, whereas a single vote in Dallas is .00005% of all Dallas votes.
A single vote in Montana has a higher impact than a single vote from Dallas

I know the math. I'm challenging why the math exists. I'm not two people, I shouldn't get the equivalent of two votes just because I live in a place that's mostly empty.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

'not too long ago' was 20 years ago. That's an entirely new, more liberal voting generation raised and an most of an entire generations worth of old conservative voters dead. TV shows like Glen Beck didn't get canceled because he was too outrageous, they went away because his average viewer was 70+ and died

And you've got flocks of Shapiros and Crowders and Molyneauxs and Owens's to replace them.

Or at least, that's what they keep telling me.

I've yet to hear a good explanation for why my Montanan vote is worth more than a vote from Dallas or Oakland.

Because Montana as a population of 1million, and Dallas has a population of 2 million. Your single montana vote is .001% of all montana votes, whereas a single vote in Dallas is .00005% of all Dallas votes.
A single vote in Montana has a higher impact than a single vote from Dallas

I know the math. I'm challenging why the math exists. I'm not two people, I shouldn't get the equivalent of two votes just because I live in a place that's mostly empty.

Thats just the way it is. If we did direct elections, you'd have 1 vote sure, but no one would care about Montana. Why would a politician ever go there when there are twice as many votes in Dallas alone? A politician could just carry New York, LA, Dallas, Chicago, Boston and maybe Atlantic City and they'd win the election. Everywhere else would just be the outskirts of the closest major city.

 

[Nedoras]

SNIP

'not too long ago' was 20 years ago. That's an entirely new, more liberal voting generation raised and an most of an entire generations worth of old conservative voters dead. TV shows like Glen Beck didn't get canceled because he was too outrageous, they went away because his average viewer was 70+ and died

And you've got flocks of Shapiros and Crowders and Molyneauxs and Owens's to replace them.

Or at least, that's what they keep telling me.

I've yet to hear a good explanation for why my Montanan vote is worth more than a vote from Dallas or Oakland.

Because Montana as a population of 1million, and Dallas has a population of 2 million. Your single montana vote is .001% of all montana votes, whereas a single vote in Dallas is .00005% of all Dallas votes.
A single vote in Montana has a higher impact than a single vote from Dallas

I know the math. I'm challenging why the math exists. I'm not two people, I shouldn't get the equivalent of two votes just because I live in a place that's mostly empty.

Thats just the way it is. If we did direct elections, you'd have 1 vote sure, but no one would care about Montana. Why would a politician ever go there when there are twice as many votes in Dallas alone? A politician could just carry New York, LA, Dallas, Chicago, Boston and maybe Atlantic City and they'd win the election. Everywhere else would just be the outskirts of the closest major city.

The cities alone don't carry the electoral college. Also that picture you posted earlier is literally from a TPUSA meme, something I wouldn't go throwing around to prove a point. You also stated that three cities have half the population of the US...which...well...no.

Direct elections would just be better. I never understand the arguments against it. Why the fuck do we NEED the electoral college? The most common argument I hear is "I don't want someone from California deciding what's best for someone in North Dakota" or something to that effect. But HOW is that the fucking case? It's for the Presidency, not for a state senator or local judge. It's for the position of President of the United States of America, not for "President who individually runs all of your local politics in your town or state". A President and their administration can shape which direction the country goes in, sure. But that can also be shit on by the courts and the states. You're voting for the face of your country, not for your local mayor or rep. Someone from California can't determine the state politics of Texas. That's not a fucking thing. And in the case of the face of a nation, someone who is supposed to represent the will of the majority of people across all states....wouldn't a popular vote make sense? I'd say so. Why should a minority of people decide something like that?

As for the "why would anyone go to Montana" thing....no one does with the college either. A lot of candidates ignore everything but the "key" states.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

SNIP

'not too long ago' was 20 years ago. That's an entirely new, more liberal voting generation raised and an most of an entire generations worth of old conservative voters dead. TV shows like Glen Beck didn't get canceled because he was too outrageous, they went away because his average viewer was 70+ and died

And you've got flocks of Shapiros and Crowders and Molyneauxs and Owens's to replace them.

Or at least, that's what they keep telling me.

I've yet to hear a good explanation for why my Montanan vote is worth more than a vote from Dallas or Oakland.

Because Montana as a population of 1million, and Dallas has a population of 2 million. Your single montana vote is .001% of all montana votes, whereas a single vote in Dallas is .00005% of all Dallas votes.
A single vote in Montana has a higher impact than a single vote from Dallas

I know the math. I'm challenging why the math exists. I'm not two people, I shouldn't get the equivalent of two votes just because I live in a place that's mostly empty.

Thats just the way it is. If we did direct elections, you'd have 1 vote sure, but no one would care about Montana. Why would a politician ever go there when there are twice as many votes in Dallas alone? A politician could just carry New York, LA, Dallas, Chicago, Boston and maybe Atlantic City and they'd win the election. Everywhere else would just be the outskirts of the closest major city.

Plot twist, nobody gives a shit about Montana *now*. Instead of fighting over *places half the country lives*, they fight over...Ohio and Iowa.

Meanwhile, literal tens of millions of voters in places like California and Texas just don't matter. At all, for any reason.

 

[Saelune]

SNIP

'not too long ago' was 20 years ago. That's an entirely new, more liberal voting generation raised and an most of an entire generations worth of old conservative voters dead. TV shows like Glen Beck didn't get canceled because he was too outrageous, they went away because his average viewer was 70+ and died

And you've got flocks of Shapiros and Crowders and Molyneauxs and Owens's to replace them.

Or at least, that's what they keep telling me.

I've yet to hear a good explanation for why my Montanan vote is worth more than a vote from Dallas or Oakland.

Because Montana as a population of 1million, and Dallas has a population of 2 million. Your single montana vote is .001% of all montana votes, whereas a single vote in Dallas is .00005% of all Dallas votes.
A single vote in Montana has a higher impact than a single vote from Dallas

I know the math. I'm challenging why the math exists. I'm not two people, I shouldn't get the equivalent of two votes just because I live in a place that's mostly empty.

Thats just the way it is. If we did direct elections, you'd have 1 vote sure, but no one would care about Montana. Why would a politician ever go there when there are twice as many votes in Dallas alone? A politician could just carry New York, LA, Dallas, Chicago, Boston and maybe Atlantic City and they'd win the election. Everywhere else would just be the outskirts of the closest major city.

Why does anyone need to go anywhere? TV and the internet and phones exist. Campaigning is just another barrier that favors the rich.

How is the President caring about people in one state reliant on not caring about another? This is why we have mayors and governors and congresspeople and senators. The President is supposed to care about the whole country, not that Trump gets that. The Electoral College makes politicians not care about everyone, Democracy would change that. New York Republicans and Texan Democrats would get their voices heard.

I never relied on them showing up to my door to support a candidate. Not being a huge bigot did however.