Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Redistricting is quite common, unfortunately.

a hypocrite who talks soley in bs rhetoric

To be fair, this seems to be the MO of nearly all politicians across the political spectrum.

Actually Jon Huntsman isn't that bad... but Obama is still the best choice we've got to date. I don't agree with EVERYTHING he does, but it makes more sense than 'make obama fail, make obama fail, make obama fail."


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And the country fails with him. So then we can blame it on him!

GOP politics at its finest.

Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:And the country fails with him. So then we can blame it on him!

If there's one thing I've learned in the last three years or so, we can't blame anything on Obama.

It's always someone else's fault.

I'm sure the Queen will be happy to welcome you all back into the fold if you can't sort out how to elect your own leaders...

SilverMK2 wrote:I'm sure the Queen will be happy to welcome you all back into the fold if you can't sort out how to elect your own leaders...

I'm down with that. Do we still get to kill everyone in Penn?

I wish the God-Emperor would hurry up and reveal his true nature already.

Easiest election campaign ever.

What about france? Can we go to war with the french?

Also, we can blame Obama for some things, but really- he don't make the laws, its congress. If the GOP won't be reasonable, they're screwing us all.

Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:What about france? Can we see how fast the French surrender?

Fixed for you.

Going to war with France is pretty much a national pass time for us. It is about time to kick off another round and with the collapse of all money everywhere (except China) I'm sure that we will be able to get back to business soon

Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:Also, we can blame Obama for some things, but really- he don't make the laws, its congress. If the GOP won't be reasonable, they're screwing us all.

What about the year+ when he had a fillibuster-proof Senate and a majority in the House? Does that matter?

Goddard wrote:I wish the God-Emperor would hurry up and reveal his true nature already.

Easiest election campaign ever.

Whatever, I'd vote for Horus.

"Death to the False Emperor 2012!"

Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:What about france? Can we go to war with the french?

Also, we can blame Obama for some things, but really- he don't make the laws, its congress. If the GOP won't be reasonable, they're screwing us all.

I do remember him pushing a health care bill that no one wanted down everyone's throats, though.....

Slarg232 wrote:

Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:What about france? Can we go to war with the french?
Also, we can blame Obama for some things, but really- he don't make the laws, its congress. If the GOP won't be reasonable, they're screwing us all.

I do remember him pushing a health care bill that no one wanted down everyone's throats, though.....

The people who need health care wanted it.

Chowderhead wrote:

Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:What about france? Can we see how fast the French surrender?

Fixed for you.

Thank you sir.

biccat wrote:

Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:Also, we can blame Obama for some things, but really- he don't make the laws, its congress. If the GOP won't be reasonable, they're screwing us all.

What about the year+ when he had a fillibuster-proof Senate and a majority in the House? FIXING BUSH'S MESS? Does that matter?

I think it's time to admit that there is currently some combination of serious issues that government is perhaps not quite able to fix at all, and Obama being a gakky president.

I like the guy. Voted for him. Probably will again. But I'm not going to go to the mat for the guy.

biccat wrote:

Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:And the country fails with him. So then we can blame it on him!

If there's one thing I've learned in the last three years or so, we can't blame anything on Obama.

It's always someone else's fault.

Funny, republicans said the same thing about Bush.

I say we vote for that LordofHats guy. He'd totally get the country in tip top shape by expanding the hat market with a law requiring all US citizens to wear hats.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:Funny, republicans said the same thing about Bush.

Does that make it less true? Not saying it is true of course. Just saying that this is not indicative of anything but that republicans apparently said the same thing about Bush.

But then this is politics. No one can use logic even when being a hat (I can say its our word) and knit picking other users posts about logical errors

Depends. Some actions really are Bush's fault (engaging in wars for example). That said, I agreed with many Bush's actions to an extend when they were first made, but in retrospect I wish I hadn't....

Melissia wrote:Some actions really are Bush's fault (engaging in wars for example).

The funny thing about the president is that he and his groupies usually take the most flak when things go bad, but that everyone else usually gets off scot free in the long term. Bush pushed for the wars yeah, but Congress approved it and never took anywhere near as much criticism as the big G did. Not to absolve Bushy of all responsibility, but government is a collaboration. It's rarely just one guys fault.

I know. It as also congress' fault. But as I said, I don't really hold it against him because, well, at the time most people including myself agreed with him.

Hindsight sucks don't it If only we had some way to see things before they happened...

LordofHats wrote:Hindsight sucks don't it If only we had some way to see things before they happened...

Chowderhead wrote:

LordofHats wrote:Hindsight sucks don't it If only we had some way to see things before they happened...

Captain Hindsight? Of course! In hindsight, its all so obvious

Article wrote:
Under the Republican plan—which has been endorsed by top GOPers in both houses of the state Legislature, as well as the governor, Tom Corbett—Pennsylvania would change from this system to one where each congressional district gets its own electoral vote.

But that's a good thing, because now we're bringing back the republic side of our Democratic republic.

So how is this bad?

It's been proposed before, and the Republicans reacted with outrage.

Now they propose it, conveniently ignoring the earlier reactions, because it will let them screw over Obama.

Kanluwen wrote:It's been proposed before, and the Republicans reacted with outrage.

Now they propose it, conveniently ignoring the earlier reactions, because it will let them screw over Obama.

Funny how things come and go around eh

This a bad idea how? BTW? I don't care who does it. I just want it done

I'm confused, why was gerrymandering mentioned? Gerrymandering is creating a congressional district in your favor (if you're a congressman) so that you have a better chance of staying in office.

This proposition is just saying "Let the electoral votes be appointed to each district instead of winner takes all."

DickBandit wrote:I'm confused, why was gerrymandering mentioned? Gerrymandering is creating a congressional district in your favor (if you're a congressman) so that you have a better chance of staying in office.

This proposition is just saying "Let the electoral votes be appointed to each district instead of winner takes all."

This method would make gerrmandering more effective in determining the course of presidential elections.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but congressional districts only change if there is a population shift.

DickBandit wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but congressional districts only change if there is a population shift.

Each congressional district is representative of the electoral districts. The lines of these electoral districts get redrawn every now and then by state and shaping them to a particular political party or candidates advantage is what gerrymandering is.