https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/10/06/senators-representing-less-than-half-us-are-about-confirm-nominee-opposed-by-most-americans/?utm_term=.420ce2124646

More leftist lies and distortion , what Schumer said today as well

Sorry leftists your BS graphs mean nothing, each state gets 2 votes that's it no matter how big . The founders set it all up, not you not me

Read the Constitution and quit trying to lie and destroy it

Enough for me now here , time to fade away until another national disgrace from the hypocritical intolerant lying left threatens America and patriots must speak out against them

Extreme Liberals, socialists just can't help themselves!!! If they'd just shut up, they might have a chance in the mid-term elections. We as Americans have the attention span of a knat. They normally count on how we all forget about their lies a corruption.

Now, their febile attempts to out think President Trump's are going to play right into his trap!!

Expect record Conservative Turnout in November. I hope they keep protesting and attacking. Make every Democratic Senator / Congressman support or denounce their own extremism!!!!!

Cry, little commie snowflake libtards, CRY!

Dixie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry leftists your BS graphs mean nothing, each
> state gets 2 votes that's it no matter how big .
> The founders set it all up, not you not me

Yes, we all know how it works. It's only some of us though who know WHY it works that way. And the reasons are from 200+ years ago and make no sense in an era without the issue of slavery to contend with.

Modern English... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes, we all know how it works. It's only some of
> us though who know WHY it works that way. And the
> reasons are from 200+ years ago and make no sense
> in an era without the issue of slavery to contend
> with. As a liberal, I hate every thing that doesn't advance my agenda.
> I will lie, cheat, steal and destroy all that is good and righteous to gain
> power for my side. I hate America and love power. Fuck you America!


FIFY

Direct Democracy Means "Your Stupid Vote is as Important as My Intelligent Vote."

That's why we have a representative form of government and a Constitution.

Try something a little stronger than Hillary in 2020. It's one thing to not respect Trump, it's another thing to not respect the voters.

Direct democracy is a terrible sort of system. Perhaps the worst one of all. But that has nothing to do with the fact that elections are intended to be won by those who receive the most votes.

How stupid can you be? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Direct democracy is a terrible sort of system.
> Perhaps the worst one of all. But that has
> nothing to do with the fact that elections are
> intended to be won by those who receive the most
> votes.


Who intended that?

Electoral college. Electoral college.

You're a loser. You voted against America and for Hillary.
Attachments:

The so-called Electoral College is a long out-dated anachronism that has no place or justification in the modern world. This is why efforts such as National Popular Vote exist...

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/

"I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play."

-- Donald J. Trump during a brief moment of clarity after the 2016 election

How stupid can you be? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The so-called Electoral College is a long
> out-dated anachronism that has no place or
> justification in the modern world. This is why
> efforts such as National Popular Vote exist...
>
> https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/
>
> "I would rather see it, where you went with simple
> votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and
> somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win.
> There’s a reason for doing this. Because it
> brings all the states into play."
>
> -- Donald J. Trump during a brief moment of
> clarity after the 2016 election


But I bet you sound strong on paper too. Obviously you're not.

Strong enough to tear you into tiny little pieces and feed those to the pigeons in the park.

Lib Tears Nourish Me Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cry, little commie snowflake libtards, CRY!
Attachments:

In another 20 years 2/3 of the population will only have 30 Senators meaning 1/3 will have 70 Senators. I dont think that is what the founders intended. GOP has won the popular vote in just 1 out of the last 5 Presidential elections yet have have won the presidency 3 times vs Dems 2.

If popular vote decided elections we would have a 7-2 liberal SCOTUS. I doubt the framers intended that dumb-fuck farmers were to be the ruling class. Time to Add Senators for Big Cities - any city over a million people gets 1 Senator per million. NYC would have 8 senators plus the 2 already for a total of 10. States with less than a million lose a Senator and go to 1 single Senate seat.

The Republicans would never again hold a majority. Not ever.

Modern English... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dixie Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sorry leftists your BS graphs mean nothing,
> each
> > state gets 2 votes that's it no matter how big
> .
> > The founders set it all up, not you not me
>
> Yes, we all know how it works. It's only some of
> us though who know WHY it works that way. And the
> reasons are from 200+ years ago and make no sense
> in an era without the issue of slavery to contend
> with.

And yet Democrats still keep their dullards on their plantation. You're certainly no exception to that basic fact.

>ny city over a million people gets 1 Senator per million. NYC would have 8 senators

Its come time commie, no need to destroy what the founders set up to accommodate your evil scheme for commies to gain control of the United States.

The founders put in place a fair system of 2 senators for each state no matter the size to balance the powers of congress and give small states the same voice as the largest. A system that has worked equally for the people of the USA since Rhode Island became the 13th state to ratify the US Constitution on May 29, 1790

Time for you to finally defect to North Korea, tell your great leader Kim your plans, talk fast to keep him from sending you to the salt mines as the odds are 100-1 that's where he'll send you, if America is lucky the Wa Po will move with you with the same odds you'll face, their only advantage over you is that toilet paper may be in short supply

^^^ It only took nine states to ratify the Constitution, you hapless right-wing dumbfuck.

On May 29th 1790 when Rhode Island became the 13th of the 13 original states to do so, Ops statement is correct leftist sewer rat after you were flushed on your own self described turd swim

Changes to Senate representation and the Electoral College would require changing the Constitution. 3/4 of states would need to ratify it as well as 2/3 of the Senate and House. In addition, Article 5 specifically says that no state can be deprived of equal representation in the US Senate, regardless of what amendments are passed. Will NEVER happen.

That’s stupid-wrong. States are free to pledge their electors to the winner of the national popular vote.

Toilet swimmer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ^^^ It only took nine states to ratify the
> Constitution, you hapless right-wing dumbfuck.


Where did he say it required anything more?

12:41

Recapper... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 12:41


Wrong. You seem to have a reading comprehension problem.

No, dude. Mention of 13 was made by an ignorant dumbfuck. I assume it was you.

Recapper... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, dude. Mention of 13 was made by an ignorant
> dumbfuck. I assume it was you.


He used an event in history to indicate a point in time. The significance of it being the 9th or 13th was never mentioned and certainly not inferred. You fucked up. I made fun of you for it. End of story. Best thing for you is to just live with it. Finally, like you, you're assumption is just plain wrong.

The real problem is that to the brainwashed sjw - politics is their new religion. There are direct parallels between the academic-media-corporation social justice complex and the old Catholic church and Inquisition.
Attachments:

Official FFU FIFY'er Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Modern English... Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Yes, we all know how it works. It's only
> some of
> > us though who know WHY it works that way. And
> the
> > reasons are from 200+ years ago and make no
> sense
> > in an era without the issue of slavery to
> contend
> > with. As a liberal, I hate every thing that
> doesn't advance my agenda.
> > I will lie, cheat, steal and destroy all that is
> good and righteous to gain
> > power for my side. I hate America and love
> power. Fuck you America!
>
>
> FIFY

Modern English... Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
...when all we have to do is wait until the next election; like every other losing party has done from the beginning of this great nation. That’s how it works legally, but we’re different and think we have to act like two-year olds.

When the United States were created, six senators (of 26) represented 60 percent of the voting population.

wrong answer, dope Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He used an event in history to indicate a point in
> time. The significance of it being the 9th or 13th
> was never mentioned and certainly not inferred. You
> fucked up. I made fun of you for it. End of story.
> Best thing for you is to just live with it. Finally,
> like you, you're assumption is just plain wrong.

I see that you've been beaten up so badly in the past that even legitimate criticism today sends you into paroxysms of insecurity. Those are the wages of stupid. And not recalling from high school history that nine states were needed for ratification is indeed an example of the classically stupid.

lcjxd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The real problem is that to the brainwashed sjw -
> politics is their new religion. There are direct
> parallels between the academic-media-corporation
> social justice complex and the old Catholic church
> and Inquisition.

There are stronger parallels between Trumptards and the brain-damaged of many prior eras. You all today are fortunate that we don't institutionalize defectives any more.

>When the United States were created, six senators (of 26) represented 60 percent of the voting population.

In facts or the history of why the founders set it up so perfectly

The left is only left lying scheming whining in their failed attempts to destroy it all

"Democracy In Darkness" that kind of rhetoric horseshit, there's no shining light upon what they want, darkness indeed with all their policies

A one way don't you dare speak out PC world with all their fake love for increasing swarms of illegals with full on police state gun bans so their pampered criminals can cut your throats at will, a third world welfare state is their goal that the Democrat masters can rule without "obstruction or resistance" as the majority of the people need that welfare check, free shit and weed

The remaining few that have jobs taxed to poverty doll rags, the economy in the drain, businesses with their jobs forced out extinct by over bearing federal regulations, the military weak stripped of needed funds for troops ships and planes.

A leftist weak PC President elected by unsustainable offers of more free shit carrying a twig attempting to deal with a harsh America hating world even if the left is in full power here, the enemy sharp ready to destroy the entire nation to take what they need or want

That's The True Democracy in Darkness the left wants in America

 
Attachments:

^^^ Another ignorant fucking asshole babbling out from the hollowed out core of what was once biologically a brain. Today, far too fucking stupid to be called that anymore.

Another leftist here from Wa Po comments, with visions of grandeur of them saving the world

Of statues of them in the future, of children looking skyward smiling with love when their name is heard

Another mental leftist lunatic with the only real thing the left has to offer with their posts every time

Mindless vulgar hate of the American people who disagree and wont go along with their glorious ideals

The good news is the great majority of Americans are not leftists, they may be Democrats The GOP independents any thing or not political . They may well disagree with Trump or hate what he says as they have been PC groomed too long to dare speak out, but their Americans, not leftists and they can discuss issues without the hate we always see from the left here and on Wa Po where this hatefull leftist freak preaches to their commie America hating crowd

>Of statues of them in the future, of children looking skyward smiling with love when their name is heard

The name is "Vienna Guy" lol

Modern English... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wrong answer, dope Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > He used an event in history to indicate a point
> in
> > time. The significance of it being the 9th or
> 13th
> > was never mentioned and certainly not inferred.
> You
> > fucked up. I made fun of you for it. End of
> story.
> > Best thing for you is to just live with it.
> Finally,
> > like you, you're assumption is just plain
> wrong.
>
> I see that you've been beaten up so badly in the
> past that even legitimate criticism today sends
> you into paroxysms of insecurity. Those are the
> wages of stupid. And not recalling from high
> school history that nine states were needed for
> ratification is indeed an example of the
> classically stupid.


Nobody ever claimed more than 9 states were needed. Too bad you're too stupid to realize that.

You did, numbnuts.

Nope. The wrong is strong with you. Further, you can't even point to the sentence the other individual wrote that supports your erroneous contention.

Done and done, asshole. Try repeating 10th grade.

The only ting that's done is you. And 10th grade is far above your reading comprehension level. I'm guessing you read at around BR100L.

You won't provide the sentence because you know I'm right. That makes you a coward.

Fuck off, bumbling stupid asshole. You dropped the ball. You got called on it. That’s just how things go sometimes when you’re a dimbulb dumbfuck.

LOL! You get called out for your fuck up and this is the pathetic shit you resort to. I suppose it's to be expected from a dope like you.

Once again, you can't point to the sentence that supports your contention. Why is that? Coward.

You’re a mindless dipshit who fucked up the history. So it goes for those in the dumbass range. Learn to live with your handicaps, serious as they might be.

I didn't fuck up anything. I merely pointed out your lack of reading comprehension capabilities.

Once again, you fail to point to the exact sentence(s) that support(s) your assertion that the above poster claimed it took more than 9 states to ratify the Constitution. If you had a leg to stand on, you could complete that very simple task. The fact that you won't is tantamount to you admitting you know your wrong. Now, your just clinging to your foolish pride instead of walking away with you tail between your legs. Walking away is about the smartest move you have left, but I bet you're too stupid to go down that road.

You fucked up. Stupid mistake. That’s all there was to it.

Pointing out your lack of reading comprehension skills is not a fuck up. It's simply pointing out the obvious. You did prove me right by showing everyone you're too stupid to walk away. Looks like I'm two for two in shaming your dumb ass.

Any particular reason you can't or won't point to the exact sentence(s) that support(s) your assertion that the above poster claimed it took more than 9 states to ratify the Constitution? Too stupid? Too much of a pussy?

If you know neither the history nor the difference between 9 and 13, there is little that I or anyone else is going to be able to do for you. The gaffe above is merely another example of the sort of hapless, boorish inadequacy so often displayed by maladroit amateur historians and laggard mathematics flunkies.

The history and significance of the difference between 9 and 13 is not at issue. Nor, has it ever been. The above poster simply picked a point in time and then used an event to delineate that. That you can't see that is further proof of your ineptitude.

Any particular reason you can't or won't point to the exact sentence(s) that support(s) your assertion that the above poster claimed it took more than 9 states to ratify the Constitution? Too stupid? Too much of a pussy?

wrong answer, dope Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The history and significance of the difference
> between 9 and 13 is not at issue. Nor, has it
> ever been.

It is at the very core of the troll-fuck bobblage you committed, asshole. What a fucking waste you are!

> The above poster simply picked a point in time and
> then used an event to delineate that.

The above poster was YOU, you ridiculous cretin. And the post in which you so horribly embarrassed yourself has already been specifically identified. Was the number of sentences you included in it somehow too many for you now to follow along with? What a parochial fucking dimwit!

Modern English... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wrong answer, dope Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The history and significance of the difference
> > between 9 and 13 is not at issue. Nor, has it
> > ever been.
>
> It is at the very core of the troll-fuck bobblage
> you committed, asshole. What a fucking waste you
> are!
>
> > The above poster simply picked a point in time
> and
> > then used an event to delineate that.
>
> The above poster was YOU, you ridiculous cretin.
> And the post in which you so horribly embarrassed
> yourself has already been specifically identified.
> Was the number of sentences you included in it
> somehow too many for you now to follow along with?
> What a parochial fucking dimwit!


Pick the sentence from that post. It's not that hard unless you know you're wrong. And, once again, not me. You failed twice in one post. Congrats.

Oh and by the way, don't make the mistake of thinking that I am really that 'Modern English' guy. I'm obviously not, but a stupid fool like you might well stumble into yet another such calamitous error.

You've lost it, dope. You stepped in dog shit. The smart person wipes it off. You decided to go for a roll in it and now you're covered in it.

You still can't or won't point to the exact sentence(s) that support(s) your assertion that the above poster claimed it took more than 9 states to ratify the Constitution? Too stupid? Too much of a pussy? I'm betting both.

Clue: 13 is different from 9. The latter for instance would have made sense in context. Not so for the former. 13 in fact was just plain a clumsy-ass fuck-up by you. Stupid is as stupid does.

Modern English... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Clue: 13 is different from 9.

Most would say 13 is greater than 9, but I bet math comes difficultly for you as well.

> The latter for
> instance would have made sense in context. Not so
> for the former.

Either makes sense depending on which point in history the author desired to use. Unless you know exactly what he was thinking, which you clearly don’t, there is no valid reason to assume that he confused 13 and 9. Which is why, as I correctly pointed out, it was never stated nor implied that it took anything more than 9 states to ratify the Constitution. It was a hastily, yet unsubstantiated, clumsy hit job on you that I called out as being stupid.

> 13 in fact was just plain a
> clumsy-ass fuck-up by you. Stupid is as stupid
> does.

Again, not me, but being wrong appears to be your thing.

wrong answer, dope Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most would say 13 is greater than 9, but I bet math comes
> difficultly for you as well.

Not so "difficultly" (LOL) actually. Higher math than you have ever dealt with was a part of my PhD studies.

> Either makes sense depending on which point in
> history the author desired to use.

We know the point you MEANT to refer to, but you fucked it up.

> Unless you know exactly what he was thinking, which
> you clearly don’t, there is no valid reason to assume
> that he confused 13 and 9.

Pathetic. Here again is the original fuck-up...
-----------
"The founders put in place a fair system of 2 senators for each state no matter the size to balance the powers of congress and give small states the same voice as the largest. A system that has worked equally for the people of the USA since Rhode Island became the 13th state to ratify the US Constitution on May 29, 1790"
-----------
It should have read "...since New Hampshire became the 9th state to ratify the US Constitution on June 21, 1788."

By late May of 1790, George Washington had been elected and inaugurated, and was well into his service as our first President under the terms of our new Constitution. All this is of course little more than grade school civics. It's hard to imagine how any more than ONE person could have screwed things up so badly.

> Which is why, as I correctly pointed out, it was never stated
> nor implied that it took anything more than 9 states to ratify
> the Constitution. It was a hastily, yet unsubstantiated, clumsy
> hit job on you that I called out as being stupid.

That's one of the worst cover stories I've ever heard. You make Bart O'Kavanaugh look good. The number of your serious FFU fuck-ups was just increased by one. Like that for Trump lies, I suspect that she tally of your fuck-ups here will not remain where it is for long.

> Again, not me, but being wrong appears to be your thing.

No, my thing is much more putting the boot up the ass of lying assfuck morons, of which you most definitely are one.

Read my lips: June 21, 1788.