General Discussion

Demsrule86

(68,556 posts)

35. clearly the intent was two Senator from every state to give the smaller states some say...so

Sun Apr 9, 2017, 02:59 PM

Apr 2017

suffrage means that. It was the only way to get the constitution approved...and when the smaller states complained about an amendment process which might change this down the road...they made this not subject to amendment. We began with two in the time of the signing so clearly that is what they meant...and they said it was ot amendable so it can not be amended.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

70 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What MIGHT Have Dems Done To Stop GOP On The Fillibuster? (title change) [View all] eniwetok Apr 2017 OP

None FBaggins Apr 2017 #1

All my ideas end up with me being carried away in hand cuffs. LOL Lib Apr 2017 #2

I want the 60 vote filibuster vlyons Apr 2017 #3

Be sure and leave some roses on my grave when that happens . . . hatrack Apr 2017 #5

It can't happen.... the GOP has become too rabid eniwetok Apr 2017 #7

the filibuster is a dual edged sword... eniwetok Apr 2017 #9

How do you propose to get to that result? onenote Apr 2017 #10

two ways to reform an antidemocratic, virtually reformproof system eniwetok Apr 2017 #12

Logically, seeing as the Dems have no leverage HoneyBadger Apr 2017 #4

Reid put it in motion with his 2013 nuke HoneyBadger Apr 2017 #6

This message was self-deleted by its author eniwetok Apr 2017 #8

How did Schumer win anything? eniwetok Apr 2017 #13

Logically HoneyBadger Apr 2017 #14

So you said in your first post... eniwetok Apr 2017 #15

There was never a way to stop Gorsuch... Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #17

So the question becomes why does Schumer want the nuke? HoneyBadger Apr 2017 #19

The base demanded it first of all Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #22

Base wanting the nuke is a valid reason for Schumer to support it HoneyBadger Apr 2017 #24

It was about the base and the mid-terms in my opinion. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #25

The GOP plays dirty because control of the courts IS key to their strategy eniwetok Apr 2017 #33

I don' t see your can reform SCOTUS Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #34

Reform? That NO Judge be ratified by Senators representing a minority of US population eniwetok Apr 2017 #38

It just is never going to happen. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #42

it's never going to happen when... eniwetok Apr 2017 #43

The Republicans would love to see CA seceed former9thward Apr 2017 #44

That's what I'm thinking as well n/t SickOfTheOnePct Apr 2017 #46

sure there would... the NATION would not stand for it eniwetok Apr 2017 #50

I think you have an odd definition of "the NATION". former9thward Apr 2017 #66

people are attached to their state and nation eniwetok Apr 2017 #68

If we take back both the House and Senate, we can do a lot more than "refuse"... regnaD kciN Apr 2017 #52

After your post I started MichMary Apr 2017 #67

1 n/t. okieinpain Apr 2017 #61

What plan could work? None is the answer. You all forget Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #18

Walk out of the Senate in protest? mvd Apr 2017 #11

They can't do that...that would be unconstitutional. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #16

depends what suffrage means... eniwetok Apr 2017 #20

This mean two for every state it was fought over and is very clear...never happen. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #21

You're EVADING the question eniwetok Apr 2017 #23

As written there are two Senators for each state...equal suffrage. Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #26

RED HERRING ALERT!! eniwetok Apr 2017 #28

I ask AGAIN... what is suffrage? eniwetok Apr 2017 #31

clearly the intent was two Senator from every state to give the smaller states some say...so Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #35

EVASION ALERT!!! And please spare us the civics lessons eniwetok Apr 2017 #37

No, the Senate can't change the rules SickOfTheOnePct Apr 2017 #40

let them sue eniwetok Apr 2017 #41

what's the REAL intent of the Senate? Why do you believe those civics lessons? eniwetok Apr 2017 #39

You could make states virtual instead of physical HoneyBadger Apr 2017 #27

there's no way to make the EC fair since it has antidemocratic intent eniwetok Apr 2017 #51

None. McCamy Taylor Apr 2017 #29

The Senate may flip...and we can just change it when we get it back...it is done...and consider Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #36

None oberliner Apr 2017 #30

sure at THIS point eniwetok Apr 2017 #32

First of all the House has to start all money bills, the Senate has advise and consent duty. CK_John Apr 2017 #45

translation: you've bought into antidemocratic government eniwetok Apr 2017 #47

I'd be interested in seeing where SickOfTheOnePct Apr 2017 #48

do the math... eniwetok Apr 2017 #49

If you look at the estimated population numbers from 2016 SickOfTheOnePct Apr 2017 #53

as I said... I split the populations of the split states.... eniwetok Apr 2017 #57

This message was self-deleted by its author Calista241 Apr 2017 #59

Force them to get up and start talking Warpy Apr 2017 #54

The Only Thing Left to Do Leith Apr 2017 #55

No... the REAL message must be that the GOP represents THE MINORITY eniwetok Apr 2017 #58

Nothing. They're not interested in anything that doesn't capitulate to them right now. JHB Apr 2017 #56

it's not hot air if the threat is existential eniwetok Apr 2017 #60

All I can say is that you don't understand the mindset of what we are up against. JHB Apr 2017 #64

the issue here is NOT the GOP base... BUT THE DEMOCRATIC BASE eniwetok Apr 2017 #65

"Sure there are problems..." talk about an understatement! This would be a coup, not a "rule change" tritsofme Apr 2017 #69

the Constitution was a coup! eniwetok Apr 2017 #70

Government, including the Senate, is inherently unfair and non-representative. Calista241 Apr 2017 #62

can't have it both ways... eniwetok Apr 2017 #63