Should Rural Votes be Weighted Against Urban Votes?

[San Lumen]

So how is your representative any different?

By being a different party from the chair he must seek representation from, and from a supermajority.

You have no idea how the legislature works. If your representative wanted to speak on the floor or in committee they have equal right as someone from Los Angeles.

[Telconi]

By being a different party from the chair he must seek representation from, and from a supermajority.

You have no idea how the legislature works. If your representative wanted to speak on the floor or in committee they have equal right as someone from Los Angeles.

You yourself said they must seek recognition from the chair...

[Freezic Vast]

By being a different party from the chair he must seek representation from, and from a supermajority.

You have no idea how the legislature works. If your representative wanted to speak on the floor or in committee they have equal right as someone from Los Angeles.

Stop acting like you know more just because "you worked in state legislature" no one gives a flying fuck if you did or not.

[Proctopeo]

You have no idea how the legislature works. If your representative wanted to speak on the floor or in committee they have equal right as someone from Los Angeles.

Stop acting like you know more just because "you worked in state legislature" no one gives a flying fuck if you did or not.

I read a news article about model UN
I should become emperor of mankind

[San Lumen]

You have no idea how the legislature works. If your representative wanted to speak on the floor or in committee they have equal right as someone from Los Angeles.

You yourself said they must seek recognition from the chair...

And if they wish to speak they would be allowed too. It is a deliberative chamber after all.

[Telconi]

You yourself said they must seek recognition from the chair...

And if they wish to speak they would be allowed too. It is a deliberative chamber after all.

>Should be

And if they aren't? Or if the majority completely ignores him?

[Freezic Vast]

You yourself said they must seek recognition from the chair...

And if they wish to speak they would be allowed too. It is a deliberative chamber after all.

And yet the can't, the chair refuses to give them recognition. Doesn't sound all that fair or equal to me.

[San Lumen]

And if they wish to speak they would be allowed too. It is a deliberative chamber after all.

>Should be

And if they aren't? Or if the majority completely ignores him?

You only think they are ignored. If your legislator got up to speak on a bill they would have equal right as anyone else. I dont know where you get this fantasy from.

[Proctopeo]

And therefore 10 percent of the population should have more say than 90 percent?

Only in one house. As I said, there would still be a house based on population where the 90% can ignore the rest entirely, instead of having to cooperate with them.

ahem

[Telconi]

>Should be

And if they aren't? Or if the majority completely ignores him?

You only think they are ignored. If your legislator got up to speak on a bill they would have equal right as anyone else. I dont know where you get this fantasy from.

>Fantasy

Personal experience.

[San Lumen]

You only think they are ignored. If your legislator got up to speak on a bill they would have equal right as anyone else. I dont know where you get this fantasy from.

>Fantasy

Personal experience.

You personally witnessed your legislator wanting to speak on the floor and not being allowed too?

[Telconi]

>Fantasy

Personal experience.

You personally witnessed your legislator wanting to speak on the floor and not being allowed too?

Yes.

[San Lumen]

You personally witnessed your legislator wanting to speak on the floor and not being allowed too?

Yes.

Have you considered factors such as allocated time for debate was expired or they were out of order?

[Telconi]

Yes.

Have you considered factors such as allocated time for debate was expired or they were out of order?

It was literally neither of those things. It was my own assembly member repeatedly requesting recognition to speak. And being ignored. And, having still gone unanswered and ignored by the chair, the assembly passed to a vote, having never allowed him to address the body.

[San Lumen]

Have you considered factors such as allocated time for debate was expired or they were out of order?

It was literally neither of those things. It was my own assembly member repeatedly requesting recognition to speak. And being ignored. And, having still gone unanswered and ignored by the chair, the assembly passed to a vote, having never allowed him to address the body.

How were they being ignored in your view? There is a allocated length of time for debate. Perhaps they were out of order like I said.

No reputable chair would simply ignore someone requesting to speak. I have watched proceedings of my state legislature which has supermajority in our lower house and no one who makes a request to speak is ignored.

[Telconi]

It was literally neither of those things. It was my own assembly member repeatedly requesting recognition to speak. And being ignored. And, having still gone unanswered and ignored by the chair, the assembly passed to a vote, having never allowed him to address the body.

How were they being ignored in your view? There is a allocated length of time for debate. Perhaps they were out of order like I said.

No reputable chair would simply ignore someone requesting to speak. I have watched proceedings of my state legislature which has supermajority in our lower house and no one who makes a request to speak is ignored.

No, they weren't out of order, time hadn't expired (literally one member had spoken) you're just trying to pretend that the government gives a rat's ass about me, or any of my values, when they verifiably do not.

So the big question of the day is, why SHOULD I support a government that is at best neglectful, and at worst openly hostile?

[Tobleste]

Because representation should not be based on land area. Why should a minority of the population be able to override the majority? 60 percent of the populous of Illinois is in Chicagoland.

Because simply having a majority on your side is not a good reason to screw over the minority. That’s the exact damn reasoning behind why racial and sexual minorities have legal protection, so that the majority can’t simply screw them over.

Define screw over. The law gives certain hard limits to what can be done with majority support in a democracy.

You mention racial and sexual minorities but why shouldn't LGBT people, women and minorities get their own representatives?

[Telconi]

Because simply having a majority on your side is not a good reason to screw over the minority. That’s the exact damn reasoning behind why racial and sexual minorities have legal protection, so that the majority can’t simply screw them over.

Define screw over. The law gives certain hard limits to what can be done with majority support in a democracy.

You mention racial and sexual minorities but why shouldn't LGBT people, women and minorities get their own representatives?

It really doesn't tho. It gives "What the courts say is okay" as a limit, which is ideally a hard limit, but in practice a pretty soft one. If fIve people in robes suddenly decide that depriving gay folks marriage licenses is okay, your "hard limit" just went to hell in a handbasket.

Ideally they should, or at least a party that advocates for them.

[San Lumen]

How were they being ignored in your view? There is a allocated length of time for debate. Perhaps they were out of order like I said.

No reputable chair would simply ignore someone requesting to speak. I have watched proceedings of my state legislature which has supermajority in our lower house and no one who makes a request to speak is ignored.

No, they weren't out of order, time hadn't expired (literally one member had spoken) you're just trying to pretend that the government gives a rat's ass about me, or any of my values, when they verifiably do not.

So the big question of the day is, why SHOULD I support a government that is at best neglectful, and at worst openly hostile?

There a multitude of things that could be behind what you witnessed. Such as the type of bill it was, the circumstances of the floor vote.

[Washington Resistance Army]

No, they weren't out of order, time hadn't expired (literally one member had spoken) you're just trying to pretend that the government gives a rat's ass about me, or any of my values, when they verifiably do not.

So the big question of the day is, why SHOULD I support a government that is at best neglectful, and at worst openly hostile?

There a multitude of things that could be behind what you witnessed. Such as the type of bill it was, the circumstances of the floor vote.

Or the fact that there's no real reason the majority would need to let him talk because what's the point?

[The Lone Alliance]

No, they weren't out of order, time hadn't expired (literally one member had spoken) you're just trying to pretend that the government gives a rat's ass about me, or any of my values, when they verifiably do not.

So the big question of the day is, why SHOULD I support a government that is at best neglectful, and at worst openly hostile?

There a multitude of things that could be behind what you witnessed. Such as the type of bill it was, the circumstances of the floor vote.

Or they just don't give a fuck and they're arrogant fuckwads. These are politicians after all.

[Freezic Vast]

No, they weren't out of order, time hadn't expired (literally one member had spoken) you're just trying to pretend that the government gives a rat's ass about me, or any of my values, when they verifiably do not.

So the big question of the day is, why SHOULD I support a government that is at best neglectful, and at worst openly hostile?

There a multitude of things that could be behind what you witnessed. Such as the type of bill it was, the circumstances of the floor vote.

Or you're just making up invalid excuses that are nothing more than complete bullshit?

[San Lumen]

There a multitude of things that could be behind what you witnessed. Such as the type of bill it was, the circumstances of the floor vote.

Or you're just making up invalid excuses that are nothing more than complete bullshit?

They are under this delusion their legislator is mute and never allowed to speak to do anything at all. That is utter rubbish.

[Freezic Vast]

Or you're just making up invalid excuses that are nothing more than complete bullshit?

They are under this delusion their legislator is mute and never allowed to speak to do anything at all. That is utter rubbish.

Like you know more about the California state legislation, and don't fucking give me the sad excuse of "I worked in the legislature so I know more than you" bullshit attitude.

[San Lumen]

They are under this delusion their legislator is mute and never allowed to speak to do anything at all. That is utter rubbish.

Like you know more about the California state legislation, and don't fucking give me the sad excuse of "I worked in the legislature so I know more than you" bullshit attitude.

It is certainly not the the rubber stamp dictatorship Telconi thinks it is