Oregon Republicans facing arrest

[Bear Stearns]

How is it not tyranny of the majority?

Your zip code should determine how much your vote counts?

Unironically, yes.

Whatever the zipcodes are for Midtown and Lower Manhattan, those should matter the most.

[San Lumen]

Your zip code should determine how much your vote counts? Someone in Portland should have their vote count less than a small town in the southeast corner of the state?

Rural people's votes should count for more than urbanites, for the simple reason that if urban regions stop functioning, people do a lot more drugs, but if rural regions stop functioning, everyone starves.

It would be fair to you then if Republicans won both these elections in Oregon last year because they got more land area?

Governor election: https://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail ... eID=835164

Attorney General election: https://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail ... eID=807584

[Scomagia]

No, by representing those they were elected to represent.

And so are those in districts held by Democrats. They are free to vote against the bill and then they can have town halls and campaign next time and say look what those awful people from Portland did.

There's no reason to do that, so they won't. I'm sorry you can't understand politicking.

Why? They can let the legislature adjourn having not passed a budget. The evil people on the coast and Portland won't have forced it on you as you put it.

Or they could do this, which A) works, B) is a common tactic, and C) won't piss off their constituents.

I'm sorry you don't understand how this works.

[Thermodolia]

And I don’t think it would do anything in Georgia. Georgia Democrat’s are more concerned with picking up those extra seats in one of the chambers and suing the shit out of the state to care.

Besides shit about it has mostly died down. I really don’t see a massive confrontation in Georgia. IIRC the GA March for life isn’t that big. The pride parade draws in more people than the march for life

I never said it was likely. Just that it was more likely than another bleeding Kansas over, say, BLM.

Considering nothing even went down during the hight of the BLM protests in Atlanta I’d say that it’s a pretty slim chance. Who knows though.

[San Lumen]

And so are those in districts held by Democrats. They are free to vote against the bill and then they can have town halls and campaign next time and say look what those awful people from Portland did.



Why? They can let the legislature adjourn having not passed a budget. The evil people on the coast and Portland won't have forced it on you as you put it.

Or they could do this, which A) works, B) is a common tactic, and C) won't piss off their constituents.

I'm sorry you don't understand how this works.

I dont think they should give them anything. Its a dereliction of duty. They should tell them to go to hell. Those in the rural counties lost the election they don;'t get to dictate policy.

[Diopolis]

Rural people's votes should count for more than urbanites, for the simple reason that if urban regions stop functioning, people do a lot more drugs, but if rural regions stop functioning, everyone starves.

It would be fair to you then if Republicans won both these elections in Oregon last year because they got more land area?

Governor election: https://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail ... eID=835164

Attorney General election: https://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail ... eID=807584

Yes to the governor election, not sure on the attorney general election.

[Diopolis]

I never said it was likely. Just that it was more likely than another bleeding Kansas over, say, BLM.

Considering nothing even went down during the hight of the BLM protests in Atlanta I’d say that it’s a pretty slim chance. Who knows though.

Oh, I don't expect widescale political violence until after the election. Neither side wants to look like the aggressor, after all.

[San Lumen]

It would be fair to you then if Republicans won both these elections in Oregon last year because they got more land area?

Governor election: https://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail ... eID=835164

Attorney General election: https://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail ... eID=807584

Yes to the governor election, not sure on the attorney general election.

Why yes on governor and not on attorney general. Why shouldnt the person who got the most votes win? In a system like that a Democrat would likely never win the Governor's Mansion. It would be a rigged election

[Thermodolia]

Or they could do this, which A) works, B) is a common tactic, and C) won't piss off their constituents.

I'm sorry you don't understand how this works.

I dont think they should give them anything. Its a dereliction of duty. They should tell them to go to hell. Those in the rural counties lost the election they don;'t get to dictate policy.

So fuck those who lost? They don’t get a voice? Government should never be about winning but a consensus.

How would you feel if the rural and suburban areas of you state got to do whatever they liked in the state legislature at your expense in the city? You’d most likely be pissed

[Thermodolia]

Considering nothing even went down during the hight of the BLM protests in Atlanta I’d say that it’s a pretty slim chance. Who knows though.

Oh, I don't expect widescale political violence until after the election. Neither side wants to look like the aggressor, after all.

True. If anything is going to go down it’s going to be after November 2020

[Diopolis]

Yes to the governor election, not sure on the attorney general election.

Why yes on governor and not on attorney general. Why shouldnt the person who got the most votes win? In a system like that a Democrat would likely never win the Governor's Mansion. It would be a rigged election

I've already said: rural people's votes should count for some fraction more than urbaner's votes. The reason for this is that screwing up agricultural policy is an order of magnitude worse than anything else the government could possibly do.
Now, I am reasonably sure that that would have caused the governor to have won the election. I don't know about the attorney general.

[Scomagia]

Or they could do this, which A) works, B) is a common tactic, and C) won't piss off their constituents.

I'm sorry you don't understand how this works.

I dont think they should give them anything. Its a dereliction of duty. They should tell them to go to hell. Those in the rural counties lost the election they don;'t get to dictate policy.

What are you even talking about? They are fulfilling their duty to the people who elected them. They didn't lose an election, they won, hence their being senators.

They won't tell them to go to hell. There will be a concession of some kind.

And yes, minorities do get to dictate policy through whatever legal means are available. Walkouts like this are a perk of democracy, not a flaw.

[Diopolis]

Oh, I don't expect widescale political violence until after the election. Neither side wants to look like the aggressor, after all.

True. If anything is going to go down it’s going to be after November 2020

I half expect something to happen after 2020, whether it's an incompetently planned military coup, mass riots, Trump refusing to step down, whatever.

[San Lumen]

I dont think they should give them anything. Its a dereliction of duty. They should tell them to go to hell. Those in the rural counties lost the election they don;'t get to dictate policy.

So fuck those who lost? They don’t get a voice? Government should never be about winning but a consensus.

How would you feel if the rural and suburban areas of you state got to do whatever they liked in the state legislature at your expense in the city? You’d most likely be pissed

Democrats have a majority in the state legislature and won every statewide office because of not just my city but suburban counties and other urban counties. Try learning about other places before you make grand pronouncements

[The Two Jerseys]

Or they could do this, which A) works, B) is a common tactic, and C) won't piss off their constituents.

I'm sorry you don't understand how this works.

I dont think they should give them anything. Its a dereliction of duty. They should tell them to go to hell. Those in the rural counties lost the election they don;'t get to dictate policy.

Unless they're the side you support, then it's OK.

[San Lumen]

Why yes on governor and not on attorney general. Why shouldnt the person who got the most votes win? In a system like that a Democrat would likely never win the Governor's Mansion. It would be a rigged election

I've already said: rural people's votes should count for some fraction more than urbaner's votes. The reason for this is that screwing up agricultural policy is an order of magnitude worse than anything else the government could possibly do.
Now, I am reasonably sure that that would have caused the governor to have won the election. I don't know about the attorney general.

Why should where you reside determine how much your vote counts? Under a system of having to win a majority of counties both the Governor and Attorney General would have lost the election

[Necroghastia]

Your zip code should determine how much your vote counts? Someone in Portland should have their vote count less than a small town in the southeast corner of the state?

Rural people's votes should count for more than urbanites, for the simple reason that if urban regions stop functioning, people do a lot more drugs, but if rural regions stop functioning, everyone starves.

Got some bolognese for that? And I still have no reason to believe "urbanites" are as critically incompentent as y'all seem to be maiking them out to be.

[Diopolis]

I've already said: rural people's votes should count for some fraction more than urbaner's votes. The reason for this is that screwing up agricultural policy is an order of magnitude worse than anything else the government could possibly do.
Now, I am reasonably sure that that would have caused the governor to have won the election. I don't know about the attorney general.

Why should where you reside determine how much your vote counts? Under a system of having to win a majority of counties both the Governor and Attorney General would have lost the election

I've already said this. So here it goes again:
Agricultural policy is literally the most important thing a modern government handles, to the point that it's literally more important than every other issue combined. To ensure agricultural policy is managed competently, rural people's votes should count for some fraction more than urbanites. I'm unsure as to how much more, and it likely depends on the individual state.

[Bear Stearns]

Your zip code should determine how much your vote counts? Someone in Portland should have their vote count less than a small town in the southeast corner of the state?

Rural people's votes should count for more than urbanites, for the simple reason that if urban regions stop functioning, people do a lot more drugs, but if rural regions stop functioning, everyone starves.

Depends on which urban and rural areas.

If New York stopped functioning, your currency would be worthless. If Baltimore stopped functioning, we might all be better off.

[Galloism]

Why should where you reside determine how much your vote counts? Under a system of having to win a majority of counties both the Governor and Attorney General would have lost the election

I've already said this. So here it goes again:
Agricultural policy is literally the most important thing a modern government handles, to the point that it's literally more important than every other issue combined. To ensure agricultural policy is managed competently, rural people's votes should count for some fraction more than urbanites. I'm unsure as to how much more, and it likely depends on the individual state.

That's an argument for farmer's votes counting more - most rural people aren't farmers.

[Fartsniffage]

I've already said this. So here it goes again:
Agricultural policy is literally the most important thing a modern government handles, to the point that it's literally more important than every other issue combined. To ensure agricultural policy is managed competently, rural people's votes should count for some fraction more than urbanites. I'm unsure as to how much more, and it likely depends on the individual state.

That's an argument for farmer's votes counting more - most rural people aren't farmers.

Farmers are good at being framers.

[Thermodolia]

So fuck those who lost? They don’t get a voice? Government should never be about winning but a consensus.

How would you feel if the rural and suburban areas of you state got to do whatever they liked in the state legislature at your expense in the city? You’d most likely be pissed

Democrats have a majority in the state legislature and won every statewide office because of not just my city but suburban counties and other urban counties. Try learning about other places before you make grand pronouncements

Again please re-read my post. I didn’t fucking say that the republicans had control of your state’s legislature, I fucking said how would you feel if the rural republicans had enough control over the legislature to do whatever they want st your expense in the city.

It’s a fucking hypothetical designed to get you to think critically for a fucking second. So for the love of god please don’t be a pretentious dick and read my fucking posts

[San Lumen]

Why should where you reside determine how much your vote counts? Under a system of having to win a majority of counties both the Governor and Attorney General would have lost the election

I've already said this. So here it goes again:
Agricultural policy is literally the most important thing a modern government handles, to the point that it's literally more important than every other issue combined. To ensure agricultural policy is managed competently, rural people's votes should count for some fraction more than urbanites. I'm unsure as to how much more, and it likely depends on the individual state.

How should it count more?

[Diopolis]

I've already said this. So here it goes again:
Agricultural policy is literally the most important thing a modern government handles, to the point that it's literally more important than every other issue combined. To ensure agricultural policy is managed competently, rural people's votes should count for some fraction more than urbanites. I'm unsure as to how much more, and it likely depends on the individual state.

That's an argument for farmer's votes counting more - most rural people aren't farmers.

That's true. But counting votes cast in predominately rural zip codes for some fraction more than those cast in urban zip codes is probably easier than figuring out who is and isn't a farmer.

[Galloism]

That's an argument for farmer's votes counting more - most rural people aren't farmers.

Farmers are good at being framers.

Generally speaking, yes.