What's new
By:

Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?

Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?

  • Total voters
    29
idestroyedthetoilet said:
That gets to question 2. Why? What obligation?
Click to expand...
You're asking what obligation the president has to not break the law?

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
 
framer said:
In a hypothetical state that was 50/50 rural and urban, it would be better to have 1 urban rep and 1 rural rep rather than 2 of split voters. That way both communities are represented. The other way it is possible that one of the communities is shut out from representation. If there is a certain section of a city that contains a lot of black voters, it is probably a good idea to not split them up over multiple districts.

Additionally an algorithm will have the bias of whoever programmed it. At least with a state legislature dividing the borders, the bias is transparent and can be voted out. Also, keep in mind that there is plenty of bipartisanship when dividing districts as incumbents of both parties will make deals to keep each other in power.

They need a way to have this decided by a 8 year old with no knowledge of politics playing a video game like Ender's Game.
Click to expand...

The object function of the algorithm would be to minimize the border distance. The map that minimizes the border distance wins. Bias is nonexistent and irrelevant.

If you want to engineer for urban vs rural, black vs white, lgbtq vs straight, whatever, have at it. I think it’s unnecessary election engineering that devolves into gerrymandering no matter how pure your intentions. I’d just like to elect the best candidate.
 
silesian said:
The object function of the algorithm would be to minimize the border distance. The map that minimizes the border distance wins. Bias is nonexistent and irrelevant.

If you want to engineer for urban vs rural, black vs white, lgbtq vs straight, whatever, have at it. I think it’s unnecessary election engineering that devolves into gerrymandering no matter how pure your intentions. I’d just like to elect the best candidate.
Click to expand...

You are making the assumption that there is a "best" candidate. That is generally in the eye of the beholder. What I want is a candidate that represents the needs of a vast majority of the people in the district. If you don't take communities of interest into account when drawing up districts, you can effectively disenfranchise large swaths of the population.

I mean look at the middle East. After the World Wars, Europeans just arbitrarily drew lines that might have looked good on paper, but locked in conflict for the next 100 years. Too many large groups that were shut out from unified representation.

Probably the best option would be to have a computer spit out 5 models based on a certain formula and have a statewide referendum vote in choosing 1 of the 5 to go with.
 
gandalfe said:
You're asking what obligation the president has to not break the law?

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Click to expand...

The FEC Chair:



People asking if the president has any obligation to report foreign interference in our elections, really need to read up on the basic rules of our elections.
 
framer said:
You are making the assumption that there is a "best" candidate. That is generally in the eye of the beholder. What I want is a candidate that represents the needs of a vast majority of the people in the district. If you don't take communities of interest into account when drawing up districts, you can effectively disenfranchise large swaths of the population.

I mean look at the middle East. After the World Wars, Europeans just arbitrarily drew lines that might have looked good on paper, but locked in conflict for the next 100 years. Too many large groups that were shut out from unified representation.

Probably the best option would be to have a computer spit out 5 models based on a certain formula and have a statewide referendum vote in choosing 1 of the 5 to go with.
Click to expand...

Not the best analogy.

Sykes and Picot's lines after WW1 were not arbitrary. They were designed to maximize the imperial influence of the British and French empires.

The chances of State A District 7 going to war over State A District 8 over a border dispute are fairly remote.
 
framer said:
You are making the assumption that there is a "best" candidate. That is generally in the eye of the beholder. What I want is a candidate that represents the needs of a vast majority of the people in the district. If you don't take communities of interest into account when drawing up districts, you can effectively disenfranchise large swaths of the population..
Click to expand...

You are making an assumption that the "best" candidate is one that "represents the needs of a vast majority of the people in the district"

Which I might agree with.

What we are talking about is not that, but how the "district" is defined.

If you leave the politicians to decide these matters, let's not be shocked when the borders continue to be driven by..... wait for it..... politics.
 
One Brow said:
So, you have evidence of Clinton taking campaign intelligence from global rivals/enemies? No? Just spouting off a false equivalence?
Click to expand...
Can you prove it is a false equivalence? ;)

Would that be a false equivalence equivalence?
 
Red said:
So, if I understand the Trump defenders here, any presidential candidate, of any political party, if offered help winning the election, by America's number one geopolitical adversary of the last 70 years, would keep their mouths shut about it, and, just as Trump did, (according to Mueller), expect to benefit from it, and even, as Trump did right out in the open, actively support it("Russia, if you're listening...."). Trump defenders would have me believe that this response by Trump would be played out regardless of who the beneficiary of this assistance was. Every last presidential candidate, of any political party, would be happy as a pig in slop to accept help from Russia. This is my interpretation of what defenders of Trump are claiming in this thread.
Click to expand...
Your interpretation is 100% wrong. The anti-Trump crowd is so unhinged it's indescribable. Their expertise in mis-interperetation has been taken to new levels. I swear there must be some sort of contest to try to take the overreaction and idiocy to the highest possible level. These people are exhausting to listen to. Trump has many faults, but he is not the anti-Christ the left is constantly trying to paint him as. It's exhausting even listening to the insanity.
 
Just for the lulz.

64353090_1312372402249594_3748870974636818432_n.jpg
 
Stoked said:
Scumbags can go lower. Disgusting. Throw him over board if true.

https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEPLPiw1lW2_PRb5OrJWlMUAqGQgEKhAIACoHCAow2Nb3CjDivdcCMKuvhQY?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en
Click to expand...
Honestly kind of sounds like a setup. Emails were sent to his infowars media company email account that had child porn images attached to them, but the FBI says they have no evidence he opened them and no evidence that he ever sent child porn to anyone.

They guy is straight up garbage but so far I'm not buying the child porn thing.
 
Bulletproof said:
Honestly kind of sounds like a setup. Emails were sent to his infowars media company email account that had child porn images attached to them, but the FBI says they have no evidence he opened them and no evidence that he ever sent child porn to anyone.

They guy is straight up garbage but so far I'm not buying the child porn thing.
Click to expand...

If so I hope they track down the people sending them and bust them for child porn and throw them over board.

Got to prove it though.
 
I agree Trump does have many faults. Including being a coward, IMO. I'm willing to label him that because he can never admit to a mistake. I take it he regards such admissions a sign of weakness, but I've always felt admitting when one is wrong is a sign of strength. Getting him to finally admit Obama was born in the United States was like pulling teeth, and even though the Central Park Five were released from prison after the real rapist confessed, Trump still won't apologize or admit error in calling for the death penalty in their case, at the time. Well, we know from his tweets and attacks that Trump has the temperament of a bully, and bullies are cowards at heart.....

 
Another allegation of sexual assault against Trump came out today.

His response.
IMG_20190621_152950.png

Note, contrary to Trump's claim of them having never met, there is a picture of them meeting in the article.
5new.w700.h467.2x.jpg
 
Zombie said:
Another allegation of sexual assault against Trump came out today.

His response.
View attachment 7484

Note, contrary to Trump's claim of them having never met, there is a picture of them meeting in the article.
View attachment 7485
Click to expand...


Was just about to post this story.

It just never ends with this guy. We empowered the trashiest most incompetent person in our country in its most important position.

Reason number 12,874,892,997,734,230 why he needs to go.

Also, imagine the fit that righties would be having if this were Clinton or Obama.
 
Red said:
Click to expand...


Should’ve happened months ago. Mueller should’ve known that few Americans would read this report. Hell, hardly any read anything longer than 280 characters without pictures anymore. And for someone who’s seen the political environment decline in DC, he couldn’t see republicans refusing to even read his report? He’s a man about 40 years out of time.

What do you think his testimony will have? Will it finally convince Pelosi to begin impeachment hearings?

Also, what manufactured crisis will trump do on this day to distract from Mueller?

A. Another North Korea Summit
B. Attack Iran
C. Something in relation to immigration
D. Attack some major health care/entitlement program
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top