Texas Republican Amendment Would Prevent Democrats from Winning ANY State Offices

[Shadow Wolf]

Big deal. The People's Republic of California and the People's Republic of New York have already done that.

https://elections.ny.gov/enrollment-county

https://www.politico.com/2020-election/results/california/

Then why does it not work like that and there are Republicans in state office here?
Try again with sources you've read.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Really

Of the county, by the county, for the county doesn't sound the same as Lincoln's words

Lincoln didn’t write the constitution.

Why do you want people in a small portion or portions of the state deciding laws for the entire state?

Do you think people living in a large city have the same concerns as farmers do?

Of course not yet you want the big city people to decide everything for everyone.

When it comes to a state budget do you think city folks are going to want to allocate money to rural areas or to build themselves a fancy new park?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Big city folk don’t think like small town folk do.

Different priorities so why not represent everyone instead of just large population centers?

Because it is taking away the ability for the places that vote Dem to have any sort of representation.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

They would have to secede from the US if they want to violate the US Constitution. What sort of government restraints would they instill if they did secede? Minimal?

Who knows. Last poll I saw was 23% of texans would vote to leave the US. Right now it would be a disaster for Texas to leave.

 

[ChristineM]

Why do you want people in a small portion or portions of the state deciding laws for the entire state?

I would like to see a democratic vote, not one tailored to favour a particular party. How about you?

Do you think people living in a large city have the same concerns as farmers do?

That's kind of besides the point

Of course not yet you want the big city people to decide everything for everyone

Don't tell me what i want, it smacks of ignorance

When it comes to a state budget do you think city folks are going to want to allocate money to rural areas or to build themselves a fancy new park?

Knowing people i would say they opt for the selfish option and screw anyone else

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Because it is taking away the ability for the places that vote Dem to have any sort of representation.

Not so, they would still have their state senators and representatives. Those are not voted on by the entire state.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Lincoln didn’t write the constitution.

Why do you want people in a small portion or portions of the state deciding laws for the entire state?

Do you think people living in a large city have the same concerns as farmers do?

Of course not yet you want the big city people to decide everything for everyone.

When it comes to a state budget do you think city folks are going to want to allocate money to rural areas or to build themselves a fancy new park?

I actually think it's a very good idea , but you can see already with the People's Republic of New York where New York City leads their policy to be valid for the entire state and those on the western end of the state are hardly fairly represented, since New York City sets the entire States political stance and nobody else can challenge it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Not so, they would still have their state senators and representatives. Those are not voted on by the entire state.

Yes so as it would essentially be a miniaturized Electoral College and that silences many voices. Like when I lived in Indiana. In 2016 my vote was so worthless and meaningless Indiana was the first called for Trump and it counted for nothing except denying Trump a mandate with the national vote.
This sort of super popularity contest is a way to to mute and render powerless those who fall outside of the majority. This is unacceptable.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

I actually think it's a very good idea , but you can see already with the People's Republic of New York where New York City leads their policy to be valid for the entire state and those on the western end of the state are hardly fairly represented, since New York City sets the entire States political stance and nobody else can challenge it.

I completely agree with you.

I believe it’s the same with people who have large populations of varying groups such as Amish or Native Americans.

Whatever group living outside of large population centers often don’t get their voices heard.

Movements like this only really come from democrats who want to solidify power because they know most urban centers are heavily democratic.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Lincoln didn’t write the constitution.

Why do you want people in a small portion or portions of the state deciding laws for the entire state?

Because that's literally how democracy works. Why do you want a smaller number of people having a greater degree of control over election outcomes?

Do you think people living in a large city have the same concerns as farmers do?

Of course not. But why should the farmer's interests mean that they have a greater proportion of the vote than non-farmers?

Of course not yet you want the big city people to decide everything for everyone.

Again, it's called democracy. You can frame it that way if you want, but ultimately it's just how democracy works. Sorry you don't like democracy.

When it comes to a state budget do you think city folks are going to want to allocate money to rural areas or to build themselves a fancy new park?

Ah yes, that thing that city people love to vote on. Not on subsidising farms, where they literally get their food, but on building parks, that thing that is constantly happening everywhere all the time. And, as we all know, rural Americans and farmers totally represent the interests of city-dwellers (i.e THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS) and never push, change or amend laws to benefit themselves to the expense of the majority of Americans.

You anti-democracy people crack me up.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Because it is taking away the ability for the places that vote Dem to have any sort of representation.

Yet you want to remove the representation from those that vote republican?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I completely agree with you.

I believe it’s the same with people who have large populations of varying groups such as Amish or Native Americans.

Whatever group living outside of large population centers often don’t get their voices heard.

Ah yes, rural voters and farmers. Those two groups who, historically, never get their voices heard and have absolutely no lobbying power whatsoever.

So, you're a big fan of affirmative action, yeah? But just for people who just so happen to vote Republican? Why not just give farmers and land owners fifteen votes each? Or, a million? Why the heck not.

Movements like this only really come from democrats who want to solidify power because they know most urban centers are heavily democratic.

Again, it's just democracy.

"How DARE democrats appeal to the larger proportion of the population and earn their vote!"

Super sneaky of them, I agree.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are actually looking to change existing laws explicitly so that they will win and Democrats can't, and you find this perfectly acceptable. Weird how you actually DON'T care about "movements" to "solidify power". You just care about it when one side does it.

Well, too bad. You can swivel. Maybe blame the Republican party for doing a terrible job appealing to urban voters; or, in other words, for failing to win the majority of the people's votes IN A DEMOCRACY. Seems like a "them" problem.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yet you want to remove the representation from those that vote republican?

You mean, the minority of the total population of a democracy?

Y'know, like how democracy works?

 

[Magic Man]

Why don’t the democrats support positions the people want then they wouldn’t have to worry about it?

They do.

If the majority of countries don’t like their policies that’s a good indicator that they need to change their beliefs.

No, it's a good indicator that they've gerrymandered the counties to make sure republicans can win most of them. That's the whole point here. Republicans' platform doesn't appeal to the majority. Instead of adjusting their platform/beliefs, as you suggest here, they try to rig the system, so that they can win with minority support.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Well America was never intended to be a democracy.

It was debated and rejected for various reasons not the least of which was that the framers of the constitution knew that people in general were too stupid to run the nation.

Well, democracy is not a single unique narrow form of government, so in broad terms the US is a combiation ipf a democracy and for the subset a republic.
But that is Civics 101.

 

[Soandso]

Lincoln didn’t write the constitution.

Why do you want people in a small portion or portions of the state deciding laws for the entire state?

Do you think people living in a large city have the same concerns as farmers do?

Of course not yet you want the big city people to decide everything for everyone.

When it comes to a state budget do you think city folks are going to want to allocate money to rural areas or to build themselves a fancy new park?

Uhhh... I don't think you realize how state and local government works

All State governments are modeled after the Federal Government and consist of three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial.

State and Local Government | The White House

Powers not granted to the Federal government are reserved for States and the people, which are divided between State and local governments.

www.whitehouse.gov

In my state, for example, if Seattle wants to do a big project that costs a lot to do then Seattle has to pay for it. The only time the state will pitch in is when it's an infrastructure thing that effects multiple counties, like roads or ferry systems, but even then in my state the counties themselves are in charge of their own projects such as public transit. It would be foolish for a state to neglect their own rural areas as farming and blue collar work is a source of strength for a state, so they get lots of attention generally - even in blue states

 

[F1fan]

Why don’t the democrats support positions the people want then they wouldn’t have to worry about it?

Anti-democratic actions are the issue, not majority rule as determines by fair elections. The point is this is deliberate fraud against the Texas public. Let's hope this backfires and these anti-democratic scumbags are voted out.

If the majority of countries don’t like their policies that’s a good indicator that they need to change their beliefs.

Bad thinking since there are many counties that are rural and have low populations. This is deliberate fraud by allowing the number of republican counties to rule over high population counties as if that means anything to democracy.

 

[F1fan]

Lincoln didn’t write the constitution.

Why do you want people in a small portion or portions of the state deciding laws for the entire state?

Small portions? Do you mean highly populated areas? You do understand that people vote, empty land does not.

Do you think people living in a large city have the same concerns as farmers do?

That's why they have their state representatives. And I suggest that farmers have basic needs like any city dweller, like clean water, safe food, healthcare access, decent roads, etc.

Of course not yet you want the big city people to decide everything for everyone.

So you have a problem with citizens casting votes and that dictates who represents them?

When it comes to a state budget do you think city folks are going to want to allocate money to rural areas or to build themselves a fancy new park?

Every part of the state will have it's needs, and the tax base will be used in proportion. Rural folks are too few to get taxed at a rate that will cover their needs. So they benefit from the large population areas for tax revenue, and that's how they get utilities, water, sewers, roads that they couldn't afford themselves.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Anti-democratic actions are the issue, not majority rule as determines by fair elections. The point is this is deliberate fraud against the Texas public. Let's hope this backfires and these anti-democratic scumbags are voted out.

Bad thinking since there are many counties that are rural and have low populations. This is deliberate fraud by allowing the number of republican counties to rule over high population counties as if that means anything to democracy.

How is it fraud when the exact same system is in our constitution?

 

[F1fan]

How is it fraud when the exact same system is in our constitution?

Where is it in the US constitution? Give a clear example and explain.