DougBH
121
Definitely. But with Manchin at least those shots wont include court packing or ending the filibuster.
That’s bound to happen when property takes precedent over people. IF liberals are the majority in this country (and that’s a big if depending on how you define them) but still lose in the EC, why shouldn’t they export people to those places they can’t win?
DougBH
123
How many people would actually move to Georgia permanently to vote in one election? Are the people who are encouraging this actually going to be moving to Georgia to vote?
WuWei
124
Property over people?
They are not liberals. A liberal would never impose that sort of authoritarianism on any one. They are a plague, a pestilence of vanguardian utopiaists demanding equity to result in mediocrity.
A shallow, selfish band of under and no achievers.
WuWei
125
Interesting dilemma with Pocahontas and the Mad Socialist.
They apparently want cabinet positions. They are both currently in the Senate. Can’t do both. 
1 Like
GWH
127
Hmmm, both republican governors.
1 Like
GWH
129
Surprising for both, especially Vermont.
1 Like
GWH
131
So if that were to make 54, taking for granted the two from GA, we’d need 6 in ‘22 to get rid of the nuclear option?
Zander
132
Emoji face will all the straight lines
WuWei
133
I don’t know, numbers is hard.
Zander
134
Are you sure? Are we still in the thread about the mustache guy tweet?
GWH
135
Just saying, if we get 60 in the senate, we can do away with the Reid (nuclear) option.
Zander
136
If you get 60 seats in the Senate in 2022 and Trump is not re-elected in 2024 then something went terribly wrong.
ETA: For Trump
GWH
138
I’m in no way eager to re-elect Trump in ‘24.
1 Like
JayJay
139
What’s a little hyperbole among friends.
Hell, the NEEAC didn’t even accomplish its goals…all they did was inspire a bunch of ruffians from Missouri to come pouring into Kansas.
Because keeping invaders from the East was far more important than the matter of owning other human beings.
Culture purity and all that…
2 Likes