How many more shots at having the minority dominate the White House and the Senate do you think you legitimately have.
Answer yourself honestly? How many is worth it to temporarily get your way?
1 Like
No. They want mass shootings to stop.
1 Like
So do I. How do you do that without sweeping draconian measures? Like Biden had on his platform pages?
Indeed. Another 200,000 on the way.
Not my focus. I live in NH.
No. Then then next R. will do and it never stops. They have to live with it.
The minority is already doing it. I think you’re confusing minority and majority.
1 Like
I don’t mind a SCOTUS with 24 justices. Might reduce the outsize impact of that particular institution.
Any changes of this kind should be bipartisan.
Expanding the Supreme Court for partisan purposes will result in one of two things. One possibility will be that it will be a pretext for establishing one-party dictatorship, where elections no longer matter. That is what has happened in Venezuela.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/court-packing-venezuela-latin-america-realit
The other possibility is that Republicans will simply expand the court when they take power, and the new justices will undo everything that the Democrats have pushed through. The long-term result will be that the Supreme Court will keep expanding in size and will be little more than a rubber stamp for the party in power.
In any case, the decision is not up to the President. It requires the approval of both houses of congress to do anything. Biden is irrelevant if Republicans retain control over the Senate.
1 Like
There should be 4,350 reps in the House.
4 Likes
it should.
the electoral college should be abolished.
3 Likes
the majority is tired of the GOP minority running roughshod over them
Expanding the house to its proper size is an easy legislative fix to the electoral college. I hope this idea gains momentum.
rule by the minority can will have devastating long term effects.
when the supreme court goes against the majority of the people they risk being made irrelevant.
for example lets say they overturned the NFA and allow anyone to own a machine gun. theres a decent chance that states like california and new york would just ignore the court especially if the dems control the executive branch. and they would have the support of the states population.
without an executive branch to enforce its orders the court could be rendered pretty powerless.
The electors corresponding to Senate seats did not change the 2016 Presidential results.
Clinton won 21 states and the District of Columbia. Reducing by the 100 Senators + 2 for the District of Columbia, would mean that Trump would have won by a margin of 244 to 185 electoral votes.
Bipartisan? That’s a necessary construct of the minority. We’ve seen what that has wrought.
1 Like
All of the suggestions in this thread will surely unify the country. At least we’re no longer shy about the desire for a one-party state.
2 Likes
On the verge of being swept from power their madhouse leadership has abused for four terrible years, they’ve magically rediscovered both bipartisan concern trolling and fiscal discipline.
■■■■ that.
3 Likes
Crazy, isn’t it?
They nearly always gain the White House and the Senate with an actual minority of votes, govern like a majority mandate, then expect even a scintilla of a regard for their feelings.
2 Likes
There wouldn’t only be one party. The ones we have would just adapt to the changes. Or they would die and be replaced. It’s net positive either way.
Most of the ideas suggested here are just modifications to make our republic more representative of its population. That’s a pretty unifying idea.
1 Like
