The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums: Politics:
US Election 2012

The Dems won the house!

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
El_Tino On October 12, 2023
booyaka!





Albuquerque, New Mexico
#1New Post! Nov 21, 2012 @ 07:26:16
"Democratic House candidates appear to have won more of the popular vote than their Republican counterparts on Tuesday, despite what looks as though it will be a 35-seat GOP majority.

According to numbers compiled by the Post’s great Dan Keating, Democrats have won roughly 48.8 percent of the House vote, compared to 48.47 percent for Republicans.

Despite losing the popular vote, Republicans are set to have their second-biggest House majority in 60 years and their third-biggest since the Great Depression."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/11/09/democratic-house-candidates-winning-the-popular-vote-despite-big-gop-majority/

So yeah, Republicans, don't take your house majority too seriously.
raditz On March 24, 2024
Blah





Houston, Texas
#2New Post! Nov 21, 2012 @ 07:45:02
Butt hurt liberal. lol
ThePainefulTruth On May 06, 2013
Verum est Deus


Deleted



Peoria, Arizona
#3New Post! Nov 21, 2012 @ 18:49:20
@El_Tino Said

"Democratic House candidates appear to have won more of the popular vote than their Republican counterparts on Tuesday, despite what looks as though it will be a 35-seat GOP majority.

According to numbers compiled by the Post’s great Dan Keating, Democrats have won roughly 48.8 percent of the House vote, compared to 48.47 percent for Republicans.

Despite losing the popular vote, Republicans are set to have their second-biggest House majority in 60 years and their third-biggest since the Great Depression."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/11/09/democratic-house-candidates-winning-the-popular-vote-despite-big-gop-majority/

So yeah, Republicans, don't take your house majority too seriously.


What's your point? How do we not take it seriously? We take abiding by the Constitution seriously while Democrats think it only applies where it's to their advantage, or not, as their elite double standard dictates.
psycoskunk On December 24, 2020
Funky-Footed Skunk





A fort made of stinky socks, C
#4New Post! Nov 21, 2012 @ 21:00:05
@ThePainefulTruth Said

What's your point? How do we not take it seriously? We take abiding by the Constitution seriously while Democrats think it only applies where it's to their advantage, or not, as their elite double standard dictates.


What's your point? I didn't read anything in the OP about the Constitution or about Democrats not taking things seriously. I literally read it as "The Democrats barely beat the Republicans by a hair in order to win the popular vote. Fun Fact: Despite this, Republicans can still look forward to having their 2nd-biggest majority in 60 years and 3rd biggest since the Great Depression."

I'm guessing the last part is directed to how some of the Republicans acted during Obama's previous term. (Note how I say 'some,' not all.)
El_Tino On October 12, 2023
booyaka!





Albuquerque, New Mexico
#5New Post! Nov 22, 2012 @ 07:07:32
@ThePainefulTruth Said

What's your point? How do we not take it seriously? We take abiding by the Constitution seriously while Democrats think it only applies where it's to their advantage, or not, as their elite double standard dictates.


My point is don't throw a tantrum like they did over the debt ceiling.
fitzyp On December 23, 2014




Auckland, New Zealand
#6New Post! Nov 23, 2012 @ 02:00:58
I was going to start a thread about this. On election night I believe Boehner was asked whether he thought that the re-election of Obama showed that there was a mandate for Obamas policies. He said that there was not because the Republicans had retained the house showing the support behind the GOP and the mandate for their policies. The fact that the received less votes than the Democrats shows that Repbulican policies are less popular on all levels but they get in because the system is not representative.
Reviso On November 23, 2014

Banned



Trenton, Canada
#7New Post! Nov 23, 2012 @ 02:13:04
@fitzyp Said

I was going to start a thread about this. On election night I believe Boehner was asked whether he thought that the re-election of Obama showed that there was a mandate for Obamas policies. He said that there was not because the Republicans had retained the house showing the support behind the GOP and the mandate for their policies. The fact that the received less votes than the Democrats shows that Repbulican policies are less popular on all levels but they get in because the system is not representative.



According to the constitution the system has no need to BE representative to the Living, only the dieting.
fitzyp On December 23, 2014




Auckland, New Zealand
#8New Post! Nov 23, 2012 @ 02:26:01
@Reviso Said

According to the constitution the system has no need to BE representative to the Living, only the dieting.


I'm not sure exactly sure what that means but it doesn't matter if the constitution says that it has to be representative. Rule of the majority is a fundamental principle of democracy and without proportionality you have no way of knowing that the elected officials actually represent a majority or not. We had this problem in New Zealand under our first past the post system. Because of the way it worked for three consecutive elections the party who formed the government won less votes than the losing party.
boxerdc On December 18, 2012

Deleted



,
#9New Post! Nov 23, 2012 @ 06:12:55
@fitzyp Said

I'm not sure exactly sure what that means but it doesn't matter if the constitution says that it has to be representative. Rule of the majority is a fundamental principle of democracy



Yeah..
We're not a democracy, we're a constitutional republic.
fitzyp On December 23, 2014




Auckland, New Zealand
#10New Post! Nov 23, 2012 @ 07:23:07
@boxerdc Said

Yeah..
We're not a democracy, we're a constitutional republic.


I don't see the necessary contradiction between them. As wikipedia states: "In common parlance a republic is a state that does not practice direct democracy but rather has a government indirectly controlled by the people."

Also according to wikipedia"[the US]is a constitutional republic and representative democracy, "in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law"."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States#Government_and_politics

Just like England is: "a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary system."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/England#Governance
El_Tino On October 12, 2023
booyaka!





Albuquerque, New Mexico
#11New Post! Nov 23, 2012 @ 07:33:56
@fitzyp Said

I was going to start a thread about this. On election night I believe Boehner was asked whether he thought that the re-election of Obama showed that there was a mandate for Obamas policies. He said that there was not because the Republicans had retained the house showing the support behind the GOP and the mandate for their policies. The fact that the received less votes than the Democrats shows that Repbulican policies are less popular on all levels but they get in because the system is not representative.


It's because the politicans set the boundaries for the districts every 10 years, a process that was just completed. So they just make the districts look like jellyfish to split up opposing voters into separate districts and keep their own party strong in the districts.
fitzyp On December 23, 2014




Auckland, New Zealand
#12New Post! Nov 24, 2012 @ 00:03:16
@El_Tino Said

It's because the politicans set the boundaries for the districts every 10 years, a process that was just completed. So they just make the districts look like jellyfish to split up opposing voters into separate districts and keep their own party strong in the districts.


I had heard as much. Seems the type of thing that should be done by non-partisan governmental organisations rather than the politicians who sit to benefit.
El_Tino On October 12, 2023
booyaka!





Albuquerque, New Mexico
#13New Post! Nov 24, 2012 @ 06:51:54
@fitzyp Said

I had heard as much. Seems the type of thing that should be done by non-partisan governmental organisations rather than the politicians who sit to benefit.


California, and possibly other states, have set up citizen commissions to do the work.
ThePainefulTruth On May 06, 2013
Verum est Deus


Deleted



Peoria, Arizona
#14New Post! Nov 24, 2012 @ 09:17:00
@El_Tino Said

My point is don't throw a tantrum like they did over the debt ceiling.


Oh God yes, tantrum. (Who are you, the reincarnation of Peter Jennings?) Much better to spend it as fast as possible. Let's hit bottom and get on with the tribulation.
El_Tino On October 12, 2023
booyaka!





Albuquerque, New Mexico
#15New Post! Nov 26, 2012 @ 06:33:19
@ThePainefulTruth Said

Oh God yes, tantrum. (Who are you, the reincarnation of Peter Jennings?) Much better to spend it as fast as possible. Let's hit bottom and get on with the tribulation.


Gee, where were you when every single past congress raised the debt ceiling 5,000 times without throwing a hissy fit like a 3 year old?
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Politics Forum - Some Rudeness Allowed

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Politics
Thu Mar 29, 2012 @ 18:16
92 4931
New posts   Politics
Mon Aug 22, 2011 @ 17:34
20 1348
New posts   Politics
Tue Mar 08, 2011 @ 20:01
72 4963
New posts   Homes & Real Estate
Thu May 27, 2010 @ 06:36
16 3966
New posts   Politics
Wed Jul 19, 2006 @ 03:26
7 1248