I can't even believe the left is attempting this, but then, they know they're done as a party, so they're trying to throw out everything they despise about the country.
Add to that, 16 yro vote and packing SCOTUS.

@realDonaldTrump
15h15 hours ago
More
The Democrats are getting very "strange." They now want to change the voting age to 16, abolish the Electoral College, and Increase significantly the number of Supreme Court Justices. Actually, you've got to win it at the Ballot Box![/img]

Quote from: Solar on March 20, 2019, 11:58:02 AM
I can't even believe the left is attempting this, but then, they know they're done as a party, so they're trying to throw out everything they despise about the country.
Add to that, 16 yro vote and packing SCOTUS.

@realDonaldTrump
15h15 hours ago
More
The Democrats are getting very "strange." They now want to change the voting age to 16, abolish the Electoral College, and Increase significantly the number of Supreme Court Justices. Actually, you've got to win it at the Ballot Box![/img]

Your note struck a chord with something I've been thinking on. The Dims are exhibiting Very odd behavior. Either they do think they're finished and are just throwing in the kitchen sink for the fun of it or they believe that they have a reason to be very confident that they will win in 2020? If felt the need to compete for the election, they would act like moderates and disguise their agenda to a degree - as in the past. Conservatives wouldn't buy it, but RINOs and Dims would either buy in or pretend to. Then the Dims would have a shot at the throne in 2020. 

Quote from: topside on March 20, 2019, 03:04:31 PM
Your note struck a chord with something I've been thinking on. The Dims are exhibiting Very odd behavior. Either they do think they're finished and are just throwing in the kitchen sink for the fun of it or they believe that they have a reason to be very confident that they will win in 2020? If felt the need to compete for the election, they would act like moderates and disguise their agenda to a degree - as in the past. Conservatives wouldn't buy it, but RINOs and Dims would either buy in or pretend to. Then the Dims would have a shot at the throne in 2020.

This is the first election where the left ran to the hard left, usually they run moderate and do the exact opposite once seated.
You raise a great point, the only way the left could possibly remain viable is, if the gopE make it possible, so I can't count them out yet, but at the rate the Dims are moving left, they'll be lucky to garner a third of the vote in 2020.
This is why they so badly want to the change the Constitution, they're planting the seed that the Constitution is outdated in hopes of keeping their evil dream of destruction alive in the next generation.

One thing about Marxists, they think in decades, while we are stuck in preservation mode.
If we want this Nation to survive, we need to support Trump and make certain the next POTUS to follow, is nearly an identical clone of the man and continue undoing the damage the left has inflicted on the country.

Quote from: Solar on March 20, 2019, 11:58:02 AM
I can't even believe the left is attempting this, but then, they know they're done as a party, so they're trying to throw out everything they despise about the country.
Add to that, 16 yro vote and packing SCOTUS.

@realDonaldTrump
15h15 hours ago
More
The Democrats are getting very "strange." They now want to change the voting age to 16, abolish the Electoral College, and Increase significantly the number of Supreme Court Justices. Actually, you've got to win it at the Ballot Box![/img]

Don't forget, nancy wants the illegals to vote. Maybe she is smarter than I gave her credit for, dims were completely against Trump, the media was completely against Trump, the 'established" republicans were against Trump, Maybe nancy realized it was the American people who elected Trump. Got to change that if she wants to stay in power. Could explain why she agreed to a two year term as speaker.

Quote from: s3779m on March 20, 2019, 03:29:22 PM
Don't forget, nancy wants the illegals to vote. Maybe she is smarter than I gave her credit for, dims were completely against Trump, the media was completely against Trump, the 'established" republicans were against Trump, Maybe nancy realized it was the American people who elected Trump. Got to change that if she wants to stay in power. Could explain why she agreed to a two year term as speaker.

Yep, they desperately needed the illegal vote the remain viable, but Trump just slammed that door closed with a Wall.
I have a pretty good idea Trump will focus on Ca and the illegal vote, because without it, the Dim party is dead in the state, and that will be the first state in a series of states he goes after.
If the report about the DMV in Ca is true, there are at a minimum of 10 million illegals voting here.

It'll never work. Not enough states will go for it.

The Dems aren't satisfied with stealing an election, they want to steal the entire Constitution

Quote from: Billy's bayonet on March 20, 2019, 04:53:07 PM
The Dems aren't satisfied with stealing an election, they want to steal the entire Constitution

Not steal it, flush down the bog. They call Trump a dictator and an authoritarian yet they are trying to create permanent democrat rule. They want a dictatorship. On their terms.

I will preface my contribution with a question:  why are not enough people referring to the Socialist, Progressive Democrats for what they are:  COMMUNISTS?  That word, when effectively associated with these Marxists, would raise eyebrows for a great multitude come election time.  I am curious, and a little beside myself, as to why this obvious labeling correlation has not been proffered into the mainstream conscience of America.  Regarding these DemoComs, as I refer to them, I just want to make the statement that an individual conservative does not cede absolute control to a necessary evil: government.  Only a limited government allows each citizen to reach their full potential.  Are we ready to fight for this?  I am.  Also, I want to borrow and share something I found today.  Actually, I read something similar in the weeks following Trump's election.   

For all the people who fell asleep in civics class...

1: There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 2,626 of them. Clinton won 487.
2: There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16.
3: Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes.
4: In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.
5: These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.
6: When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.
Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc) don't and shouldn't speak for the rest of the country.
And this children, is WHY you have a Electoral College. It's a safety net so that EVERYONES vote counts.

Quote from: mmtwice on March 20, 2019, 11:48:40 PM
I will preface my contribution with a question:  why are not enough people referring to the Socialist, Progressive Democrats for what they are:  COMMUNISTS?  That word, when effectively associated with these Marxists, would raise eyebrows for a great multitude come election time.  I am curious, and a little beside myself, as to why this obvious labeling correlation has not been proffered into the mainstream conscience of America.  Regarding these DemoComs, as I refer to them, I just want to make the statement that an individual conservative does not cede absolute control to a necessary evil: government.  Only a limited government allows each citizen to reach their full potential.  Are we ready to fight for this?  I am.  Also, I want to borrow and share something I found today.  Actually, I read something similar in the weeks following Trump's election.   

For all the people who fell asleep in civics class...

1: There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 2,626 of them. Clinton won 487.
2: There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16.
3: Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes.
4: In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.
5: These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.
6: When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.
Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc) don't and shouldn't speak for the rest of the country.
And this children, is WHY you have a Electoral College. It's a safety net so that EVERYONES vote counts.

Thank you for that!  People don't understand the dynamics, those that don't pay attention and just say well, duh..of course whoever wins by popular vote doesn't understand how some of these larger cities can  overwhelm in numbers  several entire states.

Quote from: mmtwice on March 20, 2019, 11:48:40 PM
I will preface my contribution with a question:  why are not enough people referring to the Socialist, Progressive Democrats for what they are:  COMMUNISTS?  That word, when effectively associated with these Marxists, would raise eyebrows for a great multitude come election time.  I am curious, and a little beside myself, as to why this obvious labeling correlation has not been proffered into the mainstream conscience of America.  Regarding these DemoComs, as I refer to them, I just want to make the statement that an individual conservative does not cede absolute control to a necessary evil: government.  Only a limited government allows each citizen to reach their full potential.  Are we ready to fight for this?  I am.  Also, I want to borrow and share something I found today.  Actually, I read something similar in the weeks following Trump's election.   

For all the people who fell asleep in civics class...

1: There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 2,626 of them. Clinton won 487.
2: There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16.
3: Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes.
4: In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.
5: These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.
6: When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.
Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc) don't and shouldn't speak for the rest of the country.
And this children, is WHY you have a Electoral College. It's a safety net so that EVERYONES vote counts.

You mean, for all the lib kiddies who were never taught civics, geography, history or the constitution?
However, they have been taught to be accepting of all societies, and embrace everything antithetical to our Founding values and beliefs.

If Che were running on the Dim platform today, they'd kick his ass to the curb for not being socialist enough.

I had to do some classwork last night and uncovered some startling numbers.  The U.S. population has grown from approx. 248 million to over 308 million from 1990 to 2010.  Who in the hell accounts for this growth and what is their ideology?  I have a theory which suggests that the call by DemoComs to abolish the electoral college is directly related to this pop. growth number.  Perhaps the call for illegals and children to have the legal right to vote is because the Dems were counting on a moment in time like this.  If there are about 250 million people in the U.S. currently of voting age and 119 million voted in 2016, then a population growth of almost 70 million in two decades is a huge number.  Any thoughts?  Is the wall being built too late and the Dems got what they wanted?

Quote from: mmtwice on March 21, 2019, 07:42:07 AM
I had to do some classwork last night and uncovered some startling numbers.  The U.S. population has grown from approx. 248 million to over 328 million in the past two decades.  Who in the hell accounts for this growth and what is their ideology?  I have a theory which suggests that the call by DemoComs to abolish the electoral college is directly related to this pop. growth number.  Perhaps the call for illegals and children to have the legal right to vote is because the Dems were counting on a moment in time like this.  If there are about 250 million people in the U.S. currently of voting age and 119 million voted in 2016, then a population growth of almost 80 million in two decades is a huge number.  Any thoughts?  Is the wall being built too late and the Dems got what they wanted?

You have part of it right, but why this rush by the democrats to want more of these illegals here. First, one has to realize democrats succeed only when they have support from those they deem as the underclass and downtrodden. Back in the 1960's LBJ hijacked the Black community support by making promises that have utterly failed. They also, to a lesser degree, went after Hispanics. Now, 50 years later those two groups are figuring out this scam by democrats and are leaving the fold. Now democrats are scrambling to find another large group of folks to scam.

Quote from: Solar on March 20, 2019, 03:21:04 PM
This is the first election where the left ran to the hard left, usually they run moderate and do the exact opposite once seated.
You raise a great point, the only way the left could possibly remain viable is, if the gopE make it possible, so I can't count them out yet, but at the rate the Dims are moving left, they'll be lucky to garner a third of the vote in 2020.
This is why they so badly want to the change the Constitution, they're planting the seed that the Constitution is outdated in hopes of keeping their evil dream of destruction alive in the next generation.

One thing about Marxists, they think in decades, while we are stuck in preservation mode.
If we want this Nation to survive, we need to support Trump and make certain the next POTUS to follow, is nearly an identical clone of the man and continue undoing the damage the left has inflicted on the country.

Solar, I agree 100%!  Some of these Marxists are ignorant sheep joining in the echo chamber.  However, some of the committed Marxist are very intelligent and very cunning and as you correctly point out, they plant a seed and then have a long view working towards something that seems outrageous today, but in a couple of election cycles may gain traction.

In some ways, Donald Trump's Art of the Deal strategy is to demand something outrageous and later compromise on something that may be greater than he had actually hoped to achieve in the first place.  For instance, the Great Beautiful thirty foot solid wall from sea to shining sea.  If President Trump achieves barriers along the border wherever they are needed along with the personnel and other things the Border Patrol need to secure the border, he can then compromise and focus on reforming the legal immigration and asylum laws.  The Art of the Deal requires finding some way that the guy on the other side of the table feels like he got something.  If Trump secures the border, who cares if the Dems crow about how he didn't get his 30' High solid wall from sea to shining sea.  Donald Trump is very shrewd and he plays 4D chess, while his opponents are playing a really smart game of Chinese checkers.

Quote from: wally on March 21, 2019, 12:17:41 PM
Solar, I agree 100%!  Some of these Marxists are ignorant sheep joining in the echo chamber.  However, some of the committed Marxist are very intelligent and very cunning and as you correctly point out, they plant a seed and then have a long view working towards something that seems outrageous today, but in a couple of election cycles may gain traction.

In some ways, Donald Trump's Art of the Deal strategy is to demand something outrageous and later compromise on something that may be greater than he had actually hoped to achieve in the first place.  For instance, the Great Beautiful thirty foot solid wall from sea to shining sea.  If President Trump achieves barriers along the border wherever they are needed along with the personnel and other things the Border Patrol need to secure the border, he can then compromise and focus on reforming the legal immigration and asylum laws.  The Art of the Deal requires finding some way that the guy on the other side of the table feels like he got something.  If Trump secures the border, who cares if the Dems crow about how he didn't get his 30' High solid wall from sea to shining sea.  Donald Trump is very shrewd and he plays 4D chess, while his opponents are playing a really smart game of Chinese checkers.

Marxism is the root ideology. But it has been adaptive to particular solutions to what Marx had hoped.  Natural revolt over capitalism never happened.  So Trotsky forces it by adopting Communism. Government forcefully takes over everything.  Mussolini saw that it was not necessary to own the means of production but control it, which is called Facism.  Roosevelt believed in this form of socialism.  There were plenty of Communists in our government during his years in office.  Obama and other globalists know that they cannot force the world to kneel  but by slowly gaining control over the economic engine they can accomplish the same thing. This is what AOC and others are advocating.  Roosevelt wanted a national health care system back in the 30's.  They have tried for many years. The closest came with Clintons in the 90"s.  It was only time. Obamacare was a prelude, a leading up to the real thing.

My question is why are we still talking about some kind, any kind of federal health care system. Roberts should have declared it uncontitutional when he had the chance.  He will get another since a lower federal judge has ruled it unconstitutional.


On the idea of compromise.  You cannot compromise between life and death.  There is no such thing as half a life.  The socialist can live with half a death because they would have gained at least half of what they wanted.  This is why they will support some kind of health care compromise and then continue to follow up with single payer later.    The government needs to get out of health care completely. This includes Medicare eventually as well and stop funding Medicaid which are state run programs subsidized by the federal government. Give power back to the states completely.