Democrats prepare for top-down review after 2014 election losses

[Elian]

because Retired people have more time to vote than the average college going student.

[seta-san]

Yeah weakling democrats not wanting to rig the game.

rigging would suggest some sort of cheating going on. There's nothing against the rules going on here. two states are already like this. states are granted the right by the constitution to apportion their votes any way they like to. democrat tears are delicious.

[Wells]

rigging would suggest some sort of cheating going on. There's nothing against the rules going on here. two states are already like this. states are granted the right by the constitution to apportion their votes any way they like to. democrat tears are delicious.

No it wouldn't. The republicans are more interested in rules they can win, than rules that are fair. If you treat politics as a game then great, if you treat it as something that matters its abhorrent.

If every state switched to proportional electoral votes and we addressed gerrymandering then fine. But they aren't and we haven't.

[seta-san]

No it wouldn't. The republicans are more interested in rules they can win, than rules that are fair. If you treat politics as a game then great, if you treat it as something that matters its abhorrent.

If every state switched to proportional electoral votes and we addressed gerrymandering then fine. But they aren't and we haven't.

or you could fight fire with fire.

[Wells]

or you could fight fire with fire.

Like I said, if you view politics as a game, great, you're a political cancer on this country.

Two sides game playing doesn't make a better government than one side game playing.

[breadisfunny]

Sure am looking forward to Walker making Wisconsin's budget deficit even larger, in the name of fiscal responsibility.

i can't wait for him to rationalize his next bullshit budget cuts.

[Fugus]

or you could fight fire with fire.

That is all good in a game, not in real life politics.

To many, if the stakes are that high, fighting fire with fire is already too little too late many times and the only way you end up winning is by bringing a gun to that knife fight.

I honestly would like to make force the districts to divide the areas roughly by population size and be required to make the districts as centralized as possible, so when you look at the maps it looks like squares and circles with roughly equal populations in them and not these damn weird horseshoes and pretzel designs to funnel votes to a predetermined party.

[breadisfunny]

i'm just saying that this is the sort of thing that democrats are too weak to do so all they do is whine in a corner what republicans do things

oh yes because who cares if republicans deny people health care while rejecting federal aid to help expand medicare and set up the infrastructure to make it happen because they keep getting bribes from insurance companies oh sorry i mean "donations".

[Garnier Fructis]

That is all good in a game, not in real life politics.

To many, if the stakes are that high, fighting fire with fire is already too little too late many times and the only way you end up winning is by bringing a gun to that knife fight.

I honestly would like to make force the districts to divide the areas roughly by population size and be required to make the districts as centralized as possible, so when you look at the maps it looks like squares and circles with roughly equal populations in them and not these damn weird horseshoes and pretzel designs to funnel votes to a predetermined party.

We're long overdue for a Constitutional Amendment, and banning gerrymandering sounds like a great amendment.

[breadisfunny]

We're long overdue for a Constitutional Amendment, and banning gerrymandering sounds like a great amendment.

should add access to healthcare regardless of income level. we still don't have that.

[Wells]

should add access to healthcare regardless of income level. we still don't have that.

I think the Constitution should be limited to how government should work and what it isn't allowed to do. Setting specific policy goals in a Constitution is just too inflexible.

[Fugus]

I think the Constitution should be limited to how government should work and what it isn't allowed to do. Setting specific policy goals in a Constitution is just too inflexible.

I personally see it as there are some things they need to keep out of and some things they need to keep their hands in it and never let go.

The problem is the people in charge are now getting paid to keep out of what they need to do while sticking their nose in where it doesn't belong.

[breadisfunny]

I think the Constitution should be limited to how government should work and what it isn't allowed to do. Setting specific policy goals in a Constitution is just too inflexible.

at the rate this country's politics is going it's the only way it will happen.

- - - Updated - - -

I personally see it as there are some things they need to keep out of and some things they need to keep their hands in it and never let go.

The problem is the people in charge are now getting paid to keep out of what they need to do while sticking their nose in where it doesn't belong.

assuring that people wont have to go into foreclosure/bankruptcy because of health issues is something that shouldn't even be an issue.

[Fugus]

assuring that people wont have to go into foreclosure/bankruptcy because of health issues is something that shouldn't even be an issue.

Agreed, anything that is critical infrastructure where the people have zero choice in doing without, the government should be required to be in.

Many stuff I would like to see a socialized alternative made as a baseline and then let companies compete against that, so that if they want the people to choose them, they HAVE to have a quality high enough and a price low enough to get them off the baseline.