Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 645
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 398
Jon Bon 385
Harley Diablo 370
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 262
sharkman29 250
George Spelvin 244
Top Posters
DallasRain70380
biomed160272
Yssup Rider59843
gman4452860
LexusLover51038
WTF48267
offshoredrilling47422
pyramider46370
bambino40274
CryptKicker37064
Mokoa36485
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
The_Waco_Kid35137
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-20-2016, 11:32 AM   #16
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

"Only 55 percent say they have a lot or some trust in Obama to tell the public accurate information about foreign intelligence and what's going on overseas. Fifty-one percent say the same of Trump."

"Thirty-two percent said Russia influenced the election's results, while 44 percent said they didn't, and 24 percent said they were unsure or had no opinion."


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...OGR?li=BBnbcA1

Snipe Hunting 101!
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 12-27-2016, 04:58 PM   #17
dilbert firestorm
Premium Access
 
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 9, 2010
Location: Nuclear Wasteland BBS, New Orleans, LA, USA
Posts: 31,921
Encounters: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bambino View Post
Great, and take their 55 Electoral votes with them.
actually, the 55 votes would be distributed to other states if California leaves.
dilbert firestorm is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2016, 06:53 AM   #18
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm View Post
actually, the 55 votes would be distributed to other states if California leaves.
Why?

The Electors are based on districts and senators. They will not be "distributed to other states" .... They will just disappear.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2016, 06:29 PM   #19
The_Waco_Kid
AKA ULTRA MAGA Gurl
 
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: The MAGA Zone
Posts: 35,137
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
And Pendleton. Except unlike Guantanamo it won't be a lease.
Camp Pendleton. been there. several times. always a blast to get sent up to Pendleton for weapons qualifications. and you usually get to watch live fire tank maneuvers too. yeehaw!!

semper fi jarheads!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Budman View Post
We should keep all of California. We just need to deport all of the fucking libs. It's beautiful country but run by retards.

exactly. we took it, why give it up fer nada? just dump the libs and illegals and it will be a new west coast just waiting to be settled bahahaaaa
The_Waco_Kid is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2016, 10:34 PM   #20
dilbert firestorm
Premium Access
 
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 9, 2010
Location: Nuclear Wasteland BBS, New Orleans, LA, USA
Posts: 31,921
Encounters: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm View Post
actually, the 55 votes would be distributed to other states if California leaves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Why?

The Electors are based on districts and senators. They will not be "distributed to other states" .... They will just disappear.
I made an error in my post. I meant 53, not 55.

there is legislation that fixed congressional districts at 435 seats.

the senate would be reduced to 98 seats.
dilbert firestorm is offline   Quote
Old 12-29-2016, 12:59 AM   #21
CuteOldGuy
Valued Poster
 
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
Encounters: 20
Default

The loss of two California senators would increase the IQ and effectiveness of Congress.
CuteOldGuy is offline   Quote
Old 12-29-2016, 01:01 AM   #22
andymarksman
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 11, 2014
Location: dallas
Posts: 1,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Budman View Post
We should keep all of California. We just need to deport all of the fucking libs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rey Lengua View Post
And depot the wetbacks and gang bangers while we're at it !
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid View Post
just dump the libs and illegals and it will be a new west coast just waiting to be settled bahahaaaa
To the Black Sea, I surmise....

andymarksman is offline   Quote
Old 12-29-2016, 03:13 AM   #23
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm View Post

there is legislation that fixed congressional districts at 435 seats.
Based on the number of districts in California, when those are eliminated then the total number is reduced.

U.S. Constitution Art. I, Section 2:
"...The actual Enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one Representative;..."

This is a decent explanation of how and why it would be adjusted to meet the change from California leaving the Union .... it also address the Electoral College formula as well ....

http://www.thirty-thousand.org/docum...11July1995.pdf

California has 53 U.S. Representatives ...

The incentive for reducing the number of seats is seen here:

http://www.senate.gov/CRSpubs/9c14ec...3daa1640e4.pdf

Roughly $1.5 million annually per seat .... in budget savings.

The two Senate seats would reduce it annually about $7-8 million.

So it would reduce costs annually to about $90 million.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 12-29-2016, 11:55 PM   #24
CuteOldGuy
Valued Poster
 
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
Encounters: 20
Default

Are you saying that each congressional district is capped at 30,000 population? What's the population of your district?
CuteOldGuy is offline   Quote
Old 12-30-2016, 01:29 AM   #25
dilbert firestorm
Premium Access
 
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 9, 2010
Location: Nuclear Wasteland BBS, New Orleans, LA, USA
Posts: 31,921
Encounters: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Based on the number of districts in California, when those are eliminated then the total number is reduced.

U.S. Constitution Art. I, Section 2:
"...The actual Enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one Representative;..."

This is a decent explanation of how and why it would be adjusted to meet the change from California leaving the Union .... it also address the Electoral College formula as well ....

http://www.thirty-thousand.org/docum...11July1995.pdf

California has 53 U.S. Representatives ...

The incentive for reducing the number of seats is seen here:

http://www.senate.gov/CRSpubs/9c14ec...3daa1640e4.pdf

Roughly $1.5 million annually per seat .... in budget savings.

The two Senate seats would reduce it annually about $7-8 million.

So it would reduce costs annually to about $90 million.
it would require an act of congressto make that change.

don't think that will happen, 53 seats is too juicy to pass up. they think power over common sense.
dilbert firestorm is offline   Quote
Old 12-30-2016, 03:33 AM   #26
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy View Post
Are you saying that each congressional district is capped at 30,000 population? What's the population of your district?
No. I didn't say that.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 12-30-2016, 03:37 AM   #27
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm View Post
it would require an act of congressto make that change.

don't think that will happen, 53 seats is too juicy to pass up. they think power over common sense.
And you don't "think that will happen" based on what legal argument?

It is adjusted every 10 years and what happens every 10 years.

Secondly, if the seats are based on "population" in the constitution (which they are), being "too juicy" doesn't satisfy the standard set by the U.S. Constitution.

Go back and see in the legislative history how many times it has been changed as the population has grown.

Haven't we had too much "too juicy" decisions lately?
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 12-30-2016, 10:21 AM   #28
dilbert firestorm
Premium Access
 
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 9, 2010
Location: Nuclear Wasteland BBS, New Orleans, LA, USA
Posts: 31,921
Encounters: 4
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
And you don't "think that will happen" based on what legal argument?

It is adjusted every 10 years and what happens every 10 years.

Secondly, if the seats are based on "population" in the constitution (which they are), being "too juicy" doesn't satisfy the standard set by the U.S. Constitution.

Go back and see in the legislative history how many times it has been changed as the population has grown.

Haven't we had too much "too juicy" decisions lately?
legislation has changed a bunch of times until 1911 which was the last year of an increase. there was two attempts to add more seats in 1929 & in 2000's (adding 2 more seats).

of course, the next census Will determine who will get those 53 seats.

Quote:
And you don't "think that will happen" based on what legal argument
this is not about a legal argument, but about politics.
dilbert firestorm is offline   Quote
Old 12-31-2016, 02:06 AM   #29
CuteOldGuy
Valued Poster
 
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
Encounters: 20
Default

I think the House of Representatives should be increased to 1500 members. The cost would be offset by more intimate connections with their constituents and less influence of special interests. There would be greater turnover, and much less concentration of power. The people would have a much clearer voice, which would limit the passage of stupid bills. More people would be acquainted with their representatives.

I know you're going to flame away, but understand, the Establishment will never let this happen, and so far, I'm the only one with this idea, and Mike Pompeo doesn't like talking to me.
CuteOldGuy is offline   Quote
Old 12-31-2016, 03:23 AM   #30
dilbert firestorm
Premium Access
 
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 9, 2010
Location: Nuclear Wasteland BBS, New Orleans, LA, USA
Posts: 31,921
Encounters: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy View Post
I think the House of Representatives should be increased to 1500 members. The cost would be offset by more intimate connections with their constituents and less influence of special interests. There would be greater turnover, and much less concentration of power. The people would have a much clearer voice, which would limit the passage of stupid bills. More people would be acquainted with their representatives.

I know you're going to flame away, but understand, the Establishment will never let this happen, and so far, I'm the only one with this idea, and Mike Pompeo doesn't like talking to me.
congressional seats need to be increased to at least 1305 or 2175.
dilbert firestorm is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved