Obama Stepping On Your Rights...Again?

[PHXConx]

Congressional races are local.  One district or one state.  Presidential elections are run nationally.  They are not dependent on one local.  
 
I believe democrats have become a bit more liberal over the last few years.  I guess time will tell.  I think if Clinton decides to run she will get the nomination this time around. 
 
I do believe they were more sexist and that is why Clinton lost.  She was the better candidate.  It's my opinion.  You are free to disagree.

wow i think you failed civics class... 
 
Congress is a district, Senate is state, Presidential elections are state ran its not one nationwide election.
 
if you dont think those local races count, tell a presidential candidate not to visit New York, California, Texas, Florida or  Illinois 
 
Hell you only need eleven states to win the presidency, if you have those eleven states you got the 270 votes needed California 55; Texas 34; New York 31; Florida 27; Pennsylvania 21; Illinois 21; Ohio 20; Michigan 17; New Jersey 15; Georgia 15; North Carolina 15. 
 
you win those states you get to be called president...  and the other 39 can get bent..  
 
also as far as the primaries are concerned you have to focus  on new hampshire and iowa, (well iowa is a caucus but you still have to focus on two of the smallest states in the union... not local?  get real..
 
she may get the nomination but the primaries are going to be ugly, no way will biden bow out, and im pretty sure kerry is going to run to, expect  to see some congress critters try to run as well... i expected jesse jackson jr, but his jail time screwed that up for him.. andrew cuomo will certainly run she may very well be the favorite, right now, but alot of time between now and november 2016
 
 
And I do disagree with Clinton being the better candidate once she gave us the birther conspiracy it was time to bow out gracefully, that was truly a sleazy stunt on her campaigns part 

 

[Ms Tree]

There are 300 million in this country.  Selling out a few venues does not a majority make.  Never said all his idea were whacky.  Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 
 
The govt is involved in marriage.  How would he fix it?  I have not followed him so I do not know if he has publicly stated that he would support marriage equality.  Last I checked he want to kick it to the states.  Allow them to discriminate in violation of the COTUS. Married in one state and not in another.  How the heck does that work?

 

[Ms Tree]

wow i think you failed civics class... 
 
Congress is a district, Senate is state, Presidential elections are state ran its not one nationwide election.

 
OK, that is the funniest thing I have read in a while.  I'll give you a bit to correct it. 
 
Do your self a favor, if you are going to accuse someone of needing a civics class, making a statement like the one above is not the best way to open a discussion.
 
I did not even get past your first sentence.  If you cannot get this right,
the rest is just going to be noise.

 

[PHXConx]

I think that is a big part of his problem.  The ship has sailed.  The govt is in the marriage business so the no one care that he thinks they should not be.  What I want to know is how he is going to deal with the reality that we live in, not some fantasy world that he wants top be in.

i dont think that the government should be in the marriage business either, for anyone straight or gay.  i think there should be a one time get out of jail free card for married people... if both parties agree then their union can be dissolved no questions asked.  after that period is over if you are married you stay part of a new civil union.  which will be a personal contract.  each couple will be able to set up their own expectations what will be allowed what wont, it will be a binding contract, with agreed upon penalties and agreements.  
 
Civil unions would fix alot of the problems we have, they would be agreed upon not based on a religious text, (unless the partners draw up the agreement that way) but an actual contract.  no longer will one political party or another be able to dictate the terms in which someone can show their love for another.  
 
Weddings as a ceremony would be delegated to the church based on their texts, their first amendment rights will be satisfied, and people can with dignity and the privacy they deserve live their lives loving who they want.  and how they want.  
 
Marriage should be a personal agreement between two people, and the state shouldnt step in shouldnt dictate shouldnt make rules that should be a private and personal thing and in no way can that be done if the state is involved 

 

[PHXConx]

 
OK, that is the funniest thing I have read in a while.  I'll give you a bit to correct it. 
 
Do your self a favor, if you are going to accuse someone of needing a civics class, making a statement like the one above is not the best way to open a discussion.
 
I did not even get past your first sentence.  If you cannot get this right,
the rest is just going to be noise.

 
ok.. art 2 section one us constitution
 
Article. II.
Section. 1.
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
 
Each state shall appoint in a manner as the legislature thereof may direct... 
 
Each states laws for picking those electors are different, thats why its a local election not a national one 
 
like i said failed civics class 
 
ill give you a moment to argue with the US constituion... now maybe you should go back and read the rest of my post because obviously you need the lesson

 

[Ms Tree]

Ok, one more try. Read your post (hint the first part of the sentence not the last) and then read Art II again.

 

[PHXConx]

Ok, one more try. Read your post (hint the first part of the sentence not the last) and then read Art II again

just tell me what you think it is i dont have time to play this cryptic bs...  how do you think its a national election when you have to go to a local polling area?  its counted by the states, not a national entity...
 
you do know you arent voting for the president correct? you are voting for who gets to be the electors of that electorial college, and even after they are chosen they dont have to vote the way you want them to 
 
you do know that right?
 
you realize why thats a local election not a national one???
 
FAILED CIVICS CLASS

 

[EastUS1]

When i got fed up with the republicans i went to the libertarian party...
 
where does a liberal fed up with the democrats go?
 
Is the Green party still a viable choice for fed up democrats?

 
1) Welcome to the club.
2) I'd not think merely the Greens. The only viable "choice" for any upset "democrats" that want to lean further towards the umm... "progessive" left would be the communist party....

 

[Ms Tree]

wow i think you failed civics class... 
 
Congress is a district, Senate is state, Presidential elections are state ran its not one nationwide election.

Geez, you're no fun.
 
There is the House, which has 435 representatives who are elected by their district.  Then there is the Senate which has 100 Senators how are elected by their state.  The House and the Senate make up Congress.  So if you are going to lecture me (or anyone else about needing a civics class) at least know that Congress is not a district. Congress is the name given to both chambers of the US legislature.
 
So, now that we have that out of the way why don't you drop the holier than thou smug BS attitude and have a discussion like an adult? 
 
When I said that Senate and House candidates were local I meant exactly that.  A House rep only needs to win in their small district.  It is easier for a minority or female to be elected in a district in a more progressive area than a more conservative area.  The same goes for a Senate Candidate but on a state level.
 
A presidential candidate needs to win several states so that is more challenging. The bias of a group gets watered down as the group grows. That is why I think it will be easier for a female to get elected to the WH now than it was 8 or 10 years ago. I think here are enough pockets in the dem party that are more progressive now than there were 8 years ago.
 
Yes I know there is an electoral college and yes I know that they do not need to vote the way the popular vote turned out at least not in all states. The regulations on what an elector may do vary by state.
 
I agree with the idea of all unions being civil and contract based but that will never happen.  What I think will happen is that more and more states will enforce marriage equality and when the SCOTUS gets a hold of it, they will be left with no choice but to legalize it state wide or tell tens of thousands of couples now married that they are no longer married.  I cannot recall a time when the court took away rights after the fact from that number of people.

 

[PHXConx]

Just couldn't Bring it to yourself to say you were Wrong. could you?

 

[PHXConx]

1) Welcome to the club.
2) I'd not think merely the Greens. The only viable "choice" for any upset "democrats" that want to lean further towards the umm... "progessive" left would be the communist party....

Sad to say this.. But the communist party isn't as far left as most hosts. ON MSNBC. LET alone some. Of the far left democrats

 

[PHXConx]

Geez, you're no fun.
 
There is the House, which has 435 representatives who are elected by their district.  Then there is the Senate which has 100 Senators how are elected by their state.  The House and the Senate make up Congress.  So if you are going to lecture me (or anyone else about needing a civics class) at least know that Congress is not a district. Congress is the name given to both chambers of the US legislature.

When you say I am a congressman you are a what? Oh you are a member of the house of Representatives.. Never is it interchangeable. With senator. Call a senator a congressman see how quickly you are corrected That is why the term Congress is synonymous. With the house. But never ever the Senate. You seem to have a grasp of English I'm sure you knew that.
 
 

When I said that Senate and House candidates were local I meant exactly that.  A House rep only needs to win in their small district.  It is easier for a minority or female to be elected in a district in a more progressive area than a more conservative area.  The same goes for a Senate Candidate but on a state level.

Yup said this already

 
A presidential candidate needs to win several states so that is more challenging. The bias of a group gets watered down as the group grows. That is why I think it will be easier for a female to get elected to the WH now than it was 8 or 10 years ago. I think here are enough pockets in the dem party that are more progressive now than there were 8 years ago.

It's still a local race.. Promises are made to States interest groups etc. You never see anyone campaigning In. Alaska. Not even Sarah Palin lol if it was a national race they wouldn't have to kiss babies in California and new York even though both for the last 30 years gone Democrat. Democrats still go there multiple times. If it was. As you say a national race. They wouldn't need to. They would go. To all 50 States equally.

 

Yes I know there is an electoral college and yes I know that they do not need to vote the way the popular vote turned out at least not in all states. The regulations on what an elector may do vary by state.

And they are who you are voting for. Not the presidential candidate another reason why it's a local election. You don't vote for president. But local ppl in your state.
 

I agree with the idea of all unions being civil and contract based but that will never happen.  What I think will happen is that more and more states will enforce marriage equality and when the SCOTUS gets a hold of it, they will be left with no choice but to legalize it state wide or tell tens of thousands of couples now married that they are no longer married.  I cannot recall a time when the court took away rights after the fact from that number of people.

Because marriage as defined by Scotus is a state issue. Scotus sends cases back to States. Spanks them for being overzealous. But usually rules with instructions for state or district courts to take the issue back up with the ruling in mind. It's going to take a constitutional amendment and there has been decent movement. From both the left and the right to propose exactly that. A constitutional. Amendment to make civil unions the way to do consensual contracts. And remove States power to define that. It's making unions an individual Right not a state rights issue. It may take a while. But I really believe it's coming.

I can think of plenty of times. A court ruled allowing rights of ppl taken away.. Japanese American citizens. Put into internment camps come to mind...

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

2) I'd not think merely the Greens. The only viable "choice" for any upset "democrats" that want to lean further towards the umm... "progessive" left would be the communist party....

Truth.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

So, now that we have that out of the way why don't you drop the holier than thou smug BS attitude and have a discussion like an adult? 

Ms Tree you are a never ending source of entertainment. 
 

Just couldn't Bring it to yourself to say you were Wrong. could you?

That is the libtard way of doing things. I mean.... look at Obamacare......

 

[Ms Tree]

The fact that members of Congress do not understand that they are all members on Congress is not surprising nor my concern. I'm using the standard definitions of the word.

The whole nation is voting for the two candidates (more if you want to count the Indies) for president.

That was a time of war and a bit different but believe what you want.

I'm done.