Honestly? Why should this be allowed?

Honestly? Why should this be allowed?

Attached: 1539050452595.jpg (750x950, 321K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=GMieHgRG_MU
sweetliberty.org/standing_calls.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

I agree, this man should not be allowed to speak. He should probably be arrested

Agreed we should stop electing senators and let states appointment them as intended

Bob Chipman is a fat faggot. Let that sink in..

>muh tyranny of the majority

Because there are two houses for a reason.

Imagine being this much of a faggot wanting to change the rules because you’re losing and the country rejects you like the reject you are

Did you tards fail high school government?

Attached: 1527664270427.png (1019x746, 1.03M)

...and that’s a good thing!

Because the house of representatives is the one based on population?

The senate is specifically 2 per state such that the smaller states had a reason to join the union. If your union denies smaller states a voice by taking all votes proportional to population then they have nothing to gain from being in your union. Which in turn fucks you over, because those states are usually producing all your food.

Woah woah woah there. Let's not bring logic in to this.

It was designed because the senators represent state governments, which are equal in the federal government regardless of size.

Direct election of Senators was a mistake

>The LA metro area has 20 congressmen
>The states of Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska and Iowa have 13 congressmen between them
Honestly why should this be allowed?

It’s as if you’ve never read the federalist papers.

let a Canadian explain

Attached: electoral college by leaf.png (1321x184, 17K)

Senators are elected to represent states. Each state gets to send two guys to congress to represent the interests of their state. The senate isn't intended to be a democratic institution. House representatives on the other hand are districted according to population.

Yes. But. Progress my man. Bob sees that as a wall against it.

The 17th should be abolished

Public education should be abolished along with voting rights for anyone under 35 and no property.

hurr durr why should states have any kind of power hurr durr we are popular we should have control.

fucking liberal socialist mindset.

>Democrats claim to want to protect the minorities
>Democrats advocating a tyranny by majority democratic system
How can democrats possibly be this retarded?

Attached: clinton.jpg (229x220, 9K)

that image made my blood pressure rise to dangerous levels.
democracy was a mistake.

Delete this antisemitism right now

Worth noting that a good 50-60% of the people in that blue dot are illegals and the extra representatives aren't representing us citizens.

The vote should be popular, and the number of senators should represent the number of LEGAL people in that area.

But, there needs to be an easy way for a state to secede. A popular vote scenario would mean only two states would decide the election.

Average IQ in the blue dot: 90
Average IQ in the red chad spot: 101

I'm from LA and I've been to all those red places. Obviously this retard hasn't. If that little blue dot ruled over those red places everyone in those red places would probably have to pay $3000 for rent each month, pay high taxes, pay ridiculous taxes just to run a business etc... our founding father sure as fuck were smarter than this fucking retard.

Attached: 1538873659482s.jpg (210x240, 7K)

78% of the population is represented by a minority of 48 senators.

This is actually true, believe or not.

Liberals are starting to suggest a constitutional convention to modernize our elections in response to urban population expansion.

this. Liberal idiocracy makes my blood boil. There's a reason California has the most homeless people on the whole planet.

no one told all those niggers to move into the same tiny geographical region

It should be allowed because the red represents a large swath of people with different beliefs and ideas. The blue represents a small microscopic groupthink bubble. A hivemind shouldn't be allowed to rule the former.

Can't wait until the next census has that illegal alien question on it and California loses a shitload of reps

Yeah, I read another article just a few minutes ago spouting this same sort of shit. The Dems new angle is that they are under represented, and that large areas with fewer citizens hold more power. Expect to hear a lot more about this.

What is Federalism?

Attached: Teaching The Retarded.jpg (416x620, 68K)

And? That's the entire purpose of the senate.

My fucking sides. As in, "Write a new Constitution?" That's not happening, number one. If we establish that precedent, our entire country is based on nothing, liable to be thrown at any given second. Number two, do you think that smaller states are going to be on board with even a Constitutional amendment of any sort? There's a reason it requires a 2/3rds majority.
Fuck off.

Before The United States of America existed, we we were colonies. Then states, that became united.
The State thing was pretty important.
Each state gets 2 senators.

>lol were you not successfully indoctrinated into suicidal nihilism or something lol?

FAGGOT, This was agreement that founded this nation. Cause people in the country with a different life style didnt want to get cucked by city retards that dont understand how they live and what they need.

youtube.com/watch?v=GMieHgRG_MU

Attached: nebraska.jpg (1024x825, 134K)

Gee what could go wrong with creating a system where 80% of your territory has de-facto no representation in govt...

if only there was some system to counteract this great injustice we really need some sort of established institution based on population contend with the senate

Attached: 1510546353036.jpg (480x480, 21K)

Kmao

because if we had a democracy instead of a republic then the only thing stopping us from killing you all would be gone.

These threads are made by LARPers in order to distill the arguments against a certain dumb position.

Maybe cry some more about it?

>There's a reason it requires a 2/3rds majority.

It's 2/3 to propose it but 3/4 to pass it. And if I remember correctly, that 3/4 covers the states individually, independent of population size.

Oh my god!! I am literally shaking from your logic. Delete this just like HRC deleted her emails.

This

Those are sovereign states, not provinces. Their citizens get a disproportionate say because their land holds strategic value to the union.

To remove the rights of these sovereign states in order to push our urban agendas would be a betrayal of the trust that formed the union in the first place.

Attached: 1492897225761.jpg (562x600, 37K)

Cali getting 2 senators sucks a nutsack indeed by itself but they also get a lot of electoral college votes and house seats so ehhhhh.

Just kill your self you fucking shitlib. We don’t want to live with you anymore. I can’t wait for your stinking corpse to be rotting in the street while we all celebrate.

/thread

Crush the urbanite

Cordon off that blue dot for three months. Nothing goes in Nothing goes out. Three months later, the population will be zero. They'll have all starved to death.

Cordon off that red swath for three months. Nothing goes in. Nothing goes out. The well-fed residents will be happy as shit that they got to keep all their tax money for three months.

That's why your fucking blue dot doesn't get 14 senators. Because they're a net drain of resources. A bunch of useless fucking eaters who can't even feed them-fucking-selves.

Be happy we allow your blue dot to exist.

I like how you got btfo on /tv/ lol, faggot

>When you're such a free-thinker you spent your time during Social Studies wondering why the tiny blue dot has less senators instead of paying attention to the lesson on the Senate and House of Representatives

Yeah that is fucking disgusting. Why would you want to live in that cramped blue shithole? Move where you can get some space and oxygen FFS.

The Constitution is Un-Constitutional!

Yeah? That's how The Senate was intended. It's the beautiful balance of power that Congress has, the other side being the House of Representatives (which libs don't control either, so not sure what basedboy here is talking about).

>huge geographical region has more votes than a single county
>holy shit abolish the electoral college

>ITT, shills are mad that we have a senate, and not just a house of representatives twice

accoriding to that logic China should rule the world. And I'm pretty sure we all know what that would mean?

Death by elevator.

Attached: 1200px-Flag_of_the_People's_Republic_of_China.svg.png (1200x800, 7K)

Officially, sure. But the constitution is just a piece of paper. When the president, majority in congress, and a packed liberal judicial branch agree, the piece of paper can be rewritten. Just need one blue wave like in 2008, except this time the gloves are off.

Because America is a republic comprised of sovereign states, and the structure of the federal government is meant to reflect that.

Do they not teach civics in school in democrat controlled states? Why are they all acting like they're just now finding this out?

It's almost like they're two completely different areas with two completely different values and resident ethnicities

>Liberals are starting to suggest a constitutional convention
that won't go the way they want it to go.

It's a S O Y face if I've ever seen one

Because senate represents land area, not population.

Congress/representatives represent population, not land area.

The Presidential balances the two.

That way stronger states can't fuck over weaker ones.
That way more populated states can't fuck over weaker ones.

What is he suggesting to do with the senate? Have senators assigned according to population? Then it would be just like the house and be retarded and redundant. May as well just abolish it and make the house the whole of congress.

These people won't be happy until congressional elections are national and every congressman comes from either NYC, DC or California.

To be fair. Santa Monica right on the beach looks cool as hell. but very very expensive. also i see your trips

Attached: 1538601023187.png (270x352, 162K)

This. These faggots have no conception of just how much they owe that "red swathe" and how fucked they'd be without it.

Learn how government works and your question will be answered.

Only tax payers and veterans should be allowed to vote

mob rule is good goyim

All of these pinkos don't realize that all they are doing is explaining the problem that led to the Connecticut Compromise. Its almost like we have a bicameral legislation for a reason.

Attached: Absolutely Retarded.gif (200x200, 1.82M)

according to your logic, laws are just written on a peace of paper. Might as well go back to the stone ages and hit ourselves over the head to settle disputes.

Attached: 1536098236622.png (1354x889, 61K)

Tiny Australia gets it.

sweetliberty.org/standing_calls.htm

>only two states are needed to require the Congress to call a Constitutional Convention.

dems know the state elections is where to focus

I live there. You can get a whole in the wall for $1000 bucks.

Let them reee about this. There's literally nothing they can do about it. Ever. The apportionment of senators is, I believe, the only part of the constitution that can't be changed by amendment. Unless they have a convention and form a new constitution, they can sit and spin. And that'll never happen because the states that don't agree to hold a convention will just immediately seceed and you're in a civil war.

Senators represent territories not people.
It looks fairer to me to give like 478 senators to the red area, to make it more proportional, don't you think?

Whoa there lad, you're gonna burn up their brains.

I'm feeling nice I'll buy your bait
The states, when unifying into one country, had a particularly bad debate about representation in the new government. If done by population, the larger states would have more power, with the smaller states having no reason to join the union. On the flip side, having 2 senators from each state regardless of size would inflate the smaller state's power compared to the larger states, with larger states having no reason to join the union. Unsurprisingly, the smaller states wanted the 2 senators, while larger states wanted representation by population.
The compromise was having both systems for the legislative branch, with the Senate and the House, both needing to agree to pass new laws and each getting other items divided between the two. The Senate adopted the 2 senators no matter the size, and the House is purely based off of population.
To answer your baiting OP pic, not only is it only showing Senators and not House representative.
Also, It's not really true-full even in it's initial claim, as any tiny dot on that map, like my country of Clark county, only has "2 senators as representatives". It'd be more accurate to have all of California blue, as all of California has those 2 senators in the Senate, but has 53 members in the House.
Do this again with House members, and you'll see how population wise it's even distributed.
With the Senate, however, it doesn't matter if you have a million or 100 million, you get two. Without that, smaller states would have no reason to remain in the union
TLDR your a faggot and you should feel bad. If the Senate isn't in place, at least 30 states would have a very good case to leave the union

Kek, good job leaf

this

Based leaflet

Underrated. Also very true, and I don't know why there are Americans who can't grasp that. Even my stupid ass gets it.

That collection of 5 states has a total of 13 congressional representatives. California alone has 53. Neck yourself

Yes because the red area could literally block off the blue and starve y'all out and there'd be nothing you city fags could do about it. So try. Just fucking try to take all political power democrats. We'd love it actually.