US US Politics General 2: Hope Edition - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png​

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Click to expand...
Oh! said:
I'm a simple, humble man. I think Trump should personally execute would-be assassins with a solid gold Desert Eagle on live TV in front of the reflecting pool. Nothing ostentatious, just two to the back of the head.
Click to expand...
After the first with a Desert Eagle, would there be anything left of the head for the second to be worth it?
 
These assassins (and the Charlie Kirk assassin) are some of the few criminals I'm not sure I want the death penalty for. I feel like killing them is exactly what they want because it fuels their martyr complex. No, let them live in prison on minimal tax dollars. Let them live year after year seeing how forgotten they are by their would-be admirers. I want them to be alive 40 years from now, eating miserable prison food and thinking about what their life would be like if they hadn't tried their hand at assassination.

That said, a life sentence always runs the risk of some corrupt official canceling it and letting them on the streets.
 
Last edited:
Herk LARPer said:
Seeing western consent-schizo terminology (I know that sounds strange bear with me) like “no is a complete sentence” on something in fucking INDIA is like finding fully labeled kosher certified food in Wehrmacht field rations
Click to expand...
i jsut spit out my taco laughing at that. thanks herk, i needed that one for real..... lmaooooo :lit: :lit: :lit:
 
 
I still don't understand how the redistricting ruling really changes anything if you live in a historically Red State. Literally nothing will change. Maybe you'll gain a couple more seats, but that's about it. Take Alabama. We've voted Red for quite a while. The only two real big blue areas are Birmingham and Montgomery, but they're not big enough of an area to affect the overall direction of the main vote.
 
marvlouslie said:
Maybe you'll gain a couple more seats
Click to expand...
spread that across the whole south and now you're talking real shifts in the balance of power in the House of Representatives. what the GOP can now do, and was restrained by the VRA from doing before is "crack" those blue districts. Cracking refers to the practice of splitting a otherwise blue district between surrounding red districts, diluting out the vote power of the democrats.
 
marvlouslie said:
I still don't understand how the redistricting ruling really changes anything if you live in a historically Red State. Literally nothing will change. Maybe you'll gain a couple more seats, but that's about it. Take Alabama. We've voted Red for quite a while. The only two real big blue areas are Birmingham and Montgomery, but they're not big enough of an area to affect the overall direction of the main vote.
Click to expand...

The issue is actually more relevant in the south. Despite being overwhelmingly Republican until now they have been forced by democrat judges to carve out special districts for the dumbest jackson type sheboon niggers imaginable to guarantee them elections to Congress. It doesn't effect the overall vote in Presidential elections, but it means each southern state was forced to have 1-2+ moronic sub IQ democrat congroids baked into their congressional maps no matter what. That's over now. So in theory the south could have every single district filled with a republican, the same way every new england district is filled with democrats, despite the GOP making up ~40+% of that electorate.

Democrats were fine with that, but argued getting the same treatment in the south was racist. SCOTUS told them to get fucked. Jackson pounds her chest and gorilla charges in anger.
 
los pepes said:
The issue is actually more relevant in the south. Despite being overwhelmingly Republican until now they have been forced by democrat judges to carve out special districts for the dumbest jackson type sheboon niggers imaginable to guarantee them elections to Congress. It doesn't effect the overall vote in Presidential elections, but it means each southern state was forced to have 1-2+ moronic sub IQ democrat congroids baked into their congressional maps no matter what. That's over now. So in theory the south could have every single district filled with a republican, the same way every new england district is filled with democrats, despite the GOP making up ~40+% of that electorate.

Democrats were fine with that, but argued getting the same treatment in the south was racist. SCOTUS told them to get fucked. Jackson pounds her chest and gorilla charges in anger.
Click to expand...
and the GOP has the upper hand in the district war since the democrats have already redrawn their maps to maximize their power over the last decades. They've squeezed nearly all the blood from the stone they can.
 
marvlouslie said:
I still don't understand how the redistricting ruling really changes anything if you live in a historically Red State. Literally nothing will change. Maybe you'll gain a couple more seats, but that's about it. Take Alabama. We've voted Red for quite a while. The only two real big blue areas are Birmingham and Montgomery, but they're not big enough of an area to affect the overall direction of the main vote.
Click to expand...
Less sheboons in government, more Republicans, less power from Democrat race grifting. It will also hopefully be easier for Trump to get his agenda going domestically 🌈 (that rainbow is there for optimism, not gayness).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom