On 2024-10-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 2024-10-23 2:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
>> On 2024-10-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-22 3:34 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-21 9:21 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 14:59:58 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would almost believe this if Trump were going to win, but he isn't.
>>>>>>> Kamala will make him defeated again ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Harris seems guaranteed to win the popular vote over Trump. In a
>>>>>> democracy, that would be enough. In the US, it isn’t.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even the dumbest citizen knows that it wouldn't make sense for the
>>>>> presidency to be decided by the metropolises of the country simply
>>>>> because the agricultural sectors feeding the parasites of those areas
>>>>> are sparsely populated. The Electoral College ensures that people doing
>>>>> the real work get to have a say, not just the welfare recipients living
>>>>> in slums having twenty children despite not being able to feed any of them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Without such a system, there would be no reason for agricultural states
>>>>> not to decide to secede, especially since the politics of the masses are
>>>>> wholly incompatible with every one of their values.
>>>>
>>>> Yep. That's why the U.S. has an electoral college, so that a few cities
>>>> can't run the whole country.
>>>
>>> Considering who lives in places like Los Angeles and New York City, I
>>> don't see why anyone would be willing to give them as much power as they
>>> want. People whose IQ never reaches anywhere near 100 and with no hope
>>> or ever owning property shouldn't have any power whatsoever over politics.
>>>
>>> Once again, I submit Rhodesia as an example of how to do things right.
>>> Despite being landlocked, the British there turned a sparsely-populated
>>> land into the breadbasket of Africa. Whites and blacks both had the
>>> right to vote as long as they owned property and while this was the
>>> case, the country prospered. Then, the Communists emerged from every
>>> side to destroy it, and with the support of the Soviet Union, China, the
>>> United Kingdom and the United States, they ended up bringing it down to
>>> become Zimbabwe. Now, those brilliant progressives are starving and
>>> desperately asking the Whites to return to feed their useless asses.
>>>
>>> The lesson here is simple: don't let progressivism into your country.
>>
>> Not just Rhodesia. South Africa was slated to be one of the top five
>> powerful countries in the world at one point (in the 70s or 80s). But I
>> think race relations were better in Rhodesia than in South Africa, even back
>> then.
>
> They were. I think that like in Angola and another African nations, the
> blacks who had it quite good in Rhodesia were convinced by Communists
> that it could somehow be better. Since Rhodesia was landlocked and
> stripped of the aid they should have received from the UK at the very
> least, the Whites fought to the end but couldn't stop the threat all
> around them, including that of dumb blacks who rallied to the Communist
> cause. I hope they enjoy the starvation they are now facing.

Putin has offered an opportunity for farm land to those displaced by this
stupidity.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:09:09 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> Considering who lives in places like Los Angeles and New York City, I
>> don't see why anyone would be willing to give them as much power as they
>> want.
>
> Why should the value of your vote depend on where you live?

Because each state is sovereign and they entered into the Union with
specific guarantees. Constitutionally the Federal Government is supposed to
be limited to only a few powers, like defense of the country and a national
post office. The states are supposed to hold the bulk of the authority over
their citizens. It would be (and is in practice) tyranny when the Federal
government oversteps its limitations.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

>> It's not about finishing this term, it's about starting another one.
>> He's OK, for the moment.
>
>He's okay to handle potential wars on two or three fronts when he can't
>remember where he is? Are we going to put world events on hold for a few
>months while he staggers on?

Is that your pitch to get hired writing political satire sketches?

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>> Yeah, if we assume that the 2020 popular vote would've been about the
>> same in a true national election, Biden won by a good amount, and yet it
>> was still remarkably close in the state-by-state race.
>
>I have heard it said that, if the US President was elected by popular
>vote, it’s likely a Republican would never occupy the White House again.
>
>But then, that’s their own fault. Each time they lose an election, instead
>of trying to fix it by coming up with policies that appeal to a broader
>range of voters, currently their strategy seems to be to swing even
>further to the extreme right.

Pretty much.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-10-23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:11:10 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> They simply know that the mob will vote for the people who promise to
>> give them free stuff ...
>
> You mean the rural mob, from those former slave-owning states. The ones
> who get outsize representation in the Electoral College.

The Electoral College is based on numbers from the House and Senate. Each
state has the same number of Electors as they do Congressmen. There are two
Senators from each state (part of the checks and balances built into the
Constitution) and the number of members in the House from is determined by
population. So the bigger states already have a much bigger portion in the
Electoral College voting. (There are no slaves now, so all the claptrap
about "outsize" representation southern states is pure bullshit in today's
reality.)

Basically this is how it's done in the U.S. — accept it or don't, it's
really none of your business how we elect our president. You should worry
more about how you elect your small-minded, petty dictators in New Zealand.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-23, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 06:55:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:11:10 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> They simply know that the mob will vote for the people who promise to
>>> give them free stuff ...
>>
>> You mean the rural mob, from those former slave-owning states. The ones
>> who get outsize representation in the Electoral College.
>
> Do you have any idea of how many rural states either didn't exist prior to
> the Civil War or never allowed slavery? What is that 'outsized
> representation' canard? Do you know how the Electoral College is formed?
>
> Quick lesson: every state has two Senators, no more, no less. That's a
> total of 100 votes out of 538. Where do the other 438 votes come from.
> Washington DC gets 3 votes despite not being a state. That's the
> equivalent of 2 Senators and 1 Representative. All state have at least one
> Representative. Until the last election cycle this state only had one.
>
> How are the representative apportioned?
>
> https://www.census.gov/topics/public-sector/congressional-apportionment/
> about.html
>
> "The apportionment calculation is based upon the total resident population
> (citizens and noncitizens) of the 50 states."
>
> Now isn't that interesting? Fill your state with noncitizens and you may
> get more Representatives, hence more votes in the EC.
>
> So it comes out to the more populous states getting more votes. Montana is
> a rural state that did not achieve statehood until 1889 and never had
> slavery. It gets a massive 4 votes out of the 538. Yeah, that's really
> outsized representation. I guess it's better than the 3 we used to get.

Much better stated than my post. It's always amusing when those from other
countries think they've got it all figured out in our country.

I believe Alaska, Delaware, Wyoming, Vermont, North Dakota and South Dakota
all still have one Representative in House. So all are still on an even
footing with Washington, DC, where the citizens weren't originally allowed
to vote, since they were supposed to be neutral in the elections. (That was
the whole point of why the District of Columbia was to be neutral ground.)
They got Electoral voters in 1961 — it took the 23rd Amendment to the
Constitution to get it done.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2024-10-23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:09:09 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> Considering who lives in places like Los Angeles and New York City, I
>>> don't see why anyone would be willing to give them as much power as they
>>> want.
>>
>> Why should the value of your vote depend on where you live?
>
>Because each state is sovereign and they entered into the Union with
>specific guarantees. Constitutionally the Federal Government is supposed to
>be limited to only a few powers, like defense of the country and a national
>post office. The states are supposed to hold the bulk of the authority over
>their citizens. It would be (and is in practice) tyranny when the Federal
>government oversteps its limitations.

Good, so Marco Rubio can fuck off when he talks about "federal law
needs to be enforced" on cannabis. Oh, but he's a Republican! How
interesting.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-10-24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On 23 Oct 2024 19:46:30 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> Do you know how the Electoral College is formed?
>
> I know about the “Three-Fifths Compromise”. That allowed the
> slave-owning states to get more say in the election of the President
> augmented to some extent by their slave population, without those
> slaves getting any actual votes. Clever, don’t you think?
>
>> Washington DC gets 3 votes despite not being a state.
>
> I wonder why there is so much opposition to it becoming a state ...
>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_Voting_Rights_Amendment>

Because its border was carved out of the territory of two states, Maryland
and Virginia, specifically so Federal capitol was not in any state. The
District of Columbia was supposed to be neutral territory.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 08:56:45 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> On 2024-10-22 12:43 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 21:37:36 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> Even the dumbest citizen knows that it wouldn't make sense for the
>>>> presidency to be decided by the metropolises of the country ...
>>>
>>> I’ve heard that nonsense from countless supporters of the
>>> Dumbfuckistani voting system, and I still don’t understand it.
>>>
>>> Don’t you take it as “self-evident” that all your people are created
>>> equal? If so, why shouldn’t their votes count equally too?
>>
>> Because the very nature of agriculture means that it would be impossible
>> for states doing the real work to have as many people as the areas where
>> people collect welfare.
>
> If you mean “large cities”, those are in fact the backbone of your
> economy. The US isn’t an agrarian society any more.

"Backbone" in what way? We don't have industry any more. Most city dwellers
just money changers and parasites — and the cities guzzle whatever taxes
they can get from the rest of country, via the Federal government.

> Why should the value of someone’s vote depend on where they live?

And why should big states be able to trample on the rights of citizens
living in small states? Again, each state is a sovereign entity and they
joined the Union with certain stipulations. These were checks and balances
specifically put into place so small states were not dominated (as much) by
large states.

It's just the way is. Live with it.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2024-10-24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On 23 Oct 2024 19:46:30 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> Washington DC gets 3 votes despite not being a state.
>>
>> I wonder why there is so much opposition to it becoming a state ...
>>
>><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_Voting_Rights_Amendment>
>
>Because its border was carved out of the territory of two states, Maryland
>and Virginia, specifically so Federal capitol was not in any state. The
>District of Columbia was supposed to be neutral territory.

Fuck off, rural cracker. Your days of meddling in the real world's
affairs are numbered.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-10-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 2024-10-23 2:56 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 08:56:45 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-10-22 12:43 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 21:37:36 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Even the dumbest citizen knows that it wouldn't make sense for the
>>>>> presidency to be decided by the metropolises of the country ...
>>>>
>>>> I’ve heard that nonsense from countless supporters of the
>>>> Dumbfuckistani voting system, and I still don’t understand it.
>>>>
>>>> Don’t you take it as “self-evident” that all your people are created
>>>> equal? If so, why shouldn’t their votes count equally too?
>>>
>>> Because the very nature of agriculture means that it would be impossible
>>> for states doing the real work to have as many people as the areas where
>>> people collect welfare.
>>
>> If you mean “large cities”, those are in fact the backbone of your
>> economy. The US isn’t an agrarian society any more.
>>
>> Why should the value of someone’s vote depend on where they live?
>
> If the people in those "large cities" do not receive food, what will
> happen to them? None of them would even know where to start if food
> became scarce since they have no useful survival skills.
>
> The reason the value of someone's vote means more is because unlike you
> progressives, the forefathers understood how agriculture works. Also,
> they knew that smart asses like you would starve without the labour of
> people who work on farms.

Farming is not an "industry," but it's as close to industry as we now have
in the U.S. The parasites and money changers in the big cities certainly
aren't producing the necessary goods needed for their citizens to survive.
They just eating up a disproportionate share of the wealth. Federal taxes
that come from the blue collar workers in the "fly-over" states, end up in
the gaping maw of the parasites in the cities.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 12:53:13 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> On 2024-10-23 2:56 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> If you mean “large cities”, those are in fact the backbone of your
>>> economy. The US isn’t an agrarian society any more.
>>>
>>> Why should the value of someone’s vote depend on where they live?
>>
>> If the people in those "large cities" do not receive food, what will
>> happen to them?
>
> They won’t be able to make the machines that the farmers use to farm their
> crops. There would be no electricity generation or fuel supply, no
> manufacturing of farmhouses, no laying of roads for the trucks to supply
> feed and fertilizer and seed and take away produce. Nobody to pay the
> farmers. Nobody to educate them on how to grow their crops.
>
> The whole system collapses.

Do you really think the electricity generation is done in the cities? Do you
really think seeds and fertilizer come from the cities? (Fertilizer from
what... pigeons?) Do you really think the material to build roads and the
workers who build them come from the cities? Good grief.

I didn't think it was possible for anyone to be so damned clueless about
reality.

As for iron... that comes from China now. Our parasite government has
managed to all but destroy Detroit and the steel industry. What cars we
still build i the United States are done more and more in rural areas, like
the Carolinas and Tennessee. Go back to the 1940s and you might have a
point.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 09:03:42 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> On 2024-10-24 1:35 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 12:53:13 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> If the people in those "large cities" do not receive food, what will
>>>> happen to them?
>>>
>>> They won’t be able to make the machines that the farmers use to farm
>>> their crops. There would be no electricity generation or fuel supply,
>>> no manufacturing of farmhouses, no laying of roads for the trucks to
>>> supply feed and fertilizer and seed and take away produce. Nobody to
>>> pay the farmers. Nobody to educate them on how to grow their crops.
>>>
>>> The whole system collapses.
>>
>> City people don't have a monopoly on he production of machines.
>
> Machines, including farming machines, are complicated things. Most of the
> modern ones need to be built with the help of other machines. There need
> to be support machines for transport (of raw materials, workers, finished
> products), fuelling, communications etc. And for keeping track of orders
> and shipments and payments and all that. This is why you don’t see big
> factories out in the middle of corn fields.

And these machines that make machines aren't made in the cities. When you
don't what the hell you're talking about, maybe you should just slink away
and lick your wounds.

> Anyway, getting back to the point: why should the value of your vote
> depend on where you live? If you believe that all your citizens are
> “created equal”, then shouldn’t their votes count equally, too?

Because it's done on a state by state level and the votes are equal in each
state. And the only reason the Electoral College is not completely equal is
that each state gets two electoral votes, one for each Senator. But many
states have only one or two Electoral votes based on their representation in
the House. So New York has 30 Electoral votes. Vermont, Delaware, Wyoming,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Alaska, West Virginia, Rhode Island and New
Hampshire (all together) have 30 votes. That's nine states out 50 who have
the influence in the presidential race as one state, New York. This is your
"outsize" advantage? You're clueless. Stick to what you know. I wouldn't
lecture on the stupidity of the government of New Zealand. Stick your nose
in your own business.

BTW, you've been told over and over again why the Electoral College is set
up the way it is. Quit droning on like a broken record about it.

If Trump wins, he'll probalby win both the popular vote and the electoral
vote anyhow. Than what are you going to whine aobut? You don't change the
rules midstream.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-24, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 05:35:00 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 12:53:13 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-10-23 2:56 a.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you mean “large cities”, those are in fact the backbone of your
>>>> economy. The US isn’t an agrarian society any more.
>>>>
>>>> Why should the value of someone’s vote depend on where they live?
>>>
>>> If the people in those "large cities" do not receive food, what will
>>> happen to them?
>>
>> They won’t be able to make the machines that the farmers use to farm
>> their crops. There would be no electricity generation or fuel supply, no
>> manufacturing of farmhouses, no laying of roads for the trucks to supply
>> feed and fertilizer and seed and take away produce. Nobody to pay the
>> farmers. Nobody to educate them on how to grow their crops.
>>
>> The whole system collapses.
>
> You are so fucking ignorant it's pathetic. Do you really think they
> manufacture tractors in New York City, Baltimore, or LA? Harvest the
> lumber needed to build houses? Drill wells for oil and gas? Mine coal?

I don't think he's ever done any real work in his whole life.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On 24 Oct 2024 19:19:03 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 05:35:00 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 12:53:13 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> If the people in those "large cities" do not receive food, what will
>>>> happen to them?
>>>
>>> They won’t be able to make the machines that the farmers use to farm
>>> their crops. There would be no electricity generation or fuel supply,
>>> no manufacturing of farmhouses, no laying of roads for the trucks to
>>> supply feed and fertilizer and seed and take away produce. Nobody to
>>> pay the farmers. Nobody to educate them on how to grow their crops.
>>>
>>> The whole system collapses.
>>
>> Do you really think they manufacture tractors in New York City,
>> Baltimore, or LA?
>
> Whether it’s tractors, parts to make the tractors, parts to make the
> factories that make the tractors, schools to train the designers and
> makers of the tractor parts, schools to train the farmers, schools to
> train the designers and builders of the factories, schools to train the
> trainers ... you don’t see these operating in the middle of some corn
> field, do you?

And what makes you think this done in the cities? Today's cities create
money changers and other parasites, not productive citizens. (Except for
those in the city who feed the parasites, with goods trucked in from towns
and country all over the U.S.).

>> Harvest the lumber needed to build houses?
>
> Harvesting the raw lumber is the only part that happens in the forest. All
> the rest of what they call the “value-add” happens in an urban factory
> somewhere. Typically multiple stages, in multiple factories.

And what makes you "think" (so to speak) that city dwellers do anything
involving the other "parts" of getting lumber? You're clueless.

>> Drill wells for oil and gas? Mine coal?
>
> Same thing. Once the raw material is obtained in situ, all the rest
> requires the full complexity of urban infrastructure to deal with.

No, it doesn't. You're beginning to sound like that airhead Kamala Harris,
with can never answer a question with clarity.

Do tell me, "genius," what is involved with this "full complexity of urban
infrastructure" in the lumber industry (besides lazy parasites and money
changers who get fat and rich off the work of real men)? You haven't got a
clue, do you?

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-24, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 22:48:35 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> Same thing. Once the raw material is obtained in situ, all the rest
>> requires the full complexity of urban infrastructure to deal with.
>
> Either you don't have a clue or you're defining urban as any place with
> more than 10 people.

I think he's had a "sit on his ass" job his whole life and he doesn't have a
clue what working men do on the farms or in the factories. There are a lot
of clueless twits who look down on working men and would be absolutely
helpless if they ever had to actually feed themselves. I think Lawrrence is
one of them. You can't fake this level of ignorance.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-23, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 03:32:08 -0400, Joel wrote:
>
>> It's not about finishing this term, it's about starting another one.
>> He's OK, for the moment.
>
> He's okay to handle potential wars on two or three fronts when he can't
> remember where he is? Are we going to put world events on hold for a few
> months while he staggers on?

Yeah. Unbelievable.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 03:15:30 -0400, Joel wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Don’t you take it as “self-evident” that all your people are created
>>> equal? If so, why shouldn’t their votes count equally too?
>>
>> You're asking a lot of these people, if you saw the J6 committee
>> hearings, you know that a uniformed, black Capitol police offer was
>> called the N- word by a rioter, because he said he voted for Pres.
>> Biden. This is the kind of lunacy the rural redneck voters display.
>
> It seems to me, that would have been less of a problem if in fact every
> vote counted equally. Because such vile bigots are always going to be in
> the minority. It is the Electoral College that magnifies the importance of
> votes such as theirs beyond their rightful value.

It seems to me you're a crank who just can't shut the hell up when you're
clueless. The Electoral College is how we do it in the U.S. Get over
yourself and mind your own business.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

<snipped>

Lawrence the crank, ranted on about the Electoral College again. Apparently
he doesn't have anything else to do.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On 23 Oct 2024 01:31:47 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> That's the best the US can do? 330+ million people and that's it?
>
> All the good democracies offer voters a realistic choice of more than two
> parties to pick from.

Name one of these "good" democracies. And thank goodness the United States
is a Republic and not a Democracy. (Look it up, "genius.")

> And those running for election are not the ones running the election.

The ones running the elections are the ones screwing with the electronic
voting machines.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2024-10-23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 03:15:30 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don’t you take it as “self-evident” that all your people are created
>>>> equal? If so, why shouldn’t their votes count equally too?
>>>
>>> You're asking a lot of these people, if you saw the J6 committee
>>> hearings, you know that a uniformed, black Capitol police offer was
>>> called the N- word by a rioter, because he said he voted for Pres.
>>> Biden. This is the kind of lunacy the rural redneck voters display.
>>
>> It seems to me, that would have been less of a problem if in fact every
>> vote counted equally. Because such vile bigots are always going to be in
>> the minority. It is the Electoral College that magnifies the importance of
>> votes such as theirs beyond their rightful value.
>
>It seems to me you're a crank who just can't shut the hell up when you're
>clueless. The Electoral College is how we do it in the U.S. Get over
>yourself and mind your own business.

What a complete and utter moron.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-10-24 7:17 p.m., DFS wrote:
> On 10/24/2024 6:57 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 10:13:16 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> You can't reason with progressives.
>>
>> Still waiting for an answer to my question about why, if you believe all
>> your citizens are “created equal”, you don’t want their votes to count
>> equally?
>
>
> Slimer is Canadian.
>
> "all mean are created equal" is from the US Declaration of Independence.
>
> It's hogwash of course.
>
> Only White property owners should be able to vote in the US.

I wouldn't limit voting to White property owners. If negroes are able to
figure their lives out to the point that they manage to buy property, I
would give them the vote. We both know that they won't be capable, but
it's definitely an objective for them. In other words, for a citizen to
have worth in the eyes of the government, their sex, their skin colour
or their religion shouldn't matter; only their ability to own land should.

If in the end that means that only White men own land, so be it. Nobody,
not even whiny negroes, would complain if the United States turned into
Rhodesia.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On 2024-10-24 7:21 p.m., DFS wrote:
> On 10/24/2024 7:09 PM, Joel wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 23 Oct 2024 19:46:30 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you know how the Electoral College is formed?
>>>
>>> I know about the “Three-Fifths Compromise”. That allowed the
>>> slave-owning states to get more say in the election of the President
>>> augmented to some extent by their slave population, without those
>>> slaves getting any actual votes. Clever, don’t you think?
>>
>>
>> It was fucked up, and then they had the audacity to secede because it
>> was threatened.  Fuck crackers.
>>
>>
>>>> Washington DC gets 3 votes despite not being a state.
>>>
>>> I wonder why there is so much opposition to it becoming a state ...
>>>
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_Voting_Rights_Amendment>
>>
>>
>> It would be a black-plurality, highly safely Democratic state, so the
>> redneck states will never agree to it.
>
>
> No wonder you identify with jigaboos; you're an irresponsible
> welfare-sucker that's high all the time, just like them.

And just as stupid.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On 2024-10-25 5:09 a.m., RonB wrote:
> On 2024-10-24, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 2024-10-24 2:15 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-23 2:37 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-22, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:33:58 -0700 (Seattle), Relf wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You(rBowman)Replied(to Crump):
>>>>>>>>> "We" who don't vote for the collapse of civilization, if I have to
>>>>>>>>> spell it out.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have already voted. Let the collapse begin.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did you vote for trump ?
>>>>>>> I thought people here skipped that box.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't really matter. They'll be having hockey playoffs in hell before
>>>>>> Montana goes to Harris. The interesting stuff was down ticket,
>>>>>> particularly the Senate race.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same with Idaho — I think most of the Califorians who are moving here are
>>>>> coming here to get away from California.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, most of them have learned nothing and will vote for the
>>>> people who will implement the same kind of idiocy in their next location.
>>>
>>> So far it hasn't been working out that way.
>>>
>>
>> Let's hope it remains that way. I've been told that Texas would be a
>> utopia for me (by someone who used to live there). I wouldn't want it to
>> change if that is indeed the case.
>
> If you like heat and humidity you would love Texas. I lived there. I'm not
> anxious to ever return.

I'm already used to the humidity here in Quebec. We have short summers
but they're very uncomfortable without air conditioning or a swimming
pool. I'm sure I could manage there too.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On 2024-10-25 5:21 a.m., RonB wrote:
> On 2024-10-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 2024-10-23 2:30 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-22 3:34 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-10-22, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-10-21 9:21 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 14:59:58 -0400, Joel wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would almost believe this if Trump were going to win, but he isn't.
>>>>>>>> Kamala will make him defeated again ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Harris seems guaranteed to win the popular vote over Trump. In a
>>>>>>> democracy, that would be enough. In the US, it isn’t.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even the dumbest citizen knows that it wouldn't make sense for the
>>>>>> presidency to be decided by the metropolises of the country simply
>>>>>> because the agricultural sectors feeding the parasites of those areas
>>>>>> are sparsely populated. The Electoral College ensures that people doing
>>>>>> the real work get to have a say, not just the welfare recipients living
>>>>>> in slums having twenty children despite not being able to feed any of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Without such a system, there would be no reason for agricultural states
>>>>>> not to decide to secede, especially since the politics of the masses are
>>>>>> wholly incompatible with every one of their values.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep. That's why the U.S. has an electoral college, so that a few cities
>>>>> can't run the whole country.
>>>>
>>>> Considering who lives in places like Los Angeles and New York City, I
>>>> don't see why anyone would be willing to give them as much power as they
>>>> want. People whose IQ never reaches anywhere near 100 and with no hope
>>>> or ever owning property shouldn't have any power whatsoever over politics.
>>>>
>>>> Once again, I submit Rhodesia as an example of how to do things right.
>>>> Despite being landlocked, the British there turned a sparsely-populated
>>>> land into the breadbasket of Africa. Whites and blacks both had the
>>>> right to vote as long as they owned property and while this was the
>>>> case, the country prospered. Then, the Communists emerged from every
>>>> side to destroy it, and with the support of the Soviet Union, China, the
>>>> United Kingdom and the United States, they ended up bringing it down to
>>>> become Zimbabwe. Now, those brilliant progressives are starving and
>>>> desperately asking the Whites to return to feed their useless asses.
>>>>
>>>> The lesson here is simple: don't let progressivism into your country.
>>>
>>> Not just Rhodesia. South Africa was slated to be one of the top five
>>> powerful countries in the world at one point (in the 70s or 80s). But I
>>> think race relations were better in Rhodesia than in South Africa, even back
>>> then.
>>
>> They were. I think that like in Angola and another African nations, the
>> blacks who had it quite good in Rhodesia were convinced by Communists
>> that it could somehow be better. Since Rhodesia was landlocked and
>> stripped of the aid they should have received from the UK at the very
>> least, the Whites fought to the end but couldn't stop the threat all
>> around them, including that of dumb blacks who rallied to the Communist
>> cause. I hope they enjoy the starvation they are now facing.
>
> Putin has offered an opportunity for farm land to those displaced by this
> stupidity.

And they should take it because the English-speaking nations that
_should_ take them like Australia have decided that they prefer Muslim
parasites over the hard-working farmers.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.