Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44

Thread: Census Citizenship Question

  1. Top | #31
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    24,568
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    67,041
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    14th Amendment:

    Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.
    Residents, not citizens.
    The question wasn't intended to only count citizens. Rather, the purpose is to make illegals afraid to answer the census.
    Illegals or legals that know illegals?

  2. Top | #32
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,293
    Archived
    14,025
    Total Posts
    19,318
    Rep Power
    61
    Republicans are charged with wanting to lower the count, but it seems to me that the Democrats should be charged with wanting to raise the count. Having illegal aliens unjustly skews the numbers upwards, and if upward skewed numbers predominantly benefit the Democrats, there’s more to say about the agenda of the Republicans and Democrats. While the Republicans seek to lower the numbers, it’s to level the playing field while Democrats seek to raise the numbers, it’s to have an unjust advantage.

  3. Top | #33
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,611
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by fast View Post
    Republicans are charged with wanting to lower the count, but it seems to me that the Democrats should be charged with wanting to raise the count. Having illegal aliens unjustly skews the numbers upwards, and if upward skewed numbers predominantly benefit the Democrats, there’s more to say about the agenda of the Republicans and Democrats. While the Republicans seek to lower the numbers, it’s to level the playing field while Democrats seek to raise the numbers, it’s to have an unjust advantage.
    What do Democrats have to do with this at all? They aren't advocating any changes, nor do they have anything especially to do with the decisions of the court. Some of the judges are presumably Democrats I guess, but fewer are than aren't.

  4. Top | #34
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    24,568
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    67,041
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by fast View Post
    Republicans are charged with wanting to lower the count, but it seems to me that the Democrats should be charged with wanting to raise the count. Having illegal aliens unjustly skews the numbers upwards, and if upward skewed numbers predominantly benefit the Democrats, there’s more to say about the agenda of the Republicans and Democrats. While the Republicans seek to lower the numbers, it’s to level the playing field while Democrats seek to raise the numbers, it’s to have an unjust advantage.
    We don't need to. We just let millions of illegals vote in elections every year, regardless of the census count. Isn't that what Trump claimed? How would the exclusion of the question benefit Democrats if they just use those illegals (Census or not) to vote in elections?

    The aim, as demonstrated by private documents of the guy who came up with the question idea, was to add it to the Census in order to help streamline gerrymandering.

  5. Top | #35
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,687
    Rep Power
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post
    President Dickweed has "lost" his fight to include a citizenship question intended to intimidate immigrants to keep them from responding to the 2020 census. At least that's the story line being pushed by left wing media. In fact, they are being played; the more they talk about it, them more Cheato gets to threaten the target audience. IOW, the effect of the battle against his stupid question might very well do more to intimidate non-citizens than would the inclusion of the question.
    I wonder how stupid the producers of those CNN/MSNBC news shows really are. They complain about "the bully pulpit" constantly, even as they form the major part of its influence by talking Trump Trump Trump 24/7. I'd like to see a moratorium against showing that fucker's face, re-playing anything he says in his own voice, or even mentioning his name for a month or few...

    If Cheato gets re-elected, it won't be on the strength of FOX pushing the Trumputin propaganda agenda, but rather on the kneejerk stupidity of the supposedly opposing media.
    This is my thesis for being here, talking to you guys. If this is a point of view I in some way inspired from my posts, then my work here is done. No idea if I had anything to do with it or not... just saying.

  6. Top | #36
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    5,419
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    10,458
    Rep Power
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post

    Ah. Well, just as well their "reform" got delayed. I don't there will be a Republican Party as such in 2030, though their replacements may not be especially comforting to the spirit.
    There would still be a GOP--there are areas that vote very, very red and even fixing the voting situation won't make them blue. There would be a lot more blue in the statehouses, though.
    I didn't mean because of electoral politics. I just think their party is imploding and being replaced politically by the "moderate" Democrats.
    You don't really understand the mind of joe sixpack the xenophobic, right wing, idealist voter who hates blacks because they get gubmint assistance too.

  7. Top | #37
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,687
    Rep Power
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    I didn't mean because of electoral politics. I just think their party is imploding and being replaced politically by the "moderate" Democrats.
    You don't really understand the mind of joe sixpack the xenophobic, right wing, idealist voter who hates blacks because they get gubmint assistance too.
    Don't need to... just need to convince them the way to vote this year is to tweet their preference and Trump will personally record it for them. problem solved.

  8. Top | #38
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lots of planets have a North
    Posts
    5,656
    Archived
    5,115
    Total Posts
    10,771
    Rep Power
    57
    #NotMyPresident #NotMyCensus

    If the citizenship question is included, the only option is to boycott it.

  9. Top | #39
    Loony Running The Asylum ZiprHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Do you like my pretty crown?
    Posts
    15,433
    Archived
    3,034
    Total Posts
    18,467
    Rep Power
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post
    #NotMyPresident #NotMyCensus

    If the citizenship question is included, the only option is to boycott it.
    Census form burning parties?

    Boycotting is probably the worst response. That is exactly what they want.
    ITMFA

    When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

    You submit to tyranny when you renounce truth. - Timothy Snyder

  10. Top | #40
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,687
    Rep Power
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Derec View Post
    I do not get the SCOTUS ruling. Where in the constitution does it say you can't have a citizenship question?

    It is a good idea to know that information.
    The court didn't say there can't be such a question. The court said the process by which they decided the question should be there was fatally flawed.

    It's like it's perfectly legal to hire a man, but it's illegal to hire a man specifically because he's male.
    Where does it say in the Department of Labor that you can't hire a male!!?!?!??!one

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •