If they aren't the same
 

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 05:48:21 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 12:17:34 AM UTC-4, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 21:45:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

I think that by October, we are going to hear a lot more about her and
as much as the dumbocrats say "what difference does it make", I
suspect it will. The only reason she has a chance is her opponent is
Trump. There are a half dozen other people who would beat her.

Sure, but they are all Democrats.

Why didn't the democrats pick one of them? I ask the republicans the
same question.

HRC had the machine. That's how it works.
The Republicans had.......Trump. It's their speed now.

This is a national death wish. Whoever wins, it will be a disaster.

Are you saying we should change our form of government? Good luck with
that. Besides, it's only unreasonable people that don't get along.
Pretty soon, they won't be elected to public office.
The people won't stand for it.

That has to be the most stupid statement I've read in a long time. The sheeple will continue to elect the people that promise them the most. Being reasonable doesn't play into that equation at all.

I left that one teed up there, figuring someone else could knock it
out of the park. Anyone who thinks the system works, is just not
paying attention.

If they aren't the same
 

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 05:48:21 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 12:17:34 AM UTC-4, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 21:45:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

I think that by October, we are going to hear a lot more about her and
as much as the dumbocrats say "what difference does it make", I
suspect it will. The only reason she has a chance is her opponent is
Trump. There are a half dozen other people who would beat her.

Sure, but they are all Democrats.

Why didn't the democrats pick one of them? I ask the republicans the
same question.

HRC had the machine. That's how it works.
The Republicans had.......Trump. It's their speed now.

This is a national death wish. Whoever wins, it will be a disaster.

Are you saying we should change our form of government? Good luck with
that. Besides, it's only unreasonable people that don't get along.
Pretty soon, they won't be elected to public office.
The people won't stand for it.

That has to be the most stupid statement I've read in a long time. The sheeple will continue to elect the people that promise them the most. Being reasonable doesn't play into that equation at all.

I left that one teed up there, figuring someone else could knock it
out of the park. Anyone who thinks the system works, is just not
paying attention.

It was a simple question. "Are you saying we should change our form of
government?"
You could have just answered it.
What do you propose? Go ahead and knock it out of the park.
Otherwise it's just sour grapes on your part. I know, I know, there are
some people that want to control everything.
But I have a vote, so they have to contend with me.
That's how it works in the USA. I like that, win or lose.

If they aren't the same
 

Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 05:48:21 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 12:17:34 AM UTC-4, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 21:45:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

I think that by October, we are going to hear a lot more about her and
as much as the dumbocrats say "what difference does it make", I
suspect it will. The only reason she has a chance is her opponent is
Trump. There are a half dozen other people who would beat her.

Sure, but they are all Democrats.

Why didn't the democrats pick one of them? I ask the republicans the
same question.

HRC had the machine. That's how it works.
The Republicans had.......Trump. It's their speed now.

This is a national death wish. Whoever wins, it will be a disaster.

Are you saying we should change our form of government? Good luck with
that. Besides, it's only unreasonable people that don't get along.
Pretty soon, they won't be elected to public office.
The people won't stand for it.

That has to be the most stupid statement I've read in a long time. The
sheeple will continue to elect the people that promise them the most.
Being reasonable doesn't play into that equation at all.

I left that one teed up there, figuring someone else could knock it
out of the park. Anyone who thinks the system works, is just not
paying attention.

It was a simple question. "Are you saying we should change our form of
government?"
You could have just answered it.
What do you propose? Go ahead and knock it out of the park.
Otherwise it's just sour grapes on your part. I know, I know, there are
some people that want to control everything.
But I have a vote, so they have to contend with me.
That's how it works in the USA. I like that, win or lose.




Over the years our government has changed. States Rights, seem to have
been killed. How we pick the President has changed somewhat. Used to be
the state legislatures picked the Electoral College members. That mores in
to the citizens of each state voting on the members. Some states have
inner take all, others split the vote. But the we are going the Republic
may have a hard time surviving.

If they aren't the same
 

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 17:24:23 -0500, Califbill wrote:

Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 05:48:21 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 12:17:34 AM UTC-4, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 21:45:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

I think that by October, we are going to hear a lot more about her and
as much as the dumbocrats say "what difference does it make", I
suspect it will. The only reason she has a chance is her opponent is
Trump. There are a half dozen other people who would beat her.

Sure, but they are all Democrats.

Why didn't the democrats pick one of them? I ask the republicans the
same question.

HRC had the machine. That's how it works.
The Republicans had.......Trump. It's their speed now.

This is a national death wish. Whoever wins, it will be a disaster.

Are you saying we should change our form of government? Good luck with
that. Besides, it's only unreasonable people that don't get along.
Pretty soon, they won't be elected to public office.
The people won't stand for it.

That has to be the most stupid statement I've read in a long time. The
sheeple will continue to elect the people that promise them the most.
Being reasonable doesn't play into that equation at all.

I left that one teed up there, figuring someone else could knock it
out of the park. Anyone who thinks the system works, is just not
paying attention.

It was a simple question. "Are you saying we should change our form of
government?"
You could have just answered it.
What do you propose? Go ahead and knock it out of the park.
Otherwise it's just sour grapes on your part. I know, I know, there are
some people that want to control everything.
But I have a vote, so they have to contend with me.
That's how it works in the USA. I like that, win or lose.




Over the years our government has changed. States Rights, seem to have
been killed. How we pick the President has changed somewhat. Used to be
the state legislatures picked the Electoral College members. That mores in
to the citizens of each state voting on the members. Some states have
inner take all, others split the vote. But the we are going the Republic
may have a hard time surviving.

Luckily, we'll be dead before everyone must learn Chinese.

If they aren't the same
 

Poquito Loco wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 17:24:23 -0500, Califbill wrote:

Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 05:48:21 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 12:17:34 AM UTC-4, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 21:45:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

I think that by October, we are going to hear a lot more about her and
as much as the dumbocrats say "what difference does it make", I
suspect it will. The only reason she has a chance is her opponent is
Trump. There are a half dozen other people who would beat her.

Sure, but they are all Democrats.

Why didn't the democrats pick one of them? I ask the republicans the
same question.

HRC had the machine. That's how it works.
The Republicans had.......Trump. It's their speed now.

This is a national death wish. Whoever wins, it will be a disaster.

Are you saying we should change our form of government? Good luck with
that. Besides, it's only unreasonable people that don't get along.
Pretty soon, they won't be elected to public office.
The people won't stand for it.

That has to be the most stupid statement I've read in a long time. The
sheeple will continue to elect the people that promise them the most.
Being reasonable doesn't play into that equation at all.

I left that one teed up there, figuring someone else could knock it
out of the park. Anyone who thinks the system works, is just not
paying attention.

It was a simple question. "Are you saying we should change our form of
government?"
You could have just answered it.
What do you propose? Go ahead and knock it out of the park.
Otherwise it's just sour grapes on your part. I know, I know, there are
some people that want to control everything.
But I have a vote, so they have to contend with me.
That's how it works in the USA. I like that, win or lose.




Over the years our government has changed. States Rights, seem to have
been killed. How we pick the President has changed somewhat. Used to be
the state legislatures picked the Electoral College members. That mores in
to the citizens of each state voting on the members. Some states have
inner take all, others split the vote. But the we are going the Republic
may have a hard time surviving.

Luckily, we'll be dead before everyone must learn Chinese.


They may win an economic war, but I doubt they control the country. More
like a despot takes over and declares marshal law.

If they aren't the same
 

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 15:33:41 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 05:48:21 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 12:17:34 AM UTC-4, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 21:45:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

I think that by October, we are going to hear a lot more about her and
as much as the dumbocrats say "what difference does it make", I
suspect it will. The only reason she has a chance is her opponent is
Trump. There are a half dozen other people who would beat her.

Sure, but they are all Democrats.

Why didn't the democrats pick one of them? I ask the republicans the
same question.

HRC had the machine. That's how it works.
The Republicans had.......Trump. It's their speed now.

This is a national death wish. Whoever wins, it will be a disaster.

Are you saying we should change our form of government? Good luck with
that. Besides, it's only unreasonable people that don't get along.
Pretty soon, they won't be elected to public office.
The people won't stand for it.

That has to be the most stupid statement I've read in a long time. The sheeple will continue to elect the people that promise them the most. Being reasonable doesn't play into that equation at all.

I left that one teed up there, figuring someone else could knock it
out of the park. Anyone who thinks the system works, is just not
paying attention.

It was a simple question. "Are you saying we should change our form of
government?"
You could have just answered it.
What do you propose? Go ahead and knock it out of the park.
Otherwise it's just sour grapes on your part. I know, I know, there are
some people that want to control everything.
But I have a vote, so they have to contend with me.
That's how it works in the USA. I like that, win or lose.


We are not going to change our form of government, at least not in a
constitutional sense but saying congress is full of feckless and
pandering assholes is not changing the government, it is just stating
fact.

If they aren't the same
 

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 17:24:23 -0500, Califbill
wrote:


Over the years our government has changed. States Rights, seem to have
been killed. How we pick the President has changed somewhat. Used to be
the state legislatures picked the Electoral College members. That mores in
to the citizens of each state voting on the members. Some states have
inner take all, others split the vote. But the we are going the Republic
may have a hard time surviving.

Those were constitutional changes via amendments and over reaching
SCOTUS decisions. I think BAO is just talking about the legislative
process and that is mostly guided by senate and house rules. They are
not even laws.