Liberals Blaming The Senate For Their Loss Of Political Power Have Lost Touch With Reality

I was very surprised to see such a good article on MSN. It is impossible to relay the excellent points in this article with the small cut below and it is well worth the time to read. We now have people calling for restructuring the Senate to include our "neutral non-partisan media". Almost funny that anyone still can believe that the MSM is non-partisan anymore and trust me, there are people who still believe that.


www.msn.com...

Even those vaunted neutral arbiters in the mainstream media have taken a side—shocking!—and come down against the venerable institution that has been a feature of American governance since 1789. NBC’s Ken Dilanian captured the mainstream media zeitgeist when he tweeted: “It may not happen in our lifetimes, but the idea that North Dakota and New York get the same representation in the Senate has to change.

Ignoring the violation of media nonpartisanship, a custom more honored nowadays in the breach than in the observance, this cry of Senate abolition is flawed in several ways. For one, it continues the lefty tactic of blaming institutions for their failure to persuade voters to elect them.

If your weren’t born yesterday, you might recall that as recently as 2011, the Democrats controlled the White House, 59 percent of the House, and a filibuster-proof 60 percent of the Senate. Under the same laws, the same Constitution, and with an almost identical electorate, the Democrats controlled the political branches of government with huge majorities. How did they lose it all? Because the people did not like what they did with that power once they had it. That’s not a broken system, it’s a democratic republic working as designed.

a reply to: infolurker

Democratic seats across the nation reduced 38% from 2011 to 2017. That was their own fault...led by an out-of-touch President.

Strange how the Democratic Party continues with the same old failing strategy
The only thing I can think of is they are trying to get every single Progressive Liberal out to vote . Historically that group does not turn out in large numbers.
The reason : They are losing the True Democrats , the undecided , the Independents , etc. with these tactics. Yet , they still do not learn from history .

Elections have consequences.

So does unchecked power. The left has had plenty of power for far longer than they should have. In that time they scared the # out of everyone with socialism and economic shackles.

Leftism is not good. This is not to say that there is NO good in Democratic ideas. But those are growing thinner by the day as they continue to support the infringement of constitutional rights and globalism at the expense of the middle class. They have embraced and endorsed socialism in the likes of abject morons like Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders.

They have ignored the entire center of the country. The bread basket, the rust belt, and the bible belt. Then proceeded to call them all racists for voting Trump AFTER enduring 8 years of lies from Obama.

The violence and threats of violence. Shooting Republican senators, attacking people at rallies, shutting down free speech, creating mobs like Antifa and BAMN as ideological enforcers-cheered on by the leftist media and the power brokers of the Democratic Party establishment. So much so that they have publicly condoned and encouraged more violence.

Trying to destroy an innocent man just to stick it to Trump before the elections. Calling for the abolition of ICE and open borders. Calling for more gun control in places like Texas from douchebags like Robert O'Rourke, Mr. 'Hispandering' himself, "Beto". This pendejo is acting like he's from the barrio, like his mom chased his ass with a chancla yelling, "Te voy a matar, Beto!"

The left doesn't deserve to win. They shouldn't win, and I believe they are too self-absorbed to understand why they lost in the first place.

a reply to: infolurker

A voice of reason, posted on MSN?

As James Madison wrote in Federalist 62, “the equal vote allowed to each State is at once a constitutional recognition of the portion of sovereignty remaining in the individual States, and an instrument for preserving that residuary sovereignty.” The Senate he helped create did both, representing the states as states, while reflecting and preserving the balance of federalism struck at the constitutional convention.

The Senate did exactly what it was designed to do until the populist progressives last altered its makeup in 1913 with the passage of the 17th Amendment. There were some problems with the old system, in which state legislatures elected U.S. senators, and increasing deadlocks around the turn of the 20th century meant that seats went unfilled more frequently. But rather than fixing that system, progressives abolished it and made the Senate a mal-apportioned version of the House by making its members elected by the people directly.

The people calling for the abolishment of the Electoral College and unequal representation for all states in the Senate would bring forth an America that is represented only by the Elites on the coasts, with everyone between those paying fealty to them.

An American version of Hunger Games.

Again, shocked by MSN for posting the op ed.

There may be hope for us as United States yet.

S&F...

a reply to: Gothmog

None of these so-called "Up and Coming" Progressives ever say what their promises will cost people.

There's some guy running for governor of California who wants to give every CA citizen 100% Free Healthcare. But he never mentions that the state SALES TAX rate will need to increase from 13% to 25%, in order to implement it.

If you changed the Senate to work like the House, where it's balanced according to the State populations, you might as well get rid of the House. The entire point of having a bicameral Congress is to have each chamber function differently. The Senate needs to go back to the way it used to work, where they were elected by the state legislatures rather than voters. The Senate's purpose was to represent the states' interests, and not have to worry about appeasing the people to get re-elected.

a reply to: carewemust

Who is that?