Well, you can certainly say that, but I think it's a little bit unfair to him. Despite his crossing of the party line being without any consequence for the president, he will pay a big price for it in the long run. All of the trumpanzees in the GOP will make sure of that, and they will knife him in the back, first opportunity, they will make an example of him. If someone has ever hurt his feelings, Trump and his minions do not forget.I'm skeptical about whether he has a spine or not. I'm sure the GOP knew how many people could safely break ranks for them to get their desired result. If they decided to whip his vote, they probably would be able to without much trouble. Trump was bribing senators with campaign funds and punishing those who broke ranks by withholding access to GOP National Committee funds. Hey, that sounds kind of familiar, doesn't it?
Ah, this is one of my pet hates. I believe we should build in the contemporary style rather than knocking off old buildings and building styles from the past. To me it's just fake. What you end up with just looks like a Chinese copy of a centuries old building. But, this is really just to please the everything-was-better-in-the-old-days-crowd.In other news:
Sounds like of like the idea some-dude-you-probably-heard-of had for Germania.
The level of sour grapes and self pity on display there is unprecedented.What a train wreck!
The prayer breakfast is run by a cult that fetishizes power by comparing Jesus to “Lenin, Hitler, Ho Chi Minh, Bin Laden” as examples of leaders who change the world through the strength of the covenants they had forged with their “brothers”A "faith adviser"? Just when I thought I've seen everything...
When the house and senate have a higher amount of say democrats, of course decisions will be made focusing on that party’s intentions. I don’t want the majority of either major party to have a larger voice than the other. So why is this allowed to happen with the amount of representatives?Could you rephrase the question?
The number of house of representatives seats is statutory. What do you mean by allowed to happen? That people vote for one of two parties? I still don't get it.So why is this allowed to happen with the amount of representatives?
There are two independent senators which caucus with Democrats. You would need a third party to build an infrastructure across the country. That party would then either need to sweep a Senate cycle and win 33 seats in one election or build over six years and those senators would have to caucus together only but switch parties to maintain a deadlock that the Vice President would break effectively making it an organ of the Presidents party.When the house and senate have a higher amount of say democrats, of course decisions will be made focusing on that party’s intentions. I don’t want the majority of either major party to have a larger voice than the other.
Well start working on a dimensional gate because that's not our reality. Political parties are a natural outcropping of people self sorting. You would have an easier time changing the policy of a party than changing the entire political system.I’m looking for an impartial set up instead of a majority party in office.