General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Ruling with the consent of the governed."
In 2000, George W. was appointed president by the Supreme Court.
In 2004, vast irregularities in Ohio's voting machines "reelected" George W.
This year, Russia, along with FBI Director Comey, put our worst nightmare into the White House.
So about this "Ruling with the consent of the governed" bullshit ...
Any thoughts on this?
Chasstev365
(5,191 posts)The new rule is Democrats must have at least a 10 point lead in any presidential election to make stealing implausible. Apparently, that just fine!
Cyrano
(15,041 posts)The Republican Party is our enemy. Yes, ENEMY. Their goal has long been to destroy every social program that helps the middle class and poor.
Perhaps it's time for us to start fighting back on their terms.
Va Lefty
(6,252 posts)and a hundred other "scandals" where there was nothing there, now tell 66 million Americans who voted for Ms. Clinton to shut up and fall in line when mounting evidence suggests skullduggery/treason.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)Consistency is a word they've never heard and they wouldn't recognize a principle if it bit them.
We are in this mess because about half of our country worships the devil for all intents and purposes.
Va Lefty
(6,252 posts)but bigger issue is partisanship. The deplorables would vote for Manson if you put a (r) next to his name.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)Absolute loyalty without any basis.
Loyalty is for principles. Nothing else.
kentuck
(111,103 posts)But without the consent of the governed, it is a illegitimate government, just as John Lewis said.
JoshinUtah
(12 posts)Why is it only the Democrats have to wait for some nebulous "mandate" (which never comes), while the right wingers trample in under whatever circumstances they manufacture and just start running roughshod?
What we're seeing now is a perfect example, and it only seems to be getting worse!