Roe Vs Wade Overturned

[Dill]

(08-22-2023, 07:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A minority of a voting population in a liberal democracy can impose it's will on a majority in several ways, one of which is to capture the legislative branch, and then, as a legislative majority, capture the judiciary via control of nomination.

Sure, if enough people don't vote.  But that's a personal decision and if you take no time to vote then you cannot then claim to be an oppressed majority.

Yeah, NO WAY can someone lose a U.S. election with more votes.

No way the party with fewest votes nationally could become a majority in one house of Congress. 
("The majority party cannot simultaneously be the minority. Note the circles we are going in now?")

And gerrymandering would never be a concern if people just took the time to vote. Takes a "majority" to implement, right? 

(08-22-2023, 07:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: She definitely made a much more compelling argument in two posts then you have in considerably more.  Odd that you have nothing to say in regard to my rebuttal of her post.  The biggest problem with gerrymandering as a cog in your argument is that you need majority legislative control to implement it.

Sure. One "rebuttal" conflates the majority of Ohio Republicans with the majority of Ohioans who think abortion should be legal. 

Once you've done that, her examples "provide a point in your favor." Thus she was "easily understood." 

You also rebutted the claim that Ohio would have a shot at becoming blue without gerrymandering. At least twice. 
No one made that claim, and nothing to do with Pally's argument, but you still get credit for rebutting it. 

(08-22-2023, 07:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: If I'm not understanding your point then it's clearly because you're doing a very poor job of making it.  The aforementioned pally's post was easily comprehensible and did not rely on hyperbole like "super-minority" and was, thus, easily understood.  But you may be correct, if you cannot articulate your point in an understandable manner it is time to cease the back and forth.  Enjoy the rest of your day.

LOL Did you just make your "understanding" the measure of someone else's argument? 

You did. That's not a "good faith" standard.