Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Coach is Back! on October 16, 2025, 08:12:51 AM
-
Libs wont watch this….they don’ watch anything .
i=qo1fa2pghBm6xZ1v
-
So beyond the typical gerrymandering, Newscum is putting the party above the people of his state.
-
Too bad such a beautiful State was ruined by Politicians and the local Libscum.
-
It’s the same the Texas is doing. I seemed to have missed your threads crying about that. Link is to them.
:'( :'( :'( :'(
-
It’s the same the Texas is doing. I seemed to have missed your threads crying about that. Link is to them.
:'( :'( :'( :'(
It's not even remotely the same. But you won't watch the attorney.
-
It’s the same the Texas is doing. I seemed to have missed your threads crying about that. Link is to them.
:'( :'( :'( :'(
So a tit for tat is acceptable if the left is doing it? Why is only Newscum the only governor concerned and whining about it?
-
It's not even remotely the same. But you won't watch the attorney.
Classic cop out.
-
Classic cop out.
Really, I’m what way? Again, didn’t watch it, did you but you felt the need to comment on something you know absolutely nothing about. It’s frustrating how fucking stupid you people are
-
Really, I’m what way? Again, didn’t watch it, did you but you felt the need to comment on something you know absolutely nothing about. It’s frustrating how fucking stupid you people are
The point is that you did not answer his question. You have no idea what I know about gerrymandering done in Texas and California.
-
The point is that you did not answer his question. You have no idea what I know about gerrymandering done in Texas and California.
Goddammit watch the fucking video. It explains both sides. FUCK!!
-
Goddammit watch the fucking video. It explains both sides. FUCK!!
Provide the link and I will. There are multiple videos titled The Attorney.
I doubt you mean this one.
Or this one,
-
Provide the link and I will. There are multiple videos titled The Attorney.
I doubt you mean this one.
Or this one,
Holy shit Prime, it’s in my very first post
-
Holy shit Prime, it’s in my very first post
Yes it was and I missed it.
Well at least folks get to vote on proposition 50. Which gerrymandering proposition did Texans vote on? Somewhere around five lawsuits have been filed to block it the ruling on it should happen happen by December 8, 2025. One of the judges is a Trump-appointee, the lead judge is a relatively moderate Obama-appointee, and one has ruled against redistricting in the past.
-
Texas gerrymandered first without a vote, newsom did this in response and indicated he wouldn't if texas didn't. He also matched the number of seats to what texas added for the GOP and did it democratically via vote LOLOLol, texas did not.
You are fucking delusional as usual. It's in response to the rights obvious power grab because midterms will be a bloodbath as the economy is in shambles as per jerome powell and this authoritarian regime is trampling rights. The courts literally just said trump is delusional with his national guard/military on US soil nonsense, he is trying to get journalists to agree to be given news and almost none will agree to it, its typical fascist bullshit. He knows better then you! he is owed 5 seats and abbott gave it to them so newsom responded, warned he would and did it democratically via vote.
I know you are a simpleton and believe everything fox tells you but spinning this in any other way when newsom said he would if Texas did is disingenuous.
Let's recap for the retards in the back
- trump says he is owed 5 seats
- texas obliges
- newsom says if you try to steal midterms with this obvious power grab I will gerrymander- keep in mind now that when gerrymandering was brought for a vote, to stop it, no republican voted and all the demos did lolol
- newsom matches 5 seats, could of done more but he isn't a fascist
- newsom puts it to a democratic vote unlike texas
It's newsom's fault, what a psycho.
-
It's not even remotely the same. But you won't watch the attorney.
Yeah. It's the exact same thing.
-
So a tit for tat is acceptable if the left is doing it? Why is only Newscum the only governor concerned and whining about it?
So a tit for tat is acceptable if the right is doing it? Why is only MAGAtards the only crybabies concerned and whining about it?
-
Texas gerrymandered first without a vote, newsom did this in response and indicated he wouldn't if texas didn't. He also matched the number of seats to what texas added for the GOP and did it democratically via vote LOLOLol, texas did not.
You are fucking delusional as usual. It's in response to the rights obvious power grab because midterms will be a bloodbath as the economy is in shambles as per jerome powell and this authoritarian regime is trampling rights. The courts literally just said trump is delusional with his national guard/military on US soil nonsense, he is trying to get journalists to agree to be given news and almost none will agree to it, its typical fascist bullshit. He knows better then you! he is owed 5 seats and abbott gave it to them so newsom responded, warned he would and did it democratically via vote.
I know you are a simpleton and believe everything fox tells you but spinning this in any other way when newsom said he would if Texas did is disingenuous.
Let's recap for the retards in the back
- trump says he is owed 5 seats
- texas obliges
- newsom says if you try to steal midterms with this obvious power grab I will gerrymander- keep in mind now that when gerrymandering was brought for a vote, to stop it, no republican voted and all the demos did lolol
- newsom matches 5 seats, could of done more but he isn't a fascist
- newsom puts it to a democratic vote unlike texas
It's newsom's fault, what a psycho.
Pure ownage. HAHAHAHAHA See this is why no one is wasting time "debating" the little retard.
-
So a tit for tat is acceptable if the left is doing it? Why is only Newscum the only governor concerned and whining about it?
I don't think there are many other states that could do it to make up the seats, cali is in a unique position with that. Many have commented that its an authoritarian power grab, it's obviously to try and keep power using underhanded methods. What else could it be?
-
Pure ownage. HAHAHAHAHA See this is why no one is wasting time "debating" the little retard.
I honestly feel bad doing it, it's like he cannot think logically and is immune to reason if its not in line with his beliefs. I believe we call this confirmation bias.
It's like debating a christian but instead of faith in jesus its faith in the right.
-
Texas gerrymandered first without a vote, newsom did this in response and indicated he wouldn't if texas didn't.
So it's cool to blackmail other states to get your way? There was no other response from any other state besides CA? How did the NY governor react?
I don't think there are many other states that could do it to make up the seats, cali is in a unique position with that. Many have commented that its an authoritarian power grab, it's obviously to try and keep power using underhanded methods. What else could it be?
You're right, Newscum has been on a long stream of authoritarian moves for years now. You see his latest? Banning the most popular handgun in the country? But only for the people, not for LE. Let's not even talk about his covid mandates.....holy shit. Or what about his impressive manipulation of the blacks looking for reparations? He's been stringing those gullible bastards along for years!. ;D
-
So it's cool to blackmail other states to get your way? There was no other response from any other state besides CA? How did the NY governor react? You're right, Newscum has been on a long stream of authoritarian moves for years now. You see his latest? Banning the most popular handgun in the country? But only for the people, not for LE. Let's not even talk about his covid mandates.....holy shit. Or what about his impressive manipulation of the blacks looking for reparations? He's been stringing those gullible bastards along for years!. ;D
Blackmail? it definitely does not qualify as that lol. He literally said stop the bullshit- you can't just add seats at the behest of the president because he wants to wield power unchecked. Its clearly the right response and if the shoe was on the other foot and Biden was doing this you would be up in arms lol. Talk about a hypocrite.
Ya real authoritarian to put it up for a public vote, classic dictator stuff newsom did there. Meanwhile abbott does it without a vote and for no reason other then wanting more seats to stay in power- which is fucking ridiculous.
You sound silly.
-
Blackmail? it definitely does not qualify as that lol. He literally said stop the bullshit- you can't just add seats at the behest of the president because he wants to wield power unchecked. Its clearly the right response and if the shoe was on the other foot and Biden was doing this you would be up in arms lol. Talk about a hypocrite.
Ya real authoritarian to put it up for a public vote, classic dictator stuff newsom did there. Meanwhile abbott does it without a vote and for no reason other then wanting more seats to stay in power- which is fucking ridiculous.
You sound silly.
Exactly. Yet ignored because of, well..... blackmail. ::)
-
So a tit for tat is acceptable if the left is doing it? Why is only Newscum the only governor concerned and whining about it?
Governor Newsom is not whining about it, he is doing something about it and what he is doing which is putting it to a vote of the people is more democratic than Governor Abbot's approach. But then, Texas' gerrymandering is not a done deal.
-
Blackmail? it definitely does not qualify as that lol. He literally said stop the bullshit- you can't just add seats at the behest of the president because he wants to wield power unchecked. Its clearly the right response and if the shoe was on the other foot and Biden was doing this you would be up in arms lol. Talk about a hypocrite.
Ya real authoritarian to put it up for a public vote, classic dictator stuff newsom did there. Meanwhile abbott does it without a vote and for no reason other then wanting more seats to stay in power- which is fucking ridiculous.
You sound silly.
The question is, if Biden was doing it, would YOU be up in arms? I doubt it, hypocrite. ;)
You sound effeminate.
-
Texas gerrymandered first without a vote, newsom did this in response and indicated he wouldn't if texas didn't. He also matched the number of seats to what texas added for the GOP and did it democratically via vote LOLOLol, texas did not.
You are fucking delusional as usual. It's in response to the rights obvious power grab because midterms will be a bloodbath as the economy is in shambles as per jerome powell and this authoritarian regime is trampling rights. The courts literally just said trump is delusional with his national guard/military on US soil nonsense, he is trying to get journalists to agree to be given news and almost none will agree to it, its typical fascist bullshit. He knows better then you! he is owed 5 seats and abbott gave it to them so newsom responded, warned he would and did it democratically via vote.
I know you are a simpleton and believe everything fox tells you but spinning this in any other way when newsom said he would if Texas did is disingenuous.
Let's recap for the retards in the back
- trump says he is owed 5 seats
- texas obliges
- newsom says if you try to steal midterms with this obvious power grab I will gerrymander- keep in mind now that when gerrymandering was brought for a vote, to stop it, no republican voted and all the demos did lolol
- newsom matches 5 seats, could of done more but he isn't a fascist
- newsom puts it to a democratic vote unlike texas
It's newsom's fault, what a psycho.
I know you live in Canada and probably have no idea how our system works, but the process in Texas and California is not the same. The Texas process went through the legislature, like their state constitution allows. The process in California is a referendum, where people vote, like their state constitution allows.
-
I know you live in Canada and probably have no idea how our system works, but the process in Texas and California is not the same. The Texas process went through the legislature, like their state constitution allows. The process in California is a referendum, where people vote, like their state constitution allows.
So both are legal? Coach doesn't think so.
-
So both are legal? Coach doesn't think so.
So you skip right over how wrong Necrosis was.
-
So you skip right over how wrong Necrosis was.
That is Right. Because my question pertains to posts exchanged between Coach and me.
Your response seems rather odd. BTW.
-
That is Right. Because my question pertains to posts exchanged between Coach and me.
Your response seems rather odd. BTW.
My post was directed to Necrosis. You responded to my post by talking about Coach. Odd. Actually, no it isn't. It's predictable.
-
I know you live in Canada and probably have no idea how our system works, but the process in Texas and California is not the same. The Texas process went through the legislature, like their state constitution allows. The process in California is a referendum, where people vote, like their state constitution allows.
Seems a lot more democratic via californias method. I mean I can only imagine that the legislature is stacked red in texas. Mid decade map redrawing is pretty rare, with the incumbent generally losing seats in mid terms adding five seats (from immiserated communities) seems like a clear attempt to hold on to power and subvert the will of the people.
I am glad you stated Newsom did it constitutionally refuting coach's claims.
He was probably loading up some guns getting ready to take war to newsom for his treachery.
-
Seems a lot more democratic via californias method. I mean I can only imagine that the legislature is stacked red in texas. Mid decade map redrawing is pretty rare, with the incumbent generally losing seats in mid terms adding five seats (from immiserated communities) seems like a clear attempt to hold on to power and subvert the will of the people.
I am glad you stated Newsom did it constitutionally refuting coach's claims.
He was probably loading up some guns getting ready to take war to newsom for his treachery.
California voters are stacked blue, so your contention about Texas also applies to California.
-
California voters are stacked blue, so your contention about Texas also applies to California.
not even close. The public vs sitting members is not even close to the same, they can sway each other, collude, have a party they are beholden to, face consequences for not towing the line, I mean I could go on but its so silly it truly doesn't merit a response. Otherwise why have elections? I am going to start tallying up all the logical fallacies you engage in for fun. Have you ever studied logic? You should, it will help you make sense more often and form coherent positions.
today we have something called a false equivalence. That's 1 for today so far- I will leave the others in the other threads out. Give you a fresh start of sorts.
-
not even close. The public vs sitting members is not even close to the same, they can sway each other, collude, have a party they are beholden to, face consequences for not towing the line, I mean I could go on but its so silly it truly doesn't merit a response. Otherwise why have elections? I am going to start tallying up all the logical fallacies you engage in for fun. Have you ever studied logic? You should, it will help you make sense more often and form coherent positions.
today we have something called a false equivalence. That's 1 for today so far- I will leave the others in the other threads out. Give you a fresh start of sorts.
::)
You should stick to canadian politics. I hope you know more about that pile of shit than you do American politics cause you are one poor deluded, misguided soul.
-
not even close. The public vs sitting members is not even close to the same, they can sway each other, collude, have a party they are beholden to, face consequences for not towing the line, I mean I could go on but its so silly it truly doesn't merit a response. Otherwise why have elections? I am going to start tallying up all the logical fallacies you engage in for fun. Have you ever studied logic? You should, it will help you make sense more often and form coherent positions.
today we have something called a false equivalence. That's 1 for today so far- I will leave the others in the other threads out. Give you a fresh start of sorts.
That's ignorant. Voting by elective representatives is primarily how we run our state and federal governments. You obviously don't know squat about American politics.
But never fear. We are here to help.
-
That's ignorant. Voting by elective representatives is primarily how we run our state and federal governments. You obviously don't know squat about American politics.
But never fear. We are here to help.
nice fail lolol.
Resort to ad hominem, this is the third logical fallacy in as many posts- all different as well! lolol. You should seriously think about learning some logic.
There is another fallacy in there as well, do you want me to point it out or can you spot it on your own?
I don't know why you even try as you are constantly sodomized because your reasoning is piss poor.
-
::)
You should stick to canadian politics. I hope you know more about that pile of shit than you do American politics cause you are one poor deluded, misguided soul.
one point proves it, representatives can do things that are unpopular, thats all you need to know to know your assertions are stupid. If it's unpopular, its unpopular with whom? thus it would not be done if put to a vote, but yet it can be because representatives can do unpopular things because of the power vested in them.
I mean I can give you some analogies if thats how you learn? I realize its expedient for you to not admit your logic is unsound.
-
one point proves it, representatives can do things that are unpopular, thats all you need to know to know your assertions are stupid. If it's unpopular, its unpopular with whom? thus it would not be done if put to a vote, but yet it can be because representatives can do unpopular things because of the power vested in them.
I mean I can give you some analogies if thats how you learn? I realize its expedient for you to not admit your logic is unsound.
Do you even know how they are manipulating your kind here in CA to vote? They are constantly running ads saying that Trump is trying to change the future and the only way to combat it is by voting yes, they are fear mongering you dumb ass democrat voters. For a group of people that calls themselves woke, you dipshits sure aren't seeing things.
-
-
nice fail lolol.
Resort to ad hominem, this is the third logical fallacy in as many posts- all different as well! lolol. You should seriously think about learning some logic.
There is another fallacy in there as well, do you want me to point it out or can you spot it on your own?
I don't know why you even try as you are constantly sodomized because your reasoning is piss poor.
Wait. Are you saying the vast majority of our state and federal governments do not operate through representatives rather through referendums? Or do you not understand what the means?
-
You may not like what California and Texas are doing, but they are acting within the guidelines of their respective state constitutions.
-
You may not like what California and Texas are doing, but they are acting within the guidelines of their respective state constitutions.
The problem with CA is that Newscum is only doing it as a tit for tat against Texas. If you watch the video I posted he explain in more detail the impact on Californians that vote red.
-
You may not like what California and Texas are doing, but they are acting within the guidelines of their respective state constitutions.
You are literally correct, because CA’s constitution allows for propositions like prop 50.
The problem is, we passed a proposition creating an independent commission to draw congressional districts. Newsom is promoting a TEMPORARY measure to redraw districts until the next census.
If it’s the bee’s knees, the cat’s meow, why is it temporary?
As Chaos posted above, it's an attempt at a tit for tat.
-
The problem with CA is that Newscum is only doing it as a tit for tat against Texas. If you watch the video I posted he explain in more detail the impact on Californians that vote red.
obviously, he stated as much. He said he would not if texas didnt do it.
-
That's ignorant. Voting by elective representatives is primarily how we run our state and federal governments. You obviously don't know squat about American politics.
But never fear. We are here to help.
Non-sense, you realize the will of the people can be against the sitting reps whilst that rep is in office for the term until an election can take place right? hence people getting elected out etc.
Taking the temperature of the masses vs a person with pressure on him is not the same, no matter how much you want to believe it is.
There are people who voted for trump that would vote him out now, thats a fact, the fact that that is a fact disproves your notion as he is there for 4 more years regardless of the will of those people.
I know basic logic escapes you and you would like to paint me as someone who doesn't understand things to make your having to defend yourself un-needed but alas you silly worldview gets exposed again.
Just like it wasn't an insurrection trump is guilty of fraud. You cherry pick when you will bleed boundaries and things when rules matter.
-
Non-sense, you realize the will of the people can be against the sitting reps whilst that rep is in office for the term until an election can take place right? hence people getting elected out etc.
Taking the temperature of the masses vs a person with pressure on him is not the same, no matter how much you want to believe it is.
There are people who voted for trump that would vote him out now, thats a fact, the fact that that is a fact disproves your notion as he is there for 4 more years regardless of the will of those people.
I know basic logic escapes you and you would like to paint me as someone who doesn't understand things to make your having to defend yourself un-needed but alas you silly worldview gets exposed again.
Just like it wasn't an insurrection trump is guilty of fraud. You cherry pick when you will bleed boundaries and things when rules matter.
It isn't nonsense. It's a fact. I will try and help you understand again.
1. Our federal government is run primarily through elected representatives. The only referendum-type governing is done through amending the Constitution, and even that is done on a representative basis, because it requires vote of two thirds of the House and Senate and two thirds of the states. Or by a convention of states, which is likely never going to happen. So for all intents and purposes, our federal government is governed by elected representatives.
2. State governments are run primarily through elected representatives. Some states like California and Hawaii allow some issues to be decided by referendum. Even in those states, the overwhelming majority of governing is done through elected representatives.
These are facts. Whether you choose to accept them or not is up to you.
-
obviously, he stated as much. He said he would not if texas didnt do it.
Glad you agree he's only doing it out of spite, just to be a cunt. Rather than worry about homelessness, out of control taxes, fire or water management, infrastructure, etc, he's worried about what Texas is doing. ::)
-
.
-
obviously, he stated as much. He said he would not if texas didnt do it.
If it’s the bee’s knees, the cat’s meow, why is it temporary?
-
It isn't nonsense. It's a fact. I will try and help you understand again.
1. Our federal government is run primarily through elected representatives. The only referendum-type governing is done through amending the Constitution, and even that is done on a representative basis, because it requires vote of two thirds of the House and Senate and two thirds of the states. Or by a convention of states, which is likely never going to happen. So for all intents and purposes, our federal government is governed by elected representatives.
2. State governments are run primarily through elected representatives. Some states like California and Hawaii allow some issues to be decided by referendum. Even in those states, the overwhelming majority of governing is done through elected representatives.
These are facts. Whether you choose to accept them or not is up to you.
I understand that, it has zero bearing on what I said though. But thanks for trying. I see you have trouble thinking about things in an abstract manner.
Right now there are elected representatives that do not represent the will of the people. That point is all I need to make for your whole argument to fall apart. Regardless of decorum, procedure or tradition.
I do not think you understand what I am saying to be truthful. Either you can't or you won't
-
I understand that, it has zero bearing on what I said though. But thanks for trying. I see you have trouble thinking about things in an abstract manner.
Right now there are elected representatives that do not represent the will of the people. That point is all I need to make for your whole argument to fall apart. Regardless of decorum, procedure or tradition.
I do not think you understand what I am saying to be truthful. Either you can't or you won't
Again, you don't know what the heck you're talking about. This started with you saying what Texas did was unconstitutional.
Texas gerrymandered first without a vote, newsom did this in response and indicated he wouldn't if texas didn't. He also matched the number of seats to what texas added for the GOP and did it democratically via vote LOLOLol, texas did not.
You are fucking delusional as usual. It's in response to the rights obvious power grab because midterms will be a bloodbath as the economy is in shambles as per jerome powell and this authoritarian regime is trampling rights. The courts literally just said trump is delusional with his national guard/military on US soil nonsense, he is trying to get journalists to agree to be given news and almost none will agree to it, its typical fascist bullshit. He knows better then you! he is owed 5 seats and abbott gave it to them so newsom responded, warned he would and did it democratically via vote.
I know you are a simpleton and believe everything fox tells you but spinning this in any other way when newsom said he would if Texas did is disingenuous.
Let's recap for the retards in the back
- trump says he is owed 5 seats
- texas obliges
- newsom says if you try to steal midterms with this obvious power grab I will gerrymander- keep in mind now that when gerrymandering was brought for a vote, to stop it, no republican voted and all the demos did lolol
- newsom matches 5 seats, could of done more but he isn't a fascist
- newsom puts it to a democratic vote unlike texas
It's newsom's fault, what a psycho.
I've explained to you how our system works. You clearly don't understand it. But it's ok. Keep reading and maybe the lightbulb will eventually turn on. Or not.
-
where did I state it was unconstitutional?
-
where did I state it was unconstitutional?
Are you high (again)? You said California did it democratically, unlike Texas. Just stop already. You are really embarrassing yourself.
-
Are you high (again)? You said California did it democratically, unlike Texas. Just stop already. You are really embarrassing yourself.
1 I am sober thank you for checking in on me, I know you are concerned.
2. don't tell me when to stop
3. I am referring to by the people, meaning the wishes of the people.
Now, before you go crazy about the reps being the will of the people, please see my point I have been trying to make for a page now.
-
1 I am sober thank you for checking in on me, I know you are concerned.
2. don't tell me when to stop
3. I am referring to by the people, meaning the wishes of the people.
Now, before you go crazy about the reps being the will of the people, please see my point I have been trying to make for a page now.
I'm pretty sure YOU don't understand the point you're trying to make. You're saying the referendum process in California is fairer than the representative process in Texas. And you said this because of how red Texas is. What I tried to explain to you is California is blue, so the referendum process in California will be largely controlled by Democrats. So your point is neither factual nor logical. There is a reason why we don't have a direct democracy and limit things that can be decided by popular votes.
-
I'm pretty sure YOU don't understand the point you're trying to make. You're saying the referendum process in California is fairer than the representative process in Texas. And you said this because of how red Texas is. What I tried to explain to you is California is blue, so the referendum process in California will be largely controlled by Democrats. So your point is neither factual nor logical. There is a reason why we don't have a direct democracy and limit things that can be decided by popular votes.
I realize cali is blue, however, people can decide to vote differently in a democracy. My point is both logical and factual.
Your last sentence is really non-sequitor as cali just help a vote via direct democracy on the gerrymandering, so ipso facto this is the type of thing one can have a direct democratic vote on. There was a possiblity that the people would reject it because they disagreed. However, reps have invested power in the sense that gaining more seats for their party is salutary and they have to tow a party line.
There is a clear difference here, why you aren't acknowledging it and harping on this is beyond me.
The point is this. Why did texax gerrymander? what was the purpose, ultimately? can you answer that question?
-
1 I am sober thank you for checking in on me, I know you are concerned.
2. don't tell me when to stop
3. I am referring to by the people, meaning the wishes of the people.
Now, before you go crazy about the reps being the will of the people, please see my point I have been trying to make for a page now.
All things an addict in denial would say.
-
All things an addict in denial would say.
you girl!
-
you girl!
Cunt, the word you're looking for is cunt, cunt. ;D
-
I realize cali is blue, however, people can decide to vote differently in a democracy. My point is both logical and factual.
Your last sentence is really non-sequitor as cali just help a vote via direct democracy on the gerrymandering, so ipso facto this is the type of thing one can have a direct democratic vote on. There was a possiblity that the people would reject it because they disagreed. However, reps have invested power in the sense that gaining more seats for their party is salutary and they have to tow a party line.
There is a clear difference here, why you aren't acknowledging it and harping on this is beyond me.
The point is this. Why did texax gerrymander? what was the purpose, ultimately? can you answer that question?
Sorry but your point makes no sense. The limited number of things that can be decided by direct democracy (i.e., referendum) can result in a skewered result based on geography. There is nothing that makes it more fair than a representative system. And that's why the overwhelming majority of our state and federal government runs through representatives, including in California.
Texas gerrymandered in response to Democrats gerrymandering.
-
Sorry but your point makes no sense. The limited number of things that can be decided by direct democracy (i.e., referendum) can result in a skewered result based on geography. There is nothing that makes it more fair than a representative system. And that's why the overwhelming majority of our state and federal government runs through representatives, including in California.
Texas gerrymandered in response to Democrats gerrymandering.
LOL
ok nevermind, you don't live in reality
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-playbook/2025/08/25/how-california-dems-bluffed-their-way-into-a-gerrymandering-showdown-00522510
https://calmatters.org/politics/2025/08/california-republicans-newsom-redistricting-texas/
hahaha, it was a clear response to abbott, he even went as far to say he wouldn't and matched the number of seats. Abbott did it at trumps behest. If you can't even admit simple facts I don;t know what to tell you.
I think its quite obvious the timeline unless you think newsom can go back in time. It also fits with the rights refusal to end this type of shit or remediate it, voting against it.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2025/aug/21/gavin-newsom/california-texas-independent-redistricting/
You are in a cult if you think Trump saying he is owed 5 seats is fine.
-
LOL
ok nevermind, you don't live in reality
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-playbook/2025/08/25/how-california-dems-bluffed-their-way-into-a-gerrymandering-showdown-00522510
https://calmatters.org/politics/2025/08/california-republicans-newsom-redistricting-texas/
hahaha, it was a clear response to abbott, he even went as far to say he wouldn't and matched the number of seats. Abbott did it at trumps behest. If you can't even admit simple facts I don;t know what to tell you.
I think its quite obvious the timeline unless you think newsom can go back in time. It also fits with the rights refusal to end this type of shit or remediate it, voting against it.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2025/aug/21/gavin-newsom/california-texas-independent-redistricting/
You are in a cult if you think Trump saying he is owed 5 seats is fine.
You’re not following your own comments and questions. You asked why Texas did it, not why California did it. Texas did it to respond to years of Democrat gerrymandering. California simply responded to Texas. Not complicated.
You are trolling again. You have not followed the gerrymandering issue. You should do some homework.
-
You’re not following your own comments and questions. You asked why Texas did it, not why California did it. Texas did it to respond to years of Democrat gerrymandering. California simply responded to Texas. Not complicated.
You are trolling again. You have not followed the gerrymandering issue. You should do some homework.
what democratic gerrymandering are you referring to? I would have assumed you were mentioning newsoms since nothing else had been mentioned nor is the thread about that.
What specific gerrymandering are you referring to? I was unaware of any gerrymandering that occurred in lib districts recently that would warrant retaliation. Enlighten me.
I am only aware of texas doing mid decade twice now, nebraska, missouri and now cali. North carolina has or is in the process.
It would really seem like the right are really pushing the envelope here. The new york redistricting benefitted repubs as far as I know.
What cases are you referring to specifically?
-
what democratic gerrymandering are you referring to? I would have assumed you were mentioning newsoms since nothing else had been mentioned nor is the thread about that.
What specific gerrymandering are you referring to? I was unaware of any gerrymandering that occurred in lib districts recently that would warrant retaliation. Enlighten me.
I am only aware of texas doing mid decade twice now, nebraska, missouri and now cali. North carolina has or is in the process.
It would really seem like the right are really pushing the envelope here. The new york redistricting benefitted repubs as far as I know.
What cases are you referring to specifically?
I’m not doing your homework for you. You can use Google just as easily as I can. That said, it has happened all over the country, including Illinois, North Carolina, Maryland, etc. Not hard to find.
Remember what you asked me: why did Texas do this. The answer is it was a response to what has happened in numerous states.
-
I’m not doing your homework for you. You can use Google just as easily as I can. That said, it has happened all over the country, including Illinois, North Carolina, Maryland, etc. Not hard to find.
Remember what you asked me: why did Texas do this. The answer is it was a response to what has happened in numerous states.
no no, the answer you gave which was somewhat veiled as you knew what I was asking, was that it was in response to the democrats doing it for years. Now you have moved the goalposts to it happening in numerous states- the leanings of those states is pretty important if we are talking reciprocation dont you think.
It appears I know more about it than you, you literally just regurgitated what I stated and if that's all you have then as I suspected, the actual answer is that trump is conducting a power grab (he is owed 5 seats mind you) and abbott obliged. Meaning this situation is untethered from anything previous and is simply a singularity based on trumps wants.
Meanwhile, the democrats did it in retaliation, which ironically enough is your justification for abbott doing it, which we have established he did not in fact do it in that context.
Is there anything else you would like to discuss?
Are you aware of your manipulation and dishonesty? seriously? deep down you must know right? you do this weird sticking to the literal question when it suits you then switch to being abstract and expansive when it doesn't, avoiding any solidity in your position. It's a little fraudsterish
-
no no, the answer you gave which was somewhat veiled as you knew what I was asking, was that it was in response to the democrats doing it for years. Now you have moved the goalposts to it happening in numerous states- the leanings of those states is pretty important if we are talking reciprocation dont you think.
It appears I know more about it than you, you literally just regurgitated what I stated and if that's all you have then as I suspected, the actual answer is that trump is conducting a power grab (he is owed 5 seats mind you) and abbott obliged. Meaning this situation is untethered ::) ::) :P :P from anything previous and is simply a singularity based on trumps wants.
Meanwhile, the democrats did it in retaliation, which ironically enough is your justification for abbott doing it, which we have established he did not in fact do it in that context.
Is there anything else you would like to discuss?
Are you aware of your manipulation and dishonesty? seriously? deep down you must know right? you do this weird sticking to the literal question when it suits you then switch to being abstract and expansive when it doesn't, avoiding any solidity in your position. It's a little fraudsterish
::)
-
::)
Low effort, I can see you are losing steam. Enjoy your day. I will sleep well tonight from these victories. My crushing insecurity is abated for at least 20 hours.
-
Low effort, I can see you are losing steam. Enjoy your day. I will sleep well tonight from these victories. My crushing insecurity is abated for at least 20 hours.
No that’s me being nice instead of lobbing the insults I wanted to say. Lol
-
No that’s me being nice instead of lobbing the insults I wanted to say. Lol
A touch gay and the second sign of high estrogen ;D ;D
-
A touch gay and the second sign of high estrogen ;D ;D
This is the second time you have said being nice is gay (the other was Illuminati and Prime being nice to each other). Being nice is not gay. It’s just being decent. Hard to grasp with all the keyboard warriors on the internet, but it’s a good thing.
No high estrogen for me, despite all of the plant protein I consume.
-
This is the second time you have said being nice is gay (the other was Illuminati and Prime being nice to each other). Being nice is not gay. It’s just being decent. Hard to grasp with all the keyboard warriors on the internet, but it’s a good thing.
No high estrogen for me, despite all of the plant protein I consume.
LOL i can't tell if your serious
"Being nice is not gay" lmao. Dude, the context of this conversation, two grown men and you trying to parent me from a distance is hilarious. Yes, being nice is part of being a good human being, sometimes compassion is hard, like the wack of a keisaku though. Suffering breeds kindness.
Plant protein powder is a lead factory just fyi.
-
You’re not following your own comments and questions. You asked why Texas did it, not why California did it. Texas did it to respond to years of Democrat gerrymandering. California simply responded to Texas. Not complicated.
You are trolling again. You have not followed the gerrymandering issue. You should do some homework.
Texas became a Republican dominated state in the 1990's and has consistently been so ever since then. So when exactly did all those "years of Democrat gerrrymandering" take place? Texas has a long and extensively litigated history of gerrymandering, most notably for congressional maps adopted in 2003, 2021, and 2025
-
LOL i can't tell if your serious
"Being nice is not gay" lmao. Dude, the context of this conversation, two grown men and you trying to parent me from a distance is hilarious. Yes, being nice is part of being a good human being, sometimes compassion is hard, like the wack of a keisaku though. Suffering breeds kindness.
Plant protein powder is a lead factory just fyi.
You’re
-
Texas became a Republican dominated state in the 1990's and has consistently been so ever since then. So when exactly did all those "years of Democrat gerrrymandering" take place? Texas has a long and extensively litigated history of gerrymandering, most notably for congressional maps adopted in 2003, 2021, and 2025
Your reading comprehension sucks.
I thought this was interesting
The original question appears neutral and factual, seeking information about redistricting frequency. However, it omits the critical context of California's current unprecedented mid-decade redistricting effort, which represents a major political development that significantly impacts the answer.
The question's simplicity could inadvertently obscure the complex political dynamics currently at play, where powerful Democratic leaders like Gavin Newsom and Barack Obama benefit from pushing a narrative that justifies extraordinary redistricting measures as responses to Republican tactics [6] [1].
By not acknowledging the current political battle between California and Texas over congressional representation, the question fails to capture that redistricting frequency has become a strategic political weapon rather than just a routine administrative process following census data.
-
You’re
high protein powder consumption detected.
-
LOL i can't tell if your serious
"Being nice is not gay" lmao. Dude, the context of this conversation, two grown men and you trying to parent me from a distance is hilarious. Yes, being nice is part of being a good human being, sometimes compassion is hard, like the wack of a keisaku though. Suffering breeds kindness.
Plant protein powder is a lead factory just fyi.
No one is trying to parent you. That's weird.
Not sure what you mean by "lead factory," but I get 100 percent of my protein from plant-based sources.
-
No one is trying to parent you. That's weird.
Not sure what you mean by "lead factory," but I get 100 percent of my protein from plant-based sources.
recent study showed plant protein powder is crazy high in lead concentrations.
-
recent study showed plant protein powder is crazy high in lead concentrations.
What study? Do you have a link? I'd like to read it.
Saying "plant protein powder" is pretty broad. Was it soy, pea, rice, etc.? I guess I can determine that from reading the study . . . .
-
What study? Do you have a link? I'd like to read it.
Saying "plant protein powder" is pretty broad. Was it soy, pea, rice, etc.? I guess I can determine that from reading the study . . . .
It was a consumer report, they tested specific brands and powders which is very cool as you can make an informed decision.
https://www.consumerreports.org/lead/protein-powders-and-shakes-contain-high-levels-of-lead-a4206364640/
Larger investigation/study
https://cleanlabelproject.org/protein-study-2-0/
it would make sense that plant protein has more lead- it should have more metals but then again lots of plants have chelators in them as well so what that means for your health who knows. Whey was the lowest if I recall, which also makes sense.
-
What is this gay leaded protein talk ???
-
What is this gay leaded protein talk ???
i get mine straight from the tap to be fair. Spermidine is good for longevity.
-
i get mine straight from the tap to be fair. Spermidine is good for longevity.
Unleaded I assume?
-
It was a consumer report, they tested specific brands and powders which is very cool as you can make an informed decision.
https://www.consumerreports.org/lead/protein-powders-and-shakes-contain-high-levels-of-lead-a4206364640/
Larger investigation/study
https://cleanlabelproject.org/protein-study-2-0/
it would make sense that plant protein has more lead- it should have more metals but then again lots of plants have chelators in them as well so what that means for your health who knows. Whey was the lowest if I recall, which also makes sense.
Thanks. Interesting. I use two of those on their bad list. So they concluded all protein powders have unacceptable levels of lead, but plant protein powders are worse. Meh. Not going to change what I do. It's too late already anyway because I've using them for most of my life. And I don't really trust what "experts" say if they don't have specific experience with bodybuilding nutrition.
For more than two-thirds of the products we analyzed, a single serving contained more lead than CR’s food safety experts say is safe to consume in a day—some by more than 10 times.
-
Thanks. Interesting. I use two of those on their bad list. So they concluded all protein powders have unacceptable levels of lead, but plant protein powders are worse. Meh. Not going to change what I do. It's too late already anyway because I've using them for most of my life. And I don't really trust what "experts" say if they don't have specific experience with bodybuilding nutrition.
For more than two-thirds of the products we analyzed, a single serving contained more lead than CR’s food safety experts say is safe to consume in a day—some by more than 10 times.
Don't care to read the article but where did they say the lead was coming from? Is it a processing issue?
-
Don't care to read the article but where did they say the lead was coming from? Is it a processing issue?
They are not sure, but probably manufacturing. An excerpt:
"Lead could enter pea protein at the manufacturing plant, when the dried peas are dehulled and ground into flour, depending on the type of machines and metals used, says Goldman. It could also be introduced during the process where the flour is mixed with water to separate the protein from the starch and fiber, if the water wasn’t tested for contamination. The final step of the process, where the protein is coagulated with food-grade acid, neutralized, and spray-dried into the powder found in many foods and supplements, also offers opportunities for contamination, depending on the materials used.
Many companies don’t disclose where they source their pea protein, making it hard to know exactly where the products we tested came from. Historically, though, much of the pea protein used in U.S. food production is imported from China, according to data from the U.S. International Trade Commission. That’s notable because while the FDA has the authority to audit foreign supplement makers, it rarely does."
But I don't place much stock what these people have to say overall. Especially when they say stuff like this:
"The average healthy adult needs roughly 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight (0.36 grams per pound), according to federal nutrition guidelines. For a 170-pound adult, that breaks down to about 61 grams of protein, which can be achieved by eating a cup of plain Greek yogurt and 3.5 ounces of chicken breast (or 5 ounces of tempeh)."
-
They are not sure, but probably manufacturing. An excerpt:
"Lead could enter pea protein at the manufacturing plant, when the dried peas are dehulled and ground into flour, depending on the type of machines and metals used, says Goldman. It could also be introduced during the process where the flour is mixed with water to separate the protein from the starch and fiber, if the water wasn’t tested for contamination. The final step of the process, where the protein is coagulated with food-grade acid, neutralized, and spray-dried into the powder found in many foods and supplements, also offers opportunities for contamination, depending on the materials used.
Many companies don’t disclose where they source their pea protein, making it hard to know exactly where the products we tested came from. Historically, though, much of the pea protein used in U.S. food production is imported from China, according to data from the U.S. International Trade Commission. That’s notable because while the FDA has the authority to audit foreign supplement makers, it rarely does."
But I don't place much stock what these people have to say overall. Especially when they say stuff like this:
"The average healthy adult needs roughly 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight (0.36 grams per pound), according to federal nutrition guidelines. For a 170-pound adult, that breaks down to about 61 grams of protein, which can be achieved by eating a cup of plain Greek yogurt and 3.5 ounces of chicken breast (or 5 ounces of tempeh)."
That pretty much says it all doesn't it? Also how does a cup of yogurt and 3.5oz of chicken breast = 61 grams of protein? LOL
-
That pretty much says it all doesn't it? Also how does a cup of yogurt and 3.5oz of chicken breast = 61 grams of protein? LOL
Two chicken breasts and greek yogurt yes, but not one breast. If you want to look like a distance runner then follow the "federal nutrition guidelines." lol
-
No one is trying to parent you. That's weird.
Not sure what you mean by "lead factory," but I get 100 percent of my protein from plant-based sources.
Are you vegeterian?
-
Are you vegeterian?
Yep. But I am a meat and potatoes vegetarian. I use meat substitutes, so my diet isn't much different than a carnivore, except I use the fake stuff. It has gotten really good the past 20 years or so. I supplement too. I get at least 200 grams of protein a day. Never lost any muscle or strength. I'm as strong today as I was as a very young man. Second best health decision I have ever made. The first is getting 8 hours of sleep a night.
-
That pretty much says it all doesn't it? Also how does a cup of yogurt and 3.5oz of chicken breast = 61 grams of protein? LOL
That is technically true though. If we are talking need not optimal.
There were several powders that had low lead a few had near perfect levels.
There isn't anything to believe or not believe with the study, they just tested the powders and these are the findings, the samples were tested by a reputable source and it is in line with previous studies.
What that means, who knows.
-
That is technically true though. If we are talking need not optimal.
There were several powders that had low lead a few had near perfect levels.
There isn't anything to believe or not believe with the study, they just tested the powders and these are the findings, the samples were tested by a reputable source and it is in line with previous studies.
What that means, who knows.
Just curious where the contamination comes from, if they are claiming the plant or the process.
-
Just curious where the contamination comes from, if they are claiming the plant or the process.
Plants absorb metals from there surroundings/milieu so the soil, water and even air, so thats the most likely source but it can also happen during manufacturing. Thats the reason the whey protein had far lower levels, no real mechanism for absorption so its purely processing.