Liberal Forum

Beekeeper » 16 Jun 2026, 11:45 am » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 11:45 am

When the ENTIRE PREMISE of your OP is dead *** wrong, there's nothing to understand, ****!!

PERIOD!!  

There is NOTHING in our Constitution that calls this form of government a "democracy". The faster you learn that simple and yet VITAL POINT, the quicker you learn how **** STUPID your post was. We don't give 2 **** if someone fails to take 50% +1 vote in order to call themselves a winner in an election. YOUR SIDE of the aisle, the COMMIES, have been using this "rank choice" voting and "jungle primaries" for several years now, and you call THAT "democracy". Well, it's not and only a way to assure power to ONE GROUP, aka YOUR COMMIE PARTY OF ****!!

Now, you can **** OFF, cupcake, and go eat ****.

You idiot. Why do I have to dumb **** down for you? Focus: Regardless if we are a Republic, Democracy, or any other system that is rooted in voting, it is mathematically impossible for the mass of people to be represented if a third party is on the ballet. Period.  

Math does not give a **** about government structure, the constitution, your opinion, or my opinion. 

God man. I hate getting the crayons out. It's exhausting. It's like talking to BV. I have to dumb things down for him also.

Vegas » 16 Jun 2026, 12:17 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 12:17 pm

You idiot. Why do I have to dumb **** down for you? Focus: Regardless if we are a Republic, Democracy, or any other system that is rooted in voting, it is mathematically impossible for the mass of people to be represented if a third party is on the ballet. Period.  

Math does not give a **** about government structure, the constitution, your opinion, or my opinion. 

God man. I hate getting the crayons out. It's exhausting. It's like talking to BV. I have to dumb things down for him also.

Get your crayons out, CUPCAKE!!

It fits your IQ to a tee!!

NO ONE GIVES 2 **** WHAT YOU THINK!! THAT seems to be the part you're missing here. YOUR PREMISE IS FLAWED!! NO WHERE does our CONSTITUTION SAY that we have to "Represent the majority" of any group of people. IT SAYS, WE PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE MINORITY and NOT BOW DOWN TO THE WHIMS OF THE MAJORITY, ****!!

ARE YOU THAT **** STUPID?? Oh, never mind, you are.

Beekeeper » 16 Jun 2026, 12:22 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 12:22 pm

 YOUR PREMISE IS FLAWED!! NO WHERE does our CONSTITUTION SAY that we have to "Represent the majority" of any group of people. IT SAYS, WE PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE MINORITY and NOT BOW DOWN TO THE WHIMS OF THE MAJORITY, ****!!


 

No **** asshole. And guess what? A third party **** all that up. How do you not see the basic math? It's right there in the OP. I gave a very simple example. 


 

Vegas » 16 Jun 2026, 12:33 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 12:33 pm

No **** asshole. And guess what? A third party **** all that up. How do you not see the basic math? It's right there in the OP. I gave a very simple example.

LOL..   Give it all up for the Mother ****' Trump...

https://youtu.be/ztciNl2bGag?si=nSJRrlEafLJsFL_h

Dump the Slump 2026.
 

Vegas » 16 Jun 2026, 12:33 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 12:33 pm

No **** asshole. And guess what? A third party **** all that up. How do you not see the basic math? It's right there in the OP. I gave a very simple example.

What the hell do YOU expect from a  molester.
 
He is a **** IDIOT   

*Roshambo » 16 Jun 2026, 3:38 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 3:38 pm

What the hell do YOU expect from a  molester.
 
He is a **** IDIOT 

     
 

Vegas » 14 Jun 2026, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jun 2026, 11:40 am

Some simple math that even @Blackvegetable  might understand...well I doubt he will, but the rest of you can get it. 

Assume we have three candidates that won the following percentage of votes:

Candidate A: 32%
Candidate B: 30%
Candidate C: 38%

So candidate C wins. But 32% + 30% = 62%. So that means 62% of society didn't want candidate C and only 38% did. That doesn't seem much like a majority rules outcome. Though I understand we don't have a pure democracy, we have a republic. Be that as it may, even as a republic and with an electoral college, the mathematical outcome will always be the same. 

I guess no electoral system is perfect.

interesting statistics on 3rd party candidates and the percentages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... _elections
 

*Roshambo » 16 Jun 2026, 3:53 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 3:53 pm

interesting statistics on 3rd party candidates and the percentages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... _elections

Interesting. It appeared to stay relatively the same throughout the 20th century. Though it is starting to pick up a little bit, but not much. If the national average hits between 30%- 35%, then the math will begin to favor the minority winning. 

JohnnyYou » 16 Jun 2026, 3:47 am » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 3:47 am

You should be happy to invent or discover (who cares which one?) that  oligarchies are the only possible MAGAmyhtical solution to the human equation.

I believe this video may have inspired @Vegas   to try and take credit for creating a slogan here.   It's worse than @Blackvegetable  copy and pasting text from a news article..   The intervention continues..  No reply from my comment above.  We might get the No Holds Barred Yeast infection cleaned up someday..  (Hey my dog is really suffering..   Ivermectin?)

https://youtu.be/qf7ws2DF-zk?si=UqhZ61Q-jmxP4DZI

Never hurts.

Vegas » 16 Jun 2026, 12:33 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 12:33 pm

No **** asshole. And guess what? A third party **** all that up. How do you not see the basic math? It's right there in the OP. I gave a very simple example.

No, ****, it doesn't. You have 2 "minorities" that BOTH have their RIGHTS PROTECTED.

You really are THAT **** stupid. You can TRY to validate your stupidity with math if you want, but the REALITY OF HOW THINGS REALLY WORK IN OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLICAN CONFEDERATION don't math up with your premise. Because NO ONE LOSES ANY RIGHTS no matter what side you are one. IN A DEMOCRACY, THAT'S NOT TRUE, which is WHY our Founders HATED DEMOCRACY, pumpkin!!

And I don't need any "math" to prove that one. 

Are grandchildren a 3rd party to 4 grandparents and 2 parents one at a time with 7 people living between 8 great grandparents and arriving great grandchildren?
Are integers 0-9 containing 10 spaces same as results 1-10 before and after a decimal point between letters or numbers in context misleading content 24/7?
tenths compared to tens. 21 spaces of separation to the whole.

intellectual missing links are created by reasonable doubt living is the actual time of eternal separation of each cycle of life inhabiting time daily here.

Cause and effect that affects each ancestor living in plain sight as genetically present.

Vegas » 16 Jun 2026, 3:59 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2026, 3:59 pm

Interesting. It appeared to stay relatively the same throughout the 20th century. Though it is starting to pick up a little bit, but not much. If the national average hits between 30%- 35%, then the math will begin to favor the minority winning.

The establishment relies on voters thinking they have no alternative options. However, when citizens unite and choose not to endorse dishonesty, hollow commitments, and orchestrated deterioration, genuine political power starts to shift back to the populace.

Beekeeper » 17 Jun 2026, 5:39 am » wrote: ↑

17 Jun 2026, 5:39 am

No, ****, it doesn't. You have 2 "minorities" that BOTH have their RIGHTS PROTECTED.

You really are THAT **** stupid. You can TRY to validate your stupidity with math if you want, but the REALITY OF HOW THINGS REALLY WORK IN OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLICAN CONFEDERATION don't math up with your premise. Because NO ONE LOSES ANY RIGHTS no matter what side you are one. IN A DEMOCRACY, THAT'S NOT TRUE, which is WHY our Founders HATED DEMOCRACY, pumpkin!!

And I don't need any "math" to prove that one.

Oh my God. Your mathematical aptitude is at the same level of BVs.

Here. Focus. Tell me how the electoral college in our republic will register this:

Candidate A: 37% of the votes
Candidate B: 31% of the votes
Candidate C: 32% of the votes.

Candidate A won the percentage. However, 32% + 31% = 63%. That means 63% of the people didn't want candidate A. Since we have an electoral system, then usually (with the exception of Nebraska and Maine) the electoral votes will go to the candidate who received the most votes. Then the overall electoral votes are counted nationally until someone reaches 270. So when a third candidate enters, then it's inherently flawed. Every state will always have far more people who didn't want the winner. 

Tell me how the tyranny of the minority is better than the tyranny of the majority.

Vegas » 17 Jun 2026, 11:14 am » wrote: ↑

17 Jun 2026, 11:14 am

Oh my God. Your mathematical aptitude is at the same level of BVs.

Here. Focus. Tell me how the electoral college in our republic will register this:

Candidate A: 37% of the votes
Candidate B: 31% of the votes
Candidate C: 32% of the votes.

Candidate A won the percentage. However, 32% + 31% = 63%. That means 63% of the people didn't want candidate A. Since we have an electoral system, then usually (with the exception of Nebraska and Maine) the electoral votes will go to the candidate who received the most votes. Then the overall electoral votes are counted nationally until someone reaches 270. So when a third candidate enters, then it's inherently flawed. Every state will always have far more people who didn't want the winner. 

Tell me how the tyranny of the minority is better than the tyranny of the majority.

And AGAIN, ****, the results ONLY MATTER WITH WHO WON!!ONLY IN  A DEMOCRACY would your premise even come close to making any difference in life.

The simple FACT IS, the voters whose candidate DID NOT WIN, still have THEIR RIGHTS PROTECTS UNDER OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLICAN CONFERATION!! PERIOD!!

Which is the SOLE PURPOSE OF THIS NATION AND OUR CONSTITUTION- to protect the RIGHTS OF THE MINORITY IN ELECTIONS!!

Now, **** OFF, because your entire line of reasoning is FLAWED and not worth even this much discussion. Our founders NEVER intended it to be elections where you MUST have over 50% of the vote to be declared the winner of the ELECTION, otherwise it would have been IN THE CONSTITUTION.

Now, ASSHOLE MORON, SHUT THE **** UP!!

Beekeeper » 17 Jun 2026, 3:07 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jun 2026, 3:07 pm

And AGAIN, ****, the results ONLY MATTER WITH WHO WON!!ONLY IN  A DEMOCRACY would your premise even come close to making any difference in life.

The simple FACT IS, the voters whose candidate DID NOT WIN, still have THEIR RIGHTS PROTECTS UNDER OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLICAN CONFERATION!! PERIOD!!

Which is the SOLE PURPOSE OF THIS NATION AND OUR CONSTITUTION- to protect the RIGHTS OF THE MINORITY IN ELECTIONS!!

Now, **** OFF, because your entire line of reasoning is FLAWED and not worth even this much discussion. Our founders NEVER intended it to be elections where you MUST have over 50% of the vote to be declared the winner of the ELECTION, otherwise it would have been IN THE CONSTITUTION.

Now, ASSHOLE MORON, SHUT THE **** UP!!

You are hopeless. In your delusional mind, the tyranny of the minority is better than the tyranny of the majority. 

Brilliant. You are a real Einstein.
 

Vegas » 17 Jun 2026, 3:10 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jun 2026, 3:10 pm

You are hopeless. In your delusional mind, the tyranny of the minority is better than the tyranny of the majority. 

Brilliant. You are a real Einstein.

There is no "tyranny of the minority" in this nation. UNLESS you are trying to argue with IDIOTS AKA, YOU, ****!!!

RIGHTS are not "tyrannical" ASSHOLE!! They are GOD GIVEN and our CONSTITUTION PROTECTS THOSE RIGHT FROM TYRANNY.

DAMN, you are ONE GODDAMN STUPID **** PIECE OF ****!!

Beekeeper » 17 Jun 2026, 3:13 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jun 2026, 3:13 pm

There is no "tyranny of the minority" in this nation. UNLESS you are trying to argue with IDIOTS AKA, YOU, ****!!!



 

I just mathematically proved there is you dolt!!!

RIGHTS are not "tyrannical" ASSHOLE!! They are GOD GIVEN and our CONSTITUTION PROTECTS THOSE RIGHT FROM TYRANNY.

I am not talking about rights. I am talking about how a third candidate **** up what the country, as a whole. wants. 

DAMN, you are ONE GODDAMN STUPID **** PIECE OF ****!!

I only have one feeling in my whole being and you just hurt it. 

Vegas » 17 Jun 2026, 3:15 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jun 2026, 3:15 pm

I just mathematically proved there is you dolt!!!

I am not talking about rights. I am talking about how a third candidate **** up what the country, as a whole. wants. 

I only have one feeling in my whole being and you just hurt it.

YUO **** LOSER PIECE OF IDIOT ****!!!

The ELECTORAL COLLEGE was designed SO THAT THE MINORITY didn't get their VOTES SHOVED TO THE SIDE and in return, ALLOWED A HANDFUL OF STATES TO DETERMINE THE PRESIDENT!!

**** OFF!! YOU HAVE NO CONCEPT OF HOW A REPUBLIC WORKS AND IT'S NOT "majority rules' ASSHOLE!! NEVER WAS. NEVER WILL BE!!

And I have NO **** TO GIVE for your feefees.

Beekeeper » 17 Jun 2026, 4:00 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jun 2026, 4:00 pm

YUO **** LOSER PIECE OF IDIOT ****!!!

The ELECTORAL COLLEGE was designed SO THAT THE MINORITY didn't get their VOTES SHOVED TO THE SIDE and in return, ALLOWED A HANDFUL OF STATES TO DETERMINE THE PRESIDENT!!

 

And I literally showed you the math of how that doesn't work. 

Vegas » 17 Jun 2026, 6:20 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jun 2026, 6:20 pm

And I literally showed you the math of how that doesn't work.

So?? Do you think that PROVES a DEMOCRACY works?? Well it would but for one problem!!

Pssst. WE ARE NOT A **** DEMOCRACY, DICKBREATH, which makes your entire PREMISE A **** JOKE!!

Now, CUPCAKE, **** OFF and SHUT THE **** UP like a good little MORON PUMPKIN!!