You mean the part where WAPO said: "But beyond the thematic similarities, a short section of Trump's speech sounded like it could have been lifted word-for-word from Bane. Watch and decide for yourself." Which is a complete fabrication? Whoops.
Let's evaluate,
but we are transferring power from Washington, DC, and giving it back to you, the people,
The oppressors of generations who have kept you down with myths of opportunity, and we give it back to you, the people,
short section? check.
similar theme? check.
"sounded like it could have been lifted word-for-word from Bane"... redundant, but check.
The only fabrication present here is your definition of fake. Please use doubleplusungood from now on. Let us keep a literal meaning for fake.
I finally get why you fine people are labeling every single inconvenient fact you encounter "fake".
In newspeak, fake means...
Can you do me a favor, just for my own personal enjoyment, call it double-plus un-good news?
From the Fake News peddlers:
A line from President Donald Trump's inauguration speech on Friday eerily echoed the Batman villain Bane.
Not exactly the same, but it's close to what Bane, played by Tom Hardy, says of Gotham when he holds the city hostage and removes its police and powerful officials.
Certainly, Trump did not intend to quote Bane, but "give it back to you, the people" is a line that will have some staying power after Inauguration Day.
The only thing fake here is your definition of the word fake. Carry on subverting reality by removing all literal meaning from our fucking language, you fuck.
Jesus, what janitorial job dried up that left you bored and posting here?
What is your definition for liberal? Shit you don't agree with or want discredited by using boogey-man terms?
Serious question. What does liberal mean to you, and how is snopes.com or factcheck.org *that*.
I'll start cooking some popcorn.
Every politician that has any idea how the real world works, realizes the US could NEVER impose a no fly zone over Syria. You do realize Russia has hands down the best SAM systems in the world?
Oh, we absolutely could. Not without risking escalation to full scale war, though.
What you meant to say, is that we couldn't enforce one without significant American-lives cost, which is a requirement for undeclared extracurricular middle eastern activities.
Only idiot liberals and Hillary Clinton that believe that you can magically impose a no fly zone.
No magic required, just good ol' fashioned radiation-seeking smart weaponry and overwhelming air superiority.
FYI Congress already debated the no fly zone and it was torn to shreds
That's good- though I doubt any politician, liberal or otherwise, would have tried to impose one after a brief discussion with the Joint Chiefs or USCENTCOM where they were told a full-scale conflict with Russia, even in limited geographical scope, won't be politically or economically cheap.
What is it like being so dim-witted and frothingly partisan? Are you just... angry at everything... all the time?
The unashamed doublethink is what scares me. I don't really give a shit about his integrity everywhere else. He has the trappings of a dude who will go unhinged and take out the people standing in his way if he thinks he can get away with it.
I think even the press at large isn't even being... untrustworthy. I think our standard for the intelligence or rigor required for someone to be a "journalist" has dropped right through the shitter. It's a lot like headline-based science reporting, only it has permeated everything reported, down to politics and government numbers.
That's not to say that there aren't some really disingenuous media organizations out there, I just don't think it's most of them. Ignorance explains it better than massive conspiracy.
You don't. Or you do, but you got it from one of the new minitrue digested-preinterpreted news sources.
Obama did not change how the BLS does business. The BLS extended the time-limit for the most commonly cited unemployment statistic so that it would *more* accurately show people who were out of work (Less people falling off)
Because it's a stupid fucking number.
Sure, the unemployment stat has problems, mostly- people no longer able to draw unemployment...
But that number factors in *people who don't have to or want to work*
That number is going to get worse and worse. If it's news to you that the baby boomers are retiring and dying, or that more kids are attending postsecondar education, then I just can't help you.
Claiming that number represents "unemployment" in the sense of the word as it is normally used among regular humans outside of pedantic company is roughly analogous to claiming teenage condom sales track premarital sex rates.
“I love free press. I think it’s great,” he said Saturday on Fox News Channel, before quickly adding, “We ought to open up the libel laws, and I’m going to do that.”
The changes envisioned by the celebrity businessman turned Republican front-runner would mean that “when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money,” he said at a rally Friday in Fort Worth, Texas.
False articles.... like calling him a liar about the inaugural attendance?
False articles... like calling him a liar for trying to say he had no beef with the intelligence community?
You may see a theme to those... We've recently learned that the press lied about these things, because to DJT, there are in fact Alternative Facts, that can in fact Trump (I couldn't resist...) Alternative-Alternative Facts, which we will call Fucking Reality for the sake of brevity.
Threatening to "open up libel laws" to sue for "false" articles, while he is in fact the chief of blatant falsehoods skirting the edge of libel and defamation, is a dog whistle. It is a threat to the free press. It's suck my dick, or I'll make it so that the rich can sue you into the dirt for typing their name without their consent.
Do you really not see that, or are you doing the Conway Shuffle for us?
Your history is wrong, your reasoning is faulty and all you have is name calling. With opposition like you no wonder Trump won.
Sorry, it's not. You've proven that much with the information you've posted. You're just too fucking dim-witted to see it.
And no, chief. Fuckwits like you are why Trump won. All the name-calling in the world won't make an intelligent person vote for a demagogue whipping up a mob, only straight up fucking stupidity can do that.
I'm of course not painting everyone who voted for him with that brush, but the big ugly center of that population distribution bell curve- yes. Stupid fucking people. You know it, I know it, the world knows it. THAT is why he won. Oh, right- and because of that messed up electoral system that allows those people to have a slight boost to their representation so that some state a couple hundred years ago could get electoral clout for its non-voting population.
One last time, for one more fucking laugh-
It prevented one state from throwing the election with corrupt voting exactly as designed.
My calling the spade attach to a keyboard that which it is doesn't change the fact that you still couldn't cite a single piece of evidence to support your... "Alternative" interpretation of the US electoral system.
I mean hell all those people that didn't get to vote in primaries don't matter. The DNC sabotaging their own candidate completely irrelevant.. Nope nope those polls were accurate and unbiased.
Irrelevant doesn't mean right. Are you even capable of making a rational argument, or do you seek only to succeed by reframing the others argument as something it was not?
It's so easy to walk you into a stupid argument. If you tried to exercise a little consistency, you'd do a lot better at this.
Let's recap-
You say the EC was created to prevent corrupt states from dominating an election. You then prove with your own links that it was not.
You attempt to frame my argument as an argument for illegals voting, which it clearly was not, to which I retort, that I can also claim that other states disenfranchised voters, states that gave their win to Trump.
You then say I endorse said practice due to the unsubstantiated claim that the DNC partook in the same affair (I don't really care if it did. If it did, it was wrong, but being it's a vote within a political party, it has 0 constitutional protection)
What you've done, in execution if not by intent, is attempted to legitimize the electoral win of Donald Trump by acknowledging that other states may have engaged in corrupt practices to elect him. But disenfranchising legal voters is apparently preferential to enfranchising illegal voters, by your argument. Perhaps a discussion for another day. You have literally done what you accused me of doing. Apparently it's your shit that doesn't stink.
I was beginning to think you were more intelligent than I gave you credit for, but you're not. You're just another Trumpian asshat trying to justify the loophole that he sailed into office on by reframing its purpose.
We're all waiting for you to go ahead and back up your fantasy with a touch of fact, alternative or otherwise. Right now you're just presenting us with inconsistent logic and dipshittery.
That's the population of the colonies. Now if you can pull your head out your rear you might notice Virginia had over 20% of the nations population by itself. When he was talking about states with diffuse populations he wasn't talking about the economically dominant and population dominant states like Virginia.
Those are the raw populations, not the voting populations. But you knew that, didn't you.
Speaking of Virginia not only was it the largest, and wealthiest state at the time, it also proposed the form of of the representative government, and the electoral college. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]. Gee if you knew a little history you might have figured out why I picked Virginia specifically.
It was the largest in terms of slave holding population, and white population, and one of the smallest in franchised population. But again, you knew that.
I'm well aware what the Virginia Plan is, why it was made, and how it has nothing to do with presidential elections. But again, *you knew that*.
The elector system was a system devised to graft the 3/5ths Compromise and the Virginia plan, and the resulting Connecticut Compromise into the election of the executive, which had absolutely *nothing* to do with preventing a large state from having undo influence in the election, but rather, the exact opposite. Its intention was to make sure that a state with a small voting population could have disproportionate sway in national politics, and it was able to be pushed through due to the economic power those states had. By your own links, you are in fact, full of shit.
I quote once more for humor,
It prevented one state from throwing the election with corrupt voting exactly as designed.
Liberal democrats cheat only for the greater, their shit doesn't stink
You understand you just constructed a strawman, correct? You know damn well I never implied anything about the correctness of what the DNC did, only pointed out the non-factual nature of your claim. Of course you do. You're a fucking tool. Go burn some crosses, asshat.
It's amazing you go and find the passage that explains the situation and then fail to comprehend what is being said because you have absolutely no knowledge of American history.. What's more you were even pointed at the exact cause and were unable to ask the question why it would be
What the fuck are you talking about?
Did you conveniently skip the "and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes"?
Where does corrupt votes from other states come in? The clear intent of the elector system was to give slave-holders electoral power for their slave holdings because they had less free-voting power than the northern states.
You clearly agree that's what he's saying, if I'm to take your most recent rant at face value, so now I ask,
It prevented one state from throwing the election with corrupt voting exactly as designed.
I care that the education system failed you. That is specifically what the system was designed to do and the state in question was Virginia
"There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections." - July 19th, 1788 Philadelphia Constitutional Convention. James Madison's proposal for the creation of the elector system that ended up being accepted by the delegates.
Forgive my failed education, but why would Virginia worry about any state throwing the election, when the proposed rule gave them the largest collection of electoral votes in the union, in spite of having one of the smaller voting populations? You'll notice he clearly stated the reason for electors, and it wasn't about some state throwing the election.
You're inventing history. You're full of shit, disingenuous, and a piece of shit.
That would be how the DNC gave Hillary the nomination ? Projecting your sins onto others I see.
The DNC gave the nomination to the winner of the primaries and caucuses. Sure, the process was biased in her favor, but the raw vote spoke for itself as well. Again, you're a lying sack of shit, inventing history to spin your narrative. Alternative Facts? Fuck off, troll.
It was the land of some group of ancestors of some of the Israelis thousands of years ago. Wherever you live, I'm quite certain that you're thankful (or should be) that 3000 year old land-claims are not valid in today's world.
That land was the territory of the Ottoman Empire. At the dissolution of the empire, and the relinquishment of claims against the lands of the former empire upon the founding of the Republic of Turkey at the end of WW1, that land came under the control of the UN, which handed administration thereof to Britain while it sorted out what to do. Gaza and the West Bank, and even Jerusalem are not Israeli land.
The Temple Mount is dominated by Islamic architecture that is 1300 years old, and they have held that land until the dissolution of their empire, almost continuously, minus short interim intervals since. I don't discount Israeli claim to the land, but it is not stronger than the claim of the Ottoman Palestinians that lived there prior to the massive influx of Jewish immigrants, which is why the Partition Plan held that Jerusalem was to be an internationally administrated city for the enjoyment of both parties, and indeed everyone.
I'm very sympathetic to Israel's defense issues. However, the fact that they are breaching multiple Geneva Conventions in occupied territory in violation of UNSC orders that would have gotten states full of people we had much less sympathy for invaded by a multinational military force gives them the status of an occupying oppressor, and lends credibility to those fighting them. Which sucks, because I *don't* think the people fighting them are good people, either. The UNSC needs to step in, spank the Israeli regime, spank Hamas, enforce the borders, and stick to the plan. Neither side is acting in truly good faith, neither side is being entirely flexible, but the Israelis are flouting international law like they're bigger than it. Like they weren't granted that land by a UN mandate. Like they didn't illegal seize land that was granted to another group of people under that same mandate. The little racist shits in the Knesset need to be knocked out of power in the manner that all racially cleansing bastards in the past have been. The territorial integrity of Israel and the right to self-determination and security of the Israelis within their defined borders needs also be protected. The Israelis have shown they're not grown up enough to handle the job.
It prevented one state from throwing the election with corrupt voting exactly as designed.
That wasn't what it was designed to do. You lie when you say that. Do you even care?
The system was designed so that the 3/5ths Compromise could be integrated into presidential elections. This was done because a vast majority of American economic power was in states that had comparatively tiny voting populations. James Madison said exactly as much at the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention in 1788.
Or do you think illegal aliens should get a vote ?
You can claim that states with politics different than yours are letting illegals vote, and I can claim that states with politics different than mine disenfranchise millions of legal voters by closing down polling locations based on voting demographics. The difference between these 2 claims, is I can at least back mine up with some evidence.
You seem to forget that they have an internationally legal mandate for a state. The UN is still waiting for them to form it under the partition plan. Unfortunately, Israel needs to get the fuck off of their land before that can happen.
There is zero indication that anyone considering themselves "Palestinians" lived there. So if you want to play that game...
It's entirely lost on you how disgusting what you just said is, isn't it?
What did they consider themselves? People living in the British Mandate of Palestine? Former Ottomans? West-Jordanians? North-Eastern Egyptians? South-Lebanese? Tell you what it sure they sure the fuck didn't identify as- Israeli. Which is why the UN partition plan is for 2 states.
Wait, what?
You know what happened after Britain withdrew from their mandate, right?
Now I'm not saying it wasn't a 2-sided fight... it was. But the victors of that fight ethnically cleansed an entire population of people under the auspice that they weren't even a fucking people.
That fucking *happened*. Quit trying to rewrite history to justify your horse-shit narrative.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean the part where WAPO said: "But beyond the thematic similarities, a short section of Trump's speech sounded like it could have been lifted word-for-word from Bane. Watch and decide for yourself." Which is a complete fabrication? Whoops.
Let's evaluate,
but we are transferring power from Washington, DC, and giving it back to you, the people,
The oppressors of generations who have kept you down with myths of opportunity, and we give it back to you, the people,
short section? check.
similar theme? check. "sounded like it could have been lifted word-for-word from Bane"... redundant, but check.
The only fabrication present here is your definition of fake. Please use doubleplusungood from now on. Let us keep a literal meaning for fake.
It's the very definition of Fake News.
I finally get why you fine people are labeling every single inconvenient fact you encounter "fake".
In newspeak, fake means...
Can you do me a favor, just for my own personal enjoyment, call it double-plus un-good news?
From the Fake News peddlers:
A line from President Donald Trump's inauguration speech on Friday eerily echoed the Batman villain Bane.
Not exactly the same, but it's close to what Bane, played by Tom Hardy, says of Gotham when he holds the city hostage and removes its police and powerful officials.
Certainly, Trump did not intend to quote Bane, but "give it back to you, the people" is a line that will have some staying power after Inauguration Day.
The only thing fake here is your definition of the word fake. Carry on subverting reality by removing all literal meaning from our fucking language, you fuck.
On the other hand, while I certainly didn't expect a new FDR I don't think any of us were prepared to discover that he was Bush-lite.
No shit.
Jesus, what janitorial job dried up that left you bored and posting here?
What is your definition for liberal? Shit you don't agree with or want discredited by using boogey-man terms?
Serious question. What does liberal mean to you, and how is snopes.com or factcheck.org *that*.
I'll start cooking some popcorn.
Every politician that has any idea how the real world works, realizes the US could NEVER impose a no fly zone over Syria. You do realize Russia has hands down the best SAM systems in the world?
Oh, we absolutely could. Not without risking escalation to full scale war, though.
What you meant to say, is that we couldn't enforce one without significant American-lives cost, which is a requirement for undeclared extracurricular middle eastern activities.
Only idiot liberals and Hillary Clinton that believe that you can magically impose a no fly zone.
No magic required, just good ol' fashioned radiation-seeking smart weaponry and overwhelming air superiority.
FYI Congress already debated the no fly zone and it was torn to shreds
That's good- though I doubt any politician, liberal or otherwise, would have tried to impose one after a brief discussion with the Joint Chiefs or USCENTCOM where they were told a full-scale conflict with Russia, even in limited geographical scope, won't be politically or economically cheap.
What is it like being so dim-witted and frothingly partisan? Are you just... angry at everything... all the time?
The unashamed doublethink is what scares me. I don't really give a shit about his integrity everywhere else. He has the trappings of a dude who will go unhinged and take out the people standing in his way if he thinks he can get away with it.
I think even the press at large isn't even being... untrustworthy. I think our standard for the intelligence or rigor required for someone to be a "journalist" has dropped right through the shitter. It's a lot like headline-based science reporting, only it has permeated everything reported, down to politics and government numbers.
That's not to say that there aren't some really disingenuous media organizations out there, I just don't think it's most of them. Ignorance explains it better than massive conspiracy.
if I remember correctly
You don't. Or you do, but you got it from one of the new minitrue digested-preinterpreted news sources.
Obama did not change how the BLS does business. The BLS extended the time-limit for the most commonly cited unemployment statistic so that it would *more* accurately show people who were out of work (Less people falling off)
The law precluded neither of those things.
That makes him naive, not a liar.
It does however make you dumb as fucking bricks.
Because it's a stupid fucking number.
Sure, the unemployment stat has problems, mostly- people no longer able to draw unemployment...
But that number factors in *people who don't have to or want to work*
That number is going to get worse and worse. If it's news to you that the baby boomers are retiring and dying, or that more kids are attending postsecondar education, then I just can't help you.
Claiming that number represents "unemployment" in the sense of the word as it is normally used among regular humans outside of pedantic company is roughly analogous to claiming teenage condom sales track premarital sex rates.
“I love free press. I think it’s great,” he said Saturday on Fox News Channel, before quickly adding, “We ought to open up the libel laws, and I’m going to do that.”
The changes envisioned by the celebrity businessman turned Republican front-runner would mean that “when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money,” he said at a rally Friday in Fort Worth, Texas.
False articles.... like calling him a liar about the inaugural attendance?
False articles... like calling him a liar for trying to say he had no beef with the intelligence community?
You may see a theme to those... We've recently learned that the press lied about these things, because to DJT, there are in fact Alternative Facts, that can in fact Trump (I couldn't resist...) Alternative-Alternative Facts, which we will call Fucking Reality for the sake of brevity.
Threatening to "open up libel laws" to sue for "false" articles, while he is in fact the chief of blatant falsehoods skirting the edge of libel and defamation, is a dog whistle. It is a threat to the free press. It's suck my dick, or I'll make it so that the rich can sue you into the dirt for typing their name without their consent.
Do you really not see that, or are you doing the Conway Shuffle for us?
Your history is wrong, your reasoning is faulty and all you have is name calling. With opposition like you no wonder Trump won.
Sorry, it's not. You've proven that much with the information you've posted. You're just too fucking dim-witted to see it.
And no, chief. Fuckwits like you are why Trump won. All the name-calling in the world won't make an intelligent person vote for a demagogue whipping up a mob, only straight up fucking stupidity can do that.
I'm of course not painting everyone who voted for him with that brush, but the big ugly center of that population distribution bell curve- yes. Stupid fucking people. You know it, I know it, the world knows it. THAT is why he won. Oh, right- and because of that messed up electoral system that allows those people to have a slight boost to their representation so that some state a couple hundred years ago could get electoral clout for its non-voting population.
One last time, for one more fucking laugh-
It prevented one state from throwing the election with corrupt voting exactly as designed.
My calling the spade attach to a keyboard that which it is doesn't change the fact that you still couldn't cite a single piece of evidence to support your... "Alternative" interpretation of the US electoral system.
You have literally proven my point. ;)
We thank you
I mean hell all those people that didn't get to vote in primaries don't matter. The DNC sabotaging their own candidate completely irrelevant.. Nope nope those polls were accurate and unbiased.
Irrelevant doesn't mean right. Are you even capable of making a rational argument, or do you seek only to succeed by reframing the others argument as something it was not?
It's so easy to walk you into a stupid argument. If you tried to exercise a little consistency, you'd do a lot better at this.
Let's recap-
You say the EC was created to prevent corrupt states from dominating an election. You then prove with your own links that it was not.
You attempt to frame my argument as an argument for illegals voting, which it clearly was not, to which I retort, that I can also claim that other states disenfranchised voters, states that gave their win to Trump.
You then say I endorse said practice due to the unsubstantiated claim that the DNC partook in the same affair (I don't really care if it did. If it did, it was wrong, but being it's a vote within a political party, it has 0 constitutional protection)
What you've done, in execution if not by intent, is attempted to legitimize the electoral win of Donald Trump by acknowledging that other states may have engaged in corrupt practices to elect him. But disenfranchising legal voters is apparently preferential to enfranchising illegal voters, by your argument. Perhaps a discussion for another day. You have literally done what you accused me of doing. Apparently it's your shit that doesn't stink.
I was beginning to think you were more intelligent than I gave you credit for, but you're not. You're just another Trumpian asshat trying to justify the loophole that he sailed into office on by reframing its purpose.
We're all waiting for you to go ahead and back up your fantasy with a touch of fact, alternative or otherwise. Right now you're just presenting us with inconsistent logic and dipshittery.
That's the population of the colonies. Now if you can pull your head out your rear you might notice Virginia had over 20% of the nations population by itself. When he was talking about states with diffuse populations he wasn't talking about the economically dominant and population dominant states like Virginia.
Those are the raw populations, not the voting populations. But you knew that, didn't you.
Speaking of Virginia not only was it the largest, and wealthiest state at the time, it also proposed the form of of the representative government, and the electoral college. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]. Gee if you knew a little history you might have figured out why I picked Virginia specifically.
It was the largest in terms of slave holding population, and white population, and one of the smallest in franchised population. But again, you knew that.
I'm well aware what the Virginia Plan is, why it was made, and how it has nothing to do with presidential elections. But again, *you knew that*.
The elector system was a system devised to graft the 3/5ths Compromise and the Virginia plan, and the resulting Connecticut Compromise into the election of the executive, which had absolutely *nothing* to do with preventing a large state from having undo influence in the election, but rather, the exact opposite. Its intention was to make sure that a state with a small voting population could have disproportionate sway in national politics, and it was able to be pushed through due to the economic power those states had. By your own links, you are in fact, full of shit.
I quote once more for humor,
It prevented one state from throwing the election with corrupt voting exactly as designed.
[citation needed]
Your move, asshole.
Here let me fix that for you
Liberal democrats cheat only for the greater, their shit doesn't stink
You understand you just constructed a strawman, correct? You know damn well I never implied anything about the correctness of what the DNC did, only pointed out the non-factual nature of your claim. Of course you do. You're a fucking tool. Go burn some crosses, asshat.
It's amazing you go and find the passage that explains the situation and then fail to comprehend what is being said because you have absolutely no knowledge of American history.. What's more you were even pointed at the exact cause and were unable to ask the question why it would be
What the fuck are you talking about?
Did you conveniently skip the "and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes"?
Where does corrupt votes from other states come in? The clear intent of the elector system was to give slave-holders electoral power for their slave holdings because they had less free-voting power than the northern states.
You clearly agree that's what he's saying, if I'm to take your most recent rant at face value, so now I ask,
It prevented one state from throwing the election with corrupt voting exactly as designed.
Where did you get that from the above quote?
"Amazing"
Indeed.
I care that the education system failed you. That is specifically what the system was designed to do and the state in question was Virginia
"There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections." - July 19th, 1788 Philadelphia Constitutional Convention. James Madison's proposal for the creation of the elector system that ended up being accepted by the delegates.
Forgive my failed education, but why would Virginia worry about any state throwing the election, when the proposed rule gave them the largest collection of electoral votes in the union, in spite of having one of the smaller voting populations? You'll notice he clearly stated the reason for electors, and it wasn't about some state throwing the election.
You're inventing history. You're full of shit, disingenuous, and a piece of shit.
That would be how the DNC gave Hillary the nomination ? Projecting your sins onto others I see.
The DNC gave the nomination to the winner of the primaries and caucuses. Sure, the process was biased in her favor, but the raw vote spoke for itself as well. Again, you're a lying sack of shit, inventing history to spin your narrative. Alternative Facts? Fuck off, troll.
It was the land of some group of ancestors of some of the Israelis thousands of years ago. Wherever you live, I'm quite certain that you're thankful (or should be) that 3000 year old land-claims are not valid in today's world.
That land was the territory of the Ottoman Empire. At the dissolution of the empire, and the relinquishment of claims against the lands of the former empire upon the founding of the Republic of Turkey at the end of WW1, that land came under the control of the UN, which handed administration thereof to Britain while it sorted out what to do. Gaza and the West Bank, and even Jerusalem are not Israeli land.
The Temple Mount is dominated by Islamic architecture that is 1300 years old, and they have held that land until the dissolution of their empire, almost continuously, minus short interim intervals since. I don't discount Israeli claim to the land, but it is not stronger than the claim of the Ottoman Palestinians that lived there prior to the massive influx of Jewish immigrants, which is why the Partition Plan held that Jerusalem was to be an internationally administrated city for the enjoyment of both parties, and indeed everyone.
I'm very sympathetic to Israel's defense issues. However, the fact that they are breaching multiple Geneva Conventions in occupied territory in violation of UNSC orders that would have gotten states full of people we had much less sympathy for invaded by a multinational military force gives them the status of an occupying oppressor, and lends credibility to those fighting them. Which sucks, because I *don't* think the people fighting them are good people, either. The UNSC needs to step in, spank the Israeli regime, spank Hamas, enforce the borders, and stick to the plan. Neither side is acting in truly good faith, neither side is being entirely flexible, but the Israelis are flouting international law like they're bigger than it. Like they weren't granted that land by a UN mandate. Like they didn't illegal seize land that was granted to another group of people under that same mandate. The little racist shits in the Knesset need to be knocked out of power in the manner that all racially cleansing bastards in the past have been. The territorial integrity of Israel and the right to self-determination and security of the Israelis within their defined borders needs also be protected. The Israelis have shown they're not grown up enough to handle the job.
It prevented one state from throwing the election with corrupt voting exactly as designed.
That wasn't what it was designed to do. You lie when you say that. Do you even care?
The system was designed so that the 3/5ths Compromise could be integrated into presidential elections. This was done because a vast majority of American economic power was in states that had comparatively tiny voting populations. James Madison said exactly as much at the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention in 1788.
Or do you think illegal aliens should get a vote ?
You can claim that states with politics different than yours are letting illegals vote, and I can claim that states with politics different than mine disenfranchise millions of legal voters by closing down polling locations based on voting demographics. The difference between these 2 claims, is I can at least back mine up with some evidence.
You seem to forget that they have an internationally legal mandate for a state. The UN is still waiting for them to form it under the partition plan. Unfortunately, Israel needs to get the fuck off of their land before that can happen.
There is zero indication that anyone considering themselves "Palestinians" lived there. So if you want to play that game...
It's entirely lost on you how disgusting what you just said is, isn't it?
What did they consider themselves? People living in the British Mandate of Palestine? Former Ottomans? West-Jordanians? North-Eastern Egyptians? South-Lebanese? Tell you what it sure they sure the fuck didn't identify as- Israeli. Which is why the UN partition plan is for 2 states.
Wait, what?
You know what happened after Britain withdrew from their mandate, right?
Now I'm not saying it wasn't a 2-sided fight... it was. But the victors of that fight ethnically cleansed an entire population of people under the auspice that they weren't even a fucking people.
That fucking *happened*. Quit trying to rewrite history to justify your horse-shit narrative.
And furthermore, if not for the US, the UNSC would have voted to go spank their asses back behind the line, Yugoslavia style, a long time ago.