Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Now that there is a path to cheating, the Democrats don't really need to add seats in PR anymore. This will go to the backburner until these scumbags need it again.

(11-06-2020, 08:59 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-05-2020, 11:18 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]There are exceptions to every rule. The Republicans controlled both houses when the Dakota territory was admitted as two states instead of one.

Clarify your point. The point I am making is that, in a nation so closely divided, adding one state that leaned a particular way could be a breaking point. You know, kind of like the controversy that started the last Civil War. If we add Puerto Rico, add a conservative territory. Not that it will matter in a few years. Dems will send in their community organizers to show the locals how oppressed they are.

The nation was closely divided in 1889.  Democrats had power in Congress in 1888 and there was gridlock.  The Republicans prevailed in both chambers in Congress in the 1888 elections.  The Dakota territory, Montana Territory, and Washington territory were all applying for admission.  They all figured to send Republicans to the Senate at the time. In 1889, not only did they all get in, the Dakotas were actually split in two to get more Senators.  And no "Democrat leaning" state was offered as compensation or consolation.  The Democrats were ticked about it, sure, but they didn't threaten any new civil war.
The "Missouri compromise" logic you're applying, it's nice, I'm attracted to that logic as well, but it doesn't line up with a good chunk of US history, and we dont need to use it today.
Besides, I want to see the Republicans try to compete in PR.  Don't let the Dems take those new seats for granted.
Once you get over the language barrier, you will find that Puerto Ricans like concealed carry weapons, traditional family structure, baseball, boxing, and cockfighting. They have a lot in common with your stereotypical southern redneck, and we will be a better country when those rednecks realize that.

(11-06-2020, 07:09 AM)EricC85 Wrote: [ -> ]I support statehood for PR , politics be damned there’s no reason we shouldn’t expect them to pay taxes like the rest of us.

The average household income in PR is $19k. They won’t be paying taxes.

There are various ways to collect taxes other than household income.  They have huge tourism potential as well as other industries if we should chose to take advantage of the island in a state-like manner.  In time, it could be our Hawaii of the East, perhaps not at that scale but perhaps somewhere between we they are now and what Hawaii is now.

(11-06-2020, 10:54 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-06-2020, 08:59 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Clarify your point. The point I am making is that, in a nation so closely divided, adding one state that leaned a particular way could be a breaking point. You know, kind of like the controversy that started the last Civil War. If we add Puerto Rico, add a conservative territory. Not that it will matter in a few years. Dems will send in their community organizers to show the locals how oppressed they are.

The nation was closely divided in 1889.  Democrats had power in Congress in 1888 and there was gridlock.  The Republicans prevailed in both chambers in Congress in the 1888 elections.  The Dakota territory, Montana Territory, and Washington territory were all applying for admission.  They all figured to send Republicans to the Senate at the time. In 1889, not only did they all get in, the Dakotas were actually split in two to get more Senators.  And no "Democrat leaning" state was offered as compensation or consolation.  The Democrats were ticked about it, sure, but they didn't threaten any new civil war.
The "Missouri compromise" logic you're applying, it's nice, I'm attracted to that logic as well, but it doesn't line up with a good chunk of US history, and we dont need to use it today.
Besides, I want to see the Republicans try to compete in PR.  Don't let the Dems take those new seats for granted.
Once you get over the language barrier, you will find that Puerto Ricans like concealed carry weapons, traditional family structure, baseball, boxing, and cockfighting. They have a lot in common with your stereotypical southern redneck, and we will be a better country when those rednecks realize that.

You do understand that the term 'redneck' could be considered a slur to some people?

(11-06-2020, 10:56 AM)I’m JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-06-2020, 07:09 AM)EricC85 Wrote: [ -> ]I support statehood for PR , politics be damned there’s no reason we shouldn’t expect them to pay taxes like the rest of us.

The average household income in PR is $19k. They won’t be paying taxes.

Wow that bad? I know when my moms family was there she said the island was extremely corrupt and it was no secret. I imagine if we approved statehood and they came under constitutional control we could clean some of that up. Right now PR gets all the benefits of statehood but none of the burdens it’s why they’ve been against statehood in the past but the corruption might have gotten to the point they need help and statehood might be their best shot.

I know lots of hard working PR that come here to work and send the money home to support families on the island under statehood hopefully more opportunities for sustainable work would develop there. Again I have no objection to making territories states I don’t really see the benefit for us having territories.

(11-06-2020, 07:18 PM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-06-2020, 10:54 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]The nation was closely divided in 1889.  Democrats had power in Congress in 1888 and there was gridlock.  The Republicans prevailed in both chambers in Congress in the 1888 elections.  The Dakota territory, Montana Territory, and Washington territory were all applying for admission.  They all figured to send Republicans to the Senate at the time. In 1889, not only did they all get in, the Dakotas were actually split in two to get more Senators.  And no "Democrat leaning" state was offered as compensation or consolation.  The Democrats were ticked about it, sure, but they didn't threaten any new civil war.
The "Missouri compromise" logic you're applying, it's nice, I'm attracted to that logic as well, but it doesn't line up with a good chunk of US history, and we dont need to use it today.
Besides, I want to see the Republicans try to compete in PR.  Don't let the Dems take those new seats for granted.
Once you get over the language barrier, you will find that Puerto Ricans like concealed carry weapons, traditional family structure, baseball, boxing, and cockfighting.  They have a lot in common with your stereotypical southern redneck, and we will be a better country when those rednecks realize that.

You do understand that the term 'redneck' could be considered a slur to some people?

I suspect the people that would take it as an insult are not in the target audience.
I myself have made repairs with duct tape.
There's a little bit of redneck in me, I won't deny it.