Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Democrats are going to need every vote they can get. Don’t be surprised if they push for voting rights for pets. After all, there are laws for pets, so why shouldn’t they vote?
The Democrats are going to need every vote they can get. Don’t be surprised if they push for voting rights for pets. After all, there are laws for pets, so why shouldn’t they vote?
I hear the latest MENSA tests ask one to explain the correlation between the census (which has nothing to do with registering to vote) and Democrats needing every vote they can get, including from pets. No doubt you are already a member with this sound analysis.
The Democrats are going to need every vote they can get. Don’t be surprised if they push for voting rights for pets. After all, there are laws for pets, so why shouldn’t they vote?
In that case my gun should be able to vote 20,000 times over.
Did you not read the article? It said that Sarah's response was misleading and partially false. The question was last seen on the forms to ALL HOUSEHOLDS in 1950. It was included only on the long form, which was sent to 1/6 of households. Well, read the article to get the details.
TRANSLATION: Uh-oh, the OP's got us. Time to change the rules in the middle of the game. Hey, I've got one: If a question wasn't asked of every single person in the country during the census, we can now pretend it "wasn't in the census" even though it was asked of millions as part of the census. Yup, that'll do it. Now we can pretend the OP said something wrong.
And it might even mask the fact that the entire "issue" is we liberals going hysterical over Trump putting the same question back on the long form, where it still won't be asked of most people. But for that we're screaming "He IS putting it back in the census!!!"
TRANSLATION: Uh-oh, the OP's got us. Time to change the rules in the middle of the game. Hey, I've got one: If a question wasn't asked of every single person in the country during the census, we can now pretend it "wasn't in the census" even though it was asked of millions as part of the census. Yup, that'll do it. Now we can pretend the OP said something wrong.
And it might even mask the fact that the entire "issue" is we liberals going hysterical over Trump putting the same question back on the long form, where it still won't be asked of most people. But for that we're screaming "He IS putting it back in the census!!!"
Hmm, the liberal hysterics have suddenly become very quiet.
Why should a state with large numbers non citizen residents who cannot legally vote have more representative than another state with lower numbers of residents but potentially more citizens.
Because liberalism can't survive without large number of illegal voters who don't have America's best interests at heart.
TRANSLATION: Sure enough, the question was present in every census.
If by "every" you mean the census that 1 in 6 Americans received, then yes.
But if you mean "every" as in the actual defintion of the word, you are mistaken. It was not every census. It was on some of them. Unless you think 1 out of 6 is "everything."
The question has indeed been in every census except 2010 when it was removed and put in the ACS.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
