Making a law against it, that is valid under the constitution...
The part that says...
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assem- ble, and to petition the Government for a re- dress of grievances.
Make a law against the part that says not to make a law against it?
Remember folks, every vote counts. We did this to ourselves.
I've said it before elsewhere but it needs to be heard...
It's just wild to me continually seeing posts not understanding how this all works, and how it would play out. It's like the people who thought China paid the tariffs...
The house is almost tied. That's who passes bills, handles impeachments, some of the most powerful committees are, and who impeaches Presidents...
218 Republicans, 213 Democrats.
Let's see, take New York for example.
26 representatives total, 19 Democrat and 7 Republican.
5 of those were within 2 points last time their seat was up.
People who think that New York is blue, their vote doesn't matter, skips the votes for the House and Senate and end up losing a Blue house seat but later complain that nothing changes are literally the fucking problem.
Every. Fucking. State. Is. Like. This.
Apathetic morons who don't realize that the president is only held accountable by the other branch of government then wave their hands around when they did jack shit to help put people in place to, are the fucking problem.
District 3 of California was lost by 24,000 votes.
District 22 was lost by 3,000.
Those two seats in the house, along with the close ones in New York, Jersey, Michigan, Illinois, Washington, hell every state... Are what makes the House of Representatives or breaks it.
So, if you think that your vote for president doesn't matter, so you skip voting and let these other seats slip, yes, you're a fucking moron who can't grasp basic concepts of government that are taught in 4th grade.
And don't get me started on the State House/Senates, how they define voting laws and voting zones and engage in gerrymandering.
Every fucking vote counts.
And until the country realizes it, and starts acting on it, we'll keep getting the shit we deserve.
House needs a simple majority, and two thirds of the Senate.
Democrats would need ~18 seats.
First, that won't happen in 2026.
Even the best cases make it hard to win enough by 2028. Which is why impeachment is just not something we can hold out for.
Gerrymandering is part of why this is a problem, which is done at the local level, and again why every vote counts.
How could it play out? Assuming some absurdly weird upside down world just opposite of what we're living in, this is the only path just looking at the numbers...
Again, Democrats would need to gain 18 net seats.
Seats Potentially in Play (Republican Incumbents):
This requires looking at seats up in upcoming cycles.
Class 1 Seats (Up in 2026):
Highly Competitive Targets: These would be the first priority. States where Democrats have won statewide recently or that lean only slightly Republican. Examples based on recent political history might include:
North Carolina (Budd-R)
Alaska (Sullivan-R) - Unique dynamics with ranked-choice voting.
Stretch Targets: States that are more Republican but could potentially flip under exceptionally favorable conditions (like the hypothetical turnout).
Iowa (Ernst-R)
Montana (Daines-R) - Depends heavily on candidate matchups.
Very Difficult Targets: Solidly Republican states requiring overwhelming Democratic turnout and significant shifts among other voters.
Texas (Cornyn-R)
Mississippi (Wicker-R)
Alabama (Tuberville-R)
West Virginia (Capito-R)
Oklahoma (Mullin-R - Special election winner)
Wyoming (Lummis-R)
Idaho (Risch-R)
Arkansas (Cotton-R)
Nebraska (Ricketts-R)
South Dakota (Rounds-R)
Louisiana (Cassidy-R) - Jungle primary system.
Class 2 Seats (Up in 2028): (Looking further ahead)
Highly Competitive Targets:
Maine (Collins-R) - Often competitive, depends on matchup.
Georgia (Perdue/Ossoff dynamic showed competitiveness, depends who holds it after '26 potentially) - Assuming GOP holds a seat here.
Stretch Targets:
Michigan (Peters-D currently, but listing potential GOP flips back if one happened hypothetically before 2028) - Generally leans D, but could be contested.
New Hampshire (Shaheen-D currently) - Generally leans D, but listing potential GOP flips back.
Very Difficult Targets: (Many solidly Republican states)
Tennessee (Hagerty-R)
Alaska (Murkowski-R historically, depends on dynamics)
North Carolina (Tillis-R)
Iowa (Grassley-R seat potentially)
Texas (Cruz-R)
Kentucky (Paul-R)
And many others similar to the 2026 list (SC, AL, MS, WY, ID, NE, SD, KS, WV, OK).
It's going to take an absolutely historic level of pain to both drive enough people to vote MAGA out to make this change though.
The amount that's being excused, sanewashed, and just drowned out with other absurdities...
We're on all on this shit ride until some new wildcard comes into play.
No impeachment, no Supreme Court, no guardrail is going to change that.
Something new and unaccounted for is the only feasible catalyst.
Could you elaborate on that a bit? I guarantee you there's a group of people that think you know the age of consent in all states when you write stuff like this :D
So the way I read your response is:
Since the OP is concerned that making posts to large data corporations who use that data to target the OP with ads, collect as much personal data as possible to sell or monetize and train LLMs based on the OPs "community contributions", they must be a pedo.
Fuck downvoting. Double agent that fucker.