I liked the tweet from someone that was like, “That’s the point of the Senate,” as if that answers the question.
-
-
-
Replying to @newpatroon @thor_benson
No, it doesn’t. No one raising the issue doesn’t understand that original purpose, and it’s a willful misreading of the discussion to act as if that answers the question.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Under your logic, nothing could ever be changed because the thing was what it was initially for the initial reasons so therefore it should stay like that forever. It’s circular nothingness.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chrisgeidner @thor_benson
You're talking to someone who is 100% behind repealing the 17th Amendment.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @chrisgeidner @thor_benson
Why gaslight when you can make a well-reasoned (yet ideologically frightening) argument? I've seen you do it many times.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @newpatroon @thor_benson
I’m not gaslighting anything. Your initial answer is a dumb, unengaged answer that suggests you don’t actually have an interest in any real debate. You make that point even more abundantly clear by citing your opposition to the 17th Amendment, which exists ...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
... and fundamentally changed the Senate. You can’t cite originalist reasoning as a way to derail debate about whether the decision was the right one ever — but certainly not where the originalist argument was dramatically undercut by a later amendment.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chrisgeidner @thor_benson
You can "undercut" an originalist argument? I've never seen it done.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Here you go, and have a good night.pic.twitter.com/z4CjQmL92N
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.