Amendment 4 Fails in Missouri
-
A "NO" vote opposed amending the Missouri Constitution to require voter approval of citizen-initiated constitutional amendments in each congressional district, rather than statewide;
This is probably why it didn't pass. I get it.
add language prohibiting ''foreign nationals'' and ''foreign adversaries'', as defined, from spending to support or oppose ballot measures, with penalties for violations; and add language regarding penalties for ballot initiative signature petition fraud, among other changes.
If this was written by itself, it would have likely passed. I mean why not for safety sake? It was a bad decision to put these together.
βIt is impossible to get a man to understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding.β -
yeah, the second part highlighted is the killer - it shows the ulterior motive that is evident. I don't see a problem with the first.
But everything the left does has a hidden ulterior motive - leftwing-benefitting political expediency.
-
STLPR
Missouri voters reject Amendment 4, say no to making it h...
Because voters rejected Amendment 4, proposed state constitutional amendments brought by the public will still require a simple majority to pass once on the ballot.Republican effort in Missouri to effectively silence will of the people fails as 80%+ of voters vote against it
We're all pro individual liberties and pro state's rights, and the rights of people in those states, right? All happy about this?
Funny how this was most recently used to pass more progressive measures that Republicans in state office refused to pass.
And funny how Reps wanted this to reduce the influence of phantom outside money, when so many are already bought and paid for by super pacs and corporations. Or Israel
***************************************** ASSBIRD FART*****************************************
Your assbird conclusions are invalid, as most always. HTownBrown nailed it again. The ulterior motive is reflected in most if not all your stupid assbird posts.
-
The amendment was written by Republicans. The second part was added to distract from the first part. It allowed Reps to say "oh wow, you want foreign influence in Missouri!" to anyone going against the measure when in reality the thing those people cared about was the first part of the amendment. And that first part severely limited the ability of Missouri citizens to influence policy. Reps only cared about that first part, to take power from the citizens, as their last handful of citizen measures were for liberal policies.
This is basically federal reps making a bill saying "I love veterans" and then slipping in "I hate immigrants". So when a Dem doesn't sign it they can go "omg! He hates vets!'
Luckily the people of Missouri saw through that BS
-
***************************************** ASSBIRD FART*****************************************
Your assbird conclusions are invalid, as most always. HTownBrown nailed it again. The ulterior motive is reflected in most if not all your stupid assbird posts.
Your assbird conclusions are invalid, as most always. HTownBrown nailed it again. The ulterior motive is reflected in most if not all your stupid assbird posts.
Cal, you have no idea what you're talking about. You exist to blindly tow the party line without any logic or reason.
What "ulterior motive"? Wtf are you talking about? Reps wrote the amendment. Did they have an "ulterior motive"?
-
A "NO" vote opposed amending the Missouri Constitution to require voter approval of citizen-initiated constitutional amendments in each congressional district, rather than statewide;
This is probably why it didn't pass. I get it.
add language prohibiting ''foreign nationals'' and ''foreign adversaries'', as defined, from spending to support or oppose ballot measures, with penalties for violations; and add language regarding penalties for ballot initiative signature petition fraud, among other changes.
If this was written by itself, it would have likely passed. I mean why not for safety sake? It was a bad decision to put these together.
A "NO" vote opposed amending the Missouri Constitution to require voter approval of citizen-initiated constitutional amendments in each congressional district, rather than statewide;
This is probably why it didn't pass. I get it.
add language prohibiting ''foreign nationals'' and ''foreign adversaries'', as defined, from spending to support or oppose ballot measures, with penalties for violations; and add language regarding penalties for ballot initiative signature petition fraud, among other changes.
If this was written by itself, it would have likely passed. I mean why not for safety sake? It was a bad decision to put these together.
Sure, last part by itself probably passes. Hopefully it would include AIPAC. But, as I mentioned in my other post, Reps combined them for a pretty clear reason of political BS.
-
honestly answer your own questions just ONCE, ASSbird.
Ascribing intentions on others that are not accurate, then assbird bitching about what
you incorrectly ascribed, is your inconvenient modus operandi.
It has gotten old, but still, every single time, it makes you look like the ASSbird that you are.
-
STLPR
Missouri voters reject Amendment 4, say no to making it h...
Because voters rejected Amendment 4, proposed state constitutional amendments brought by the public will still require a simple majority to pass once on the ballot.Republican effort in Missouri to effectively silence will of the people fails as 80%+ of voters vote against it
We're all pro individual liberties and pro state's rights, and the rights of people in those states, right? All happy about this?
Funny how this was most recently used to pass more progressive measures that Republicans in state office refused to pass.
And funny how Reps wanted this to reduce the influence of phantom outside money, when so many are already bought and paid for by super pacs and corporations. Or Israel
He blamed Jews again didn't he?
And funny how Reps wanted this to reduce the influence of phantom outside money, when so many are already bought and paid for by super pacs and corporations. Or Israel
-
honestly answer your own questions just ONCE, ASSbird.
Ascribing intentions on others that are not accurate, then assbird bitching about what
you incorrectly ascribed, is your inconvenient modus operandi.
It has gotten old, but still, every single time, it makes you look like the ASSbird that you are.
honestly answer your own questions just ONCE, ASSbird.
Ascribing intentions on others that are not accurate, then assbird bitching about what
you incorrectly ascribed, is your inconvenient modus operandi.
It has gotten old, but still, every single time, it makes you look like the ASSbird that you are.
What in the fuck are you even trying to say here?
-
He blamed Jews again didn't he?
And funny how Reps wanted this to reduce the influence of phantom outside money, when so many are already bought and paid for by super pacs and corporations. Or Israel
He blamed Jews again didn't he?
Israel. As in AIPAC.
Not Jews
Very, very sad you can't understand the difference.
-
Israel. As in AIPAC.
Not Jews
Very, very sad you can't understand the difference.
Right....
-
honestly answer your own questions just ONCE, ASSbird.
Ascribing intentions on others that are not accurate, then assbird bitching about what
you incorrectly ascribed, is your inconvenient modus operandi.
It has gotten old, but still, every single time, it makes you look like the ASSbird that you are.
What in the fuck are you even trying to say here?
**************ASSABIRD FART*******************
did I use too many big non-ASSBIRD words that you got lost?
others got it fine.
Surely you are only pretending to be profoundly stupid.
Was your nest in the top of a very tall tree when you fell out soon after being hatched? lol
-
**************ASSABIRD FART*******************
did I use too many big non-ASSBIRD words that you got lost?
others got it fine.
Surely you are only pretending to be profoundly stupid.
Was your nest in the top of a very tall tree when you fell out soon after being hatched? lol
did I use too many big non-ASSBIRD words that you got lost?
others got it fine.
Surely you are only pretending to be profoundly stupid.
Was your nest in the top of a very tall tree when you fell out soon after being hatched? lol
Again, nothing
-
Again, nothing
Look in the mirror faggot... you never have "anything'
-
It's really my own fault for even attempting to engage in a back and forth with any of you. I can't try to play chess with a pigeon and get mad when the pigeon shits on the board
You will completely shut reality if it's necessary to praise your king and party.
-
like most all liberals, woodpecker hates itself, and tries to "lol" at every post that is legit with ASSBIRD antagonistic posts.
-
some woodpecker-like assbird leftie puts a croc into a lake in America - Indian Lake in Ohio.
So dramatic woodpecker might censor it like another time.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better π
Register Login