A liberal supermajority--What it really means for the U.S.

[steven787]

halogamer1989 said:

steven787 said:

ManusJustus said:
A liberal super majority would be great news.

And whats wrong with giving citizens in Washington DC a respresentative in a democratic country?

Why would republicans want to exclude D.C.?

In 2006, the population distribution was 55.4% African American, 34.5% Caucasian, 8.2% Hispanic (of any race), 5.1% other (including Native Americans, Alaskans, Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders), 3.4% Asian, and 1.5% mixed (two or more races).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia

The median income for a household in the city was $40,127, and the median income for a family was $46,283. Males had a median income of $40,513 versus $36,361 for females. The per capita income for the city was $28,659. About 16.7% of families and 20.2% of the population were below the poverty line, including 31.1% of those under age 18 and 16.4% of those over age 65.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Washington,_D.C.

 

I don't know man, I don't know.

 

I do favor DC representation.  It is a solid Blue EC vote anyway so what would be the difference?

 

McCain is against it.  People have to choose between McCain and Obama.  Not between Steven787 and Halogamer.

McCain is actually one of the filibusterers: http://dcvote.org/media/release.cfm?releaseID=300