Comment Deleted

0

Anonymous #1 11w

Respectfully, fuck the smaller states. they got two senators at most. Both of the Dakotas only really need the one senator in my opinion

4

Anonymous #1 11w

The government is supposed to represent the people, not land

9

Anonymous #4 11w

Small states should get representation, proportional to how many people they have. Because no one matters more based on living somewhere rural.

10

Anonymous #3 11w

Oh fuck me like im a disobedient maid and you’re a bratty pent up princess you’re right

6

Actually it’s 1 person 3.8 votes Californians don’t count as people 😂😂😂💎 (that’s a joke btw)

0

Anonymous #1 11w

Wrong person you’re replying to in this thread

1

Anonymous #1 11w

why the fuck is that a good thing a smaller state should by all logic get less representation than a larger one

6

Comment Deleted

0

Comment Deleted

0

It’s a compromise between population size and equal representation To be honest I think we need to reduce the house size so that smaller states get closer to equal representation.

-2

Comment Deleted

0

It should be equal representation for states not for people that’s why we’re the United States not the United peoples

-1

“Mob of urban slop” you mean the majority of the country?

1

Anonymous #1 11w

What do you think the senate does lmfao?

1