The Citizenship Question Could Cost California And Texas A Seat In Congress

[Sergeant Gleed]

I disagree Adelaide, there is no reason NOT to ask on the census if your a citizen of the USA or not, because if your not, you should not be on our census because you are here illegally and if not you are still not entitled to vote

Well, that answer was sloppy.

The Citizenship Question has four possible answers.

Citizen.
Legal resident, permanent.
Legal Resident, temporary
Illegal alien.

The ONLY answer carrying criminal penalties is the last, illegal alien. Illegal aliens offering any of the three other choices is committing another felony. And ICE should most certainly use the Census tk investigate and penalize illegal aliens perjuring themselves on the census.

Nobody else has any reason to lie on the Censys.

Naturally, only "Citizens" should be counted for apportionment.

[Sergeant Gleed]

Yes, a count of all persons. Full stop.

You might want to be cautious with how you compare counting slaves to counting immigrants because that's probably part of why SCOTUS has ruled on the 14th Amendment, and there are copious amounts of legal history you could be learning instead of going to Klan rallies.

The ACS already identifies how many immigrants are in the country. This is a non-issue. The Census Bureau already has a way that they determine this number in a fashion that is more accurate than the census could be.

So, the answer is, "The government already does that, so why would they do it in a second place that would jeopardize the response rate on the census?"

You might want to understand that ILLEGAL ALIENS are not "immigrants".

They are invaders.

Criminal sub-humans.

People who vote for Hillary.

Dirt.

Deportable firt.

But definitely not Deplorable.

That would be me.

[Sergeant Gleed]

I'm in a swing state.

Gender dysphoria?

[Sergeant Gleed]

"Actual Enumeration" - read the Constitution. Then, everything written by the DOJ and SCOTUS, and every previous administration since the 1960s (Republican and Democrat). Count of all persons.

What authority was granted by the Constitution to the courts to have authority over the Census?

Explain why Invaders should be counted for apportionment of Congressional representation, and explain the historical consent to thus idea in the writings of the Founders on this topic.

What part of the 14th Amendment grants Invaders a share in the governance of this nation. Cite the writings of the Framers of this amendment consenting to the same.

I don't go to Klan rallies, I am not a Hillary voter.

Is your ignorance of the Klan and the Democrats exceeded only by your ignorance of the Fourteenth Anendment?

[Sergeant Gleed]

Identifying the numbers of non citizens will be its own reward. I believe we should separate into two or more nations.

Once True Number of Invaders is revealed, an awful lot of people are going to be extremely unhappy with the Rodents and the media for lying to them.

The True Number is almost certainly a factor of three higher than the constant Lie the Rodents have been repeating FOR THE LAST THIRTY YEARS.

[FindersKeepers]

Yep Nat Silver debunked their bull$#@!. Despite being a leftist. Of course the Leftness was mad at Nate.

Silver knows his stuff. He's big into statistics/survey results and how they can be skewed. The sampling surveys leave a lot to be desired.

[Chris]

Well, that was an interesting read, this thread.

I began thinking the question of citizenship ok, but Adelaide has a very convincing argument that is constitutionally based, and suprisingly those who claim to be Constitutonal Conservatives are the ones arguing astray the Constitution.

The relevant passages:

Article 1, Section 2 "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."

And Amendment 14: "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed."

Thus, Adelaide is correct, constitutionally, "counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed."


So I've changed my mind to something like:

Whether you like it or not, it’s just a fact that citizenship is not what determines representation in the House of Representatives. Should it? Absolutely.

[MMC]

Silver knows his stuff. He's big into statistics/survey results and how they can be skewed. The sampling surveys leave a lot to be desired.

Yeah, and even Silver is telling the left to not believe in the Polling at this point. He knows that the Lame Stream and the Demos polling aren't grounded in reality. That they are trying to depress those on the Right.

[Peter1469]

Well, that was an interesting read, this thread.

I began thinking the question of citizenship ok, but Adelaide has a very convincing argument that is constitutionally based, and suprisingly those who claim to be Constitutonal Conservatives are the ones arguing astray the Constitution.

The relevant passages:

Article 1, Section 2 "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."

And Amendment 14: "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed."

Thus, Adelaide is correct, constitutionally, "counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed."


So I've changed my mind to something like:

Round up the illegals and expel them prior to the census.