View Full Version : 2020 Census
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-27-19, 09:50
So the most fundamental question that you could ask on a census of a country you can’t actually ask.
What the heck!
thepatriot2705
06-27-19, 10:03
FUBAR
Context? Link?
The Supreme Court ruled that the census cannot include a question asking if you are a citizen or not a citizen.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-census-citizenship-question-ruling-11561642213\
ETA: Guess who cucked it up, yet again? John "Supreme cuck Chief Justice" Roberts.
So the most fundamental question that you could ask on a census of a country you can’t actually ask.
What the heck!
The census is a headcount, citizenship isn't fundamental to counting.
The Supreme Court ruled that the census cannot include a question asking if you are a citizen or not a citizen.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-census-citizenship-question-ruling-11561642213\
ETA: Guess who cucked it up, yet again? John "Supreme cuck Chief Justice" Roberts.
Actually they sent it to the lower court. Fight not over but may not have enough time.
The census is a headcount, citizenship isn't fundamental to counting.
Well, not exactly. The census is used to determine how many representatives shall be appointed based on population of each state.
I'd say Citizenship is a very important question to accurately determine Representation for each state.
People here illegally should not be included in counts to determine the total # of representatives.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-27-19, 11:34
The census is a headcount, citizenship isn't fundamental to counting.
Ever get the long form? Welcome to the 21st century, where the census is how many TVs you have, what kind of central heating, how much and how many of pretty much everything in your house- except how many people are citizens.
So much of our debates and political conflict is around illegal immigration- and we don't even have a hard number to work with. That seems to be enough of a reason there to find out the answer.
Well, not exactly. The census is used to determine how many representatives shall be appointed based on population of each state.
I'd say Citizenship is a very important question to accurately determine Representation for each state.
People here illegally should not be included in counts to determine the total # of representatives.Well, that's just like, your opinion man! Constitution says reps are determined by population, not # of citizens. You may not like it but it is what it is.
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
The census is a headcount, citizenship isn't fundamental to counting.
If that were actually true, they'd only be asking a single question. It's not true because they ask far more questions, some of which are personally invasive.
I'd prefer that you were correct, but sadly you're not. :(
Didn't say they couldn't ask the question, they said the government needs to define why and scope. But yeah, by sending it down it won't change 2020 census.
I never answer census data. Or I game it.
sundance435
06-27-19, 14:20
The census is a headcount, citizenship isn't fundamental to counting.
In a vacuum, and a strict constitutional sense, yes, that's true. In practice, it's far from that. Citizenship was a question on the census until 1950. I have seen my family's census records from before then and one of the very few questions on there was whether the person identified was a citizen. Why they stopped in 1950, I have no idea, and I have not seen one mainstream article address that - probably because it's inconvenient for the narrative.
Actually they sent it to the lower court. Fight not over but may not have enough time.
They ruled conclusively on whether it was permissible interpretation by the Dept. of Commerce of its authority, which, according to Roberts, it was not, absent better justification. Thomas's dissent is on point in that regard. I think they actually sent it back to the lower court to consider 11th hour information that was brought to the court's attention regarding documents pulled off the hard drive of some dead Republican map drawer from which they're inferring racist intent.
Why the government didn't also claim that it is fundamental to the Executive Branch, in actually executing laws, to have a good guess as to how many non-citizens live in the country, I don't know. This is one of those arguments you turn against the court - you tell me why that's not reasonable. The government's claim rested on "proper" enforcement of the Voting Rights Act, which is way too narrow for something this politically charged (for the Roberts Court), unless the whole goal was political points (entirely plausible).
Didn't say they couldn't ask the question, they said the government needs to define why and scope. But yeah, by sending it down it won't change 2020 census.
I never answer census data. Or I game it.
And that was probably Roberts' desired outcome - there is now almost no chance this question makes it onto the census, unless Trump lobs a white phosphorous grenade and goes ahead with it anyway. On something like this, I wouldn't completely discount a game of chicken from him. It kind of writes itself - give me a logical explanation as to why that is not a reasonable question on a census.
In a vacuum, and a strict constitutional sense, yes, that's true. In practice, it's far from that. Citizenship was a question on the census until 1950. I have seen my family's census records from before then and one of the very few questions on there was whether the person identified was a citizen. Why they stopped in 1950, I have no idea, and I have not seen one mainstream article address that - probably because it's inconvenient for the narrative.
Maybe because illegal immigration wasn't such a hot button topic in 1950, but we all know why they're attempting to bring it back in 2020... Turns out people don't have much discretion when trying to pull politically motivated shenanigans.
Maybe because illegal immigration wasn't such a hot button topic in 1950, but we all know why they're attempting to bring it back in 2020... Turns out people don't have much discretion when trying to pull politically motivated shenanigans.
LOL, tell that to the Obama Administration Crime Syndicate.
The census is a headcount, citizenship isn't fundamental to counting.
So there is only one question right? ...... no demographics are asked at all....... ok......
:blink:
So there is only one question right? ...... no demographics are asked at all....... ok......
:blink:
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/169/Strawman-Fallacy
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/169/Strawman-Fallacy
Incorrect.
"The census is a headcount, citizenship isn't fundamental to counting."
Ergo, he didn't infer it, you implied it.
In truth, it was intended to be a headcount, but in reality it's FAR more than that, to include the basis for distribution of federal funds and resources.
To be fair, asking whether persons in the household are citizens or not is a terribly flawed way to determine even an approximation of how many illegal immigrants reside in the US. That's why the stated "statistics" vary enormously and are routinely misrepresented based on political ideology. However, it's the only vehicle currently available with which to establish some semblance of a baseline.
If it isn't a valid question, then why do research outlets frequently cit U.S. Census Bureau stats on immigration (both legal and illegal)?
https://cis.org/Report/Immigrants-United-States
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/illegal-immigration-statistics/
No one is going to believe the numbers if they don't support their bias, but I think we could partially extrapolate a useable baseline from the numbers of people willing to count themselves as illegal to a US government survey. Simply put, there's no defensible reason to NOT ask the question, unless you support illegal immigration. I can't think of a valid reason anyway...
Well, that's just like, your opinion man! Constitution says reps are determined by population, not # of citizens. You may not like it but it is what it is.
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
And the 2A only applies to militias
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-27-19, 16:50
The main reason the census doesn’t say citizens is pretty easy: slavery. Anyone understand the real impact of the 3/5 compromise? Most progressive idiots think that it was a slight that they were only counted as 3/5 of person, when it would have been far better for them to be counted as 0/5. Watch a SJW explode at that.
We are getting screwed royally in that illegals get counted at 5/5, which in effect gives them a vote since it affects representation in the House and Electoral Votes.
The 14th Amendment should have cleared this up. If the founders had known that eventually 45million illegals would be queering the system like they are, they would have been more careful.
I can’t think of a more fundamental data point for a country to know then how many people are residing there that should not be there.
Incorrect.
"The census is a headcount, citizenship isn't fundamental to counting."
Ergo, he didn't infer it, you implied it.
In truth, it was intended to be a headcount, but in reality it's FAR more than that, to include the basis for distribution of federal funds and resources.
To be fair, asking whether persons in the household are citizens or not is a terribly flawed way to determine even an approximation of how many illegal immigrants reside in the US. That's why the stated "statistics" vary enormously and are routinely misrepresented based on political ideology. However, it's the only vehicle currently available with which to establish some semblance of a baseline.
If it isn't a valid question, then why do research outlets frequently cit U.S. Census Bureau stats on immigration (both legal and illegal)?
https://cis.org/Report/Immigrants-United-States
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/illegal-immigration-statistics/
No one is going to believe the numbers if they don't support their bias, but I think we could partially extrapolate a useable baseline from the numbers of people willing to count themselves as illegal to a US government survey. Simply put, there's no defensible reason to NOT ask the question, unless you support illegal immigration. I can't think of a valid reason anyway...
This says it all.
One thing I have not understood in this entire argument is this: even if that question was allowed in the census, which I think it should be, what is stopping the non-citizens (either the illegal vermin or the legal immigrants) from lying on that question? I mean it's supposed to be anonymous, right?
I guarantee you if the question had been allowed the f***tard lefties would have encouraged non-citizens to lie about it.
We citizens do not have a say in the way this country is run, we have been disenfranchised .
The Congress refuses to do it's job, the Senate hamstrings their own President, the Supremes
never fail to amaze us with contradicting platitudes and political hamstringing.
The Democrat party is unrecognizable from just 50 years ago, and the Republicans are still the
Stupid Party.
I'm 50 and have never filled one out.
Averageman
06-27-19, 18:34
Well, not exactly. The census is used to determine how many representatives shall be appointed based on population of each state.
I'd say Citizenship is a very important question to accurately determine Representation for each state.
People here illegally should not be included in counts to determine the total # of representatives.
So if California doesn't prohibit illegal aliens and they are counted in the census, they get more representation.
They've put some thought in to this, the left and right coasts will determine how the rest of us live.
We citizens do not have a say in the way this country is run, we have been disenfranchised .
The Congress refuses to do it's job, the Senate hamstrings their own President, the Supremes
never fail to amaze us with contradicting platitudes and political hamstringing.
The Democrat party is unrecognizable from just 50 years ago, and the Republicans are still the
Stupid Party.
Pretty Much.
So if California doesn't prohibit illegal aliens and they are counted in the census, they get more representation.
They've put some thought in to this, the left and right coasts will determine how the rest of us live.
That’s also why many of them want to do away with the electoral college. It gives them iron clad control that much sooner.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.