Name: GOP Senator’s Attack On Washington D.C. Statehood Spectacularly Backfires
Brand: huffpost.com
SKU: huffpost-com-1474
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

GOP Senator’s Attack On Washington D.C. Statehood Spectacularly Backfires

preview

×U.S. EditionPart of HuffPost Politics. ©2022 BuzzFeed, Inc. All rights reserved.×Sen. (R-S.D.) on Monday tried to make the case against for Washington D.C. But given his own state’s history, it didn’t go well. Rounds tweeted: The Founding Fathers never intended for Washington D.C. to be a state. is really about packing the Senate with Democrats in order to pass a left-wing agenda.Just look at the DC voter registration data: 🔵 76.4% Democrat🔴 5.7% Republican— Senator Mike Rounds (@SenatorRounds)AdvertisementRounds’ tweet appeared after a day of non sequitur attacks on D.C. statehood, such as the weird (and ) claim by Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.) that it would be the without an auto dealership. (The U.S. Constitution does not mention auto dealerships as a condition for statehood.)Many were quick to remind Rounds that the Founders didn’t particularly envision statehood for any form of Dakota at all, much less a “South Dakota.” And in the years prior to its eventual admission as two states, there was just one Dakota: the Dakota Territory. One reason it was split just before admission was two including the one Rounds now occupies. Rounds’ critics on Twitter also shared a few other facts about what the Founding Fathers intended:The Founding Fathers also never intended there to be a Dakota Territory, or split it in two. The only reason Sen. Rounds has a state (SD) to represent is late-19th-century political deal to split the territory into two, explicitly to pad the number of likely GOP Senate seats. — James Fallows (@JamesFallows)They also never intended for black people to be counted as citizens or human beings, for women to vote and for anyone who wasn’t a White man to own property.Pro tip: Compete for votes with better ideas, instead of creating agendas based on alienation and hatred. — Jemele Hill (@jemelehill)AdvertisementNobody tell him about South Dakota — danielle (@elleelsilinad)The Dakotas were originally one territory. Maybe we should go back to that. A combined state would have less than one-third the population of Maryland. — David Corn (@DavidCornDC)They also didn't intend for Black folk to be more than 3/5 of a person and vote, . Just sit down. — Bill Prady (@billprady)The founding fathers never intended for two Dakotas or even one. — Molly Jong-Fast🏡 (@MollyJongFast)The Founding Fathers denied the vote to the majority of the citizens, which included native or indigenous ppl. And all non property holders. Let’s move on. — Donna Brazile (@donnabrazile)AdvertisementThe Founding Fathers never intended for women to be allowed to vote either, and yet here we are. — Charles #GetCovered-ba (@charles_gaba)Hey , how white and Republican is South Dakota? North Dakota? Wyoming? Idaho? You don't complain about those states having two US Senators. — rolandsmartin (@rolandsmartin)Says the guy from Dakota Territory; oops, territory divided into two only to get around the Constitution for 2 more senators. Tell you what, merge North and South Dakota and we will continue to disenfranchise over 700,000 Americans in the part of DC that is not federal bldgs.— Norman Ornstein (@NormOrnstein)The "Founding Fathers" also never intended for me to be five-fifths of a person, but GO OFF Big Mike. — tré easton (@treeaston)Tell me what the Founding Fathers thought about California.Jackass. — Elizabeth C. McLaughlin, Esq. (@ECMcLaughlin)AdvertisementThey also never expected more people would be living in D.C. than some states. If they did, they would have wanted them to have representation since we fought the Revolutionary war due to lack of representation!— Kelly ツ (@kellwoohoo)What did the Founding Fathers think about Hawaii, Alaska, or any of the other 37 states that have been added since their time?— Rob Anderson (@RobAnderson2018)Do you need a little history lesson as to why South Dakota became a state Mike?— Clark (@Clark408)The founders hated the idea of political parties. The location of the Capitol was a bargaining chip and they never imagined that the permanent population would ever be 700,000 people.If your ideas are rejected by the people, change your ideas, don't refuse them representation.— 🇺🇸 Scott Berfield 🏳️‍🌈Ω (@sberfield)The founding fathers? That what you got? DC has the population, pays taxes yet is unrepresented. America IS HERE is because we would not take taxation without representation but like all in the GOP you don't believe in our American values. Where did the founding fathers say that? — Titus (@TitusNation)AdvertisementThey pay taxes. They have a larger population than 2 rural states. Why should they not have equal representation?— c.anne Reed (@24baseballReed)If DC voted Republican, you'd sing a different tune.— Tess in PDX (@no1listened)Suggest a correctionNewsletter Sign UpHuffPost's top politics stories, straight to your inbox.Successfully Subscribed!Realness delivered to your inbox

×U.S. EditionPart of HuffPost Politics. ©2022 BuzzFeed, Inc. All rights reserved.×Sen. (R-S.D.) on Monday tried to make the case against for Washington D.C. But given his own state’s history, it didn’t go well. Rounds tweeted: The Founding Fathers never intended for Washington D.C. to be a state. is really about packing the Senate with Democrats in order to pass a left-wing agenda.Just look at the DC voter registration data: 🔵 76.4% Democrat🔴 5.7% Republican— Senator Mike Rounds (@SenatorRounds)AdvertisementRounds’ tweet appeared after a day of non sequitur attacks on D.C. statehood, such...

public

EdMazza

Ed Mazza

At HuffPost, we put people first. We believe that real life is news, and news is personal.

GOP Senator’s Attack On Washington D.C. Statehood Spectacularly Backfires

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS