So, the minority party claims to speak for "a majority of the American people"

[Webster Green]

Is this some kind of new math? :silly:

[liberal N proud]

1. I was thinking about where they get that idea

You have the tea baggers who are against anything related to Obama.
You have the GOP faithful who follow the party line regardless.

Both groups that are full of people who always vote against their own best interest and can't figure it out.

Add those two groups together with the group who actually support health care reform but have been vocal about this bill not going far enough. They group that group in with their own and that is how they are making that claim.

[DavidDvorkin]

2. After the 2000 election, the guy with fewer votes became President

So why shouldn't the party with fewer votes be considered the party of the majority?

[Sebastian Doyle]

3. Neither party seems to speak for the majority of the American people anymore

And definitely not this time. :(

[quiet.american]

4. Bingo. My thoughts exactly. nt

[Emit]

5. The technical term is Hugo Chavez majoritarian rule.

:rofl:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=7803953

[nolabear]

6. Republican math. Everything adds up to them losing this vote.

And they can't stand it.

[Raschel]

8. They don't reflect the citizens of the US. Woefully White. Such a misrepresentation,

how do they expect to have the votes for anything?

I can't believe our Congress is still as White as it is. These old men need to go.

[HopeHoops]

7. No, they're just taking a page from the Communist USSR playbook - the Bolshevik party

They adopted the name because it means "more", or "majority". The opposition party went with Menshevik, essentially accepting their role as the minority. The GOP is doing the same thing by pretending to have a majority. They want to inject that perception into the common belief. But with pretty much everything that comes out of the GOP, it is bullshit.