Reminder: please use the Amazon affiliate links to help us keep the lights on!

SCOTUS Watch

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 11739
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Pac-12 Country

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Skinypupy » Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:20 pm

Fireball wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:58 pm
YellowKing wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:37 pm
Fireball wrote:They are unaware that he ever called Mexicans "rapists"? They're unaware that he ever called Obama a non-American? Seriously, they have no knowledge of anything one of the most public people in the world has ever said or done in the last 20 years? I don't believe it.
I would bet a paycheck - hell, I'd bet 6 months pay - that my mom knew neither of those things before she voted.
Why didn't you fix that? The people running around screaming like our hair was on fire that Trump was an existential threat to the United States have been proven right on everything. I can tell you that no one I know was unaware of the danger Trump presented to the United States.
I can only speak for myself, but any time I would mention anything to that effect to my MIL, it was met with some version of "I'm sure you're exaggerating" or "It's just talk, he won't actually do that stuff", then they would immediately retreat back to their ignorance bubble. Short of strapping her to a chair and forcing her to watch the news Clockwork Orange-style, there's not a whole lot I can think of that would get through that.

Coming back to it how and screaming "SEE, I WAS RIGHT" at this point would do little to change her mind, for many of the reasons Blackhawk mentioned above. This is a woman who has lived her entire life in once place (in the same house for 40 years) and rarely travels outside of Salt Lake County. What little information that filters through her bubble is so foreign that she can't relate to it in any way. Add in the fact that she is a rather meek person to begin with and conflict of any sort makes her extremely uncomfortable, and I can sorta understand why she retreats like she does.

I'm not trying to excuse this behavior, mind you. And again, it infuriates me that she still goes out and votes when she literally knows nothing about what's going on. However, complete ignorance and/or complete disinterest is the reality for many, many people...regardless of whether or not Fireball believes it.
We are are the last of the legion.
The last of the bastion.
We are the best of the bastards.
And slaves to none.
- "Row Row", Zeal & Ardor

Jeff V
Posts: 30081
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Jeff V » Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:23 pm

I spent a good 30 minutes last night reading responses to our Congressturd's gushing over Kavanaugh. About 99% of them were along the lines of "we can't wait to vote your toadying ass out of office you worthless piece of shit." (that's one of the nicer ones).

It'll be interesting to see if it actually happens since the farther away from the city one gets, the more elephant it becomes. And I'm pretty damn far away now.

User avatar
Fireball
Posts: 4425
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fireball » Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:30 pm

Skinypupy wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:20 pm
Fireball wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:58 pm
YellowKing wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:37 pm
Fireball wrote:They are unaware that he ever called Mexicans "rapists"? They're unaware that he ever called Obama a non-American? Seriously, they have no knowledge of anything one of the most public people in the world has ever said or done in the last 20 years? I don't believe it.
I would bet a paycheck - hell, I'd bet 6 months pay - that my mom knew neither of those things before she voted.
Why didn't you fix that? The people running around screaming like our hair was on fire that Trump was an existential threat to the United States have been proven right on everything. I can tell you that no one I know was unaware of the danger Trump presented to the United States.
I can only speak for myself, but any time I would mention anything to that effect to my MIL, it was met with some version of "I'm sure you're exaggerating" or "It's just talk, he won't actually do that stuff", then they would immediately retreat back to their ignorance bubble. Short of strapping her to a chair and forcing her to watch the news Clockwork Orange-style, there's not a whole lot I can think of that would get through that.
Then she was told, and she chose to vote for him anyway. She knew, and she chose to vote for him. She owns the entirety of that vote. She wasn't uninformed — she willingly chose to vote for Trump, having been told exactly what he is.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)

User avatar
Fitzy
Posts: 1836
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Silver Spring, MD

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fitzy » Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:15 pm

I'll put the ;tldr first:

The question I am hoping to see answered here comes down to this: Is Donald Trump a unique and horrible danger that must be removed and every American should be willing to sacrifice to remove or is Donald Trump just another opportunity for one party to gain the upper hand?

I think most people here agree Trump is a unique danger to the country and needs to be removed or at a minimum neutered sorry restricted in his exercise of power. I think he needs to be curtailed to the point where I'm voting Democrat, even though I'm a centrist independent and disagree with much of the Democrats platform. Longer explanation that doesn't matter:
Spoiler:
I am willing and going to vote against my nearly ideal Independent candidate for Senate to vote for the almost certain to win anyway Democrat incumbent and even voting for my nearly socialist Rep instead of writing something funny in, despite there being a better chance of me being the first human to meet an intelligent alien than him losing. All because I looked at the numbers and, at least in the Senate race, there is very tiny, microscopic chance the Republican could win if the Independent does well by pulling mostly from moderate Democrats.


So, I think we can take as given for this post that Trump is a unique danger to the country and that Republicans are enabling him
Spoiler:
though I'd bet I disagree with many here over the reason for that, and the necessity in the minds of Republicans for why they are enabling but I do think they are enabling him
and that given a two party system the Democrats must win in order to curtail Trump's power.

Given that, why are the Democrats not reaching out to independents and moderate republicans? The only outreach I've seen is the above, Trump is a unique danger and must be stopped. If he is this huge danger, if the republicans are a huge danger, shouldn't the Democrats be doing everything possible to bring in as big a group of people to vote for Democrats? Up to and including the shelving of more left and divisive policy ideas?

So ultimately it feels like Democrats and people here are demanding that independents and moderate republicans sacrifice to remove Trump, but are unwilling to make any sacrifices of their own. It's just: vote Democrat or be a deplorable and I'm not talking to you if you don't agree with me.

For someone like me, that hurts. And note, the I and me in the following are generalized, I'm using myself, but I am including people like me. Even if there aren't many.

I'm lumped in with Trump supporters if I don't vote for Democrats. I'm a deplorable despite voting for Clinton and across the board Democrats in 2016, but I'm bad because I don't think Democrats are going to represent me and I'd much rather vote independent on the rare occasion where an independent matches what I'm looking for.

I'm going to sacrifice what I think is the direction the country should go in. Why is nobody willing to reach out to me and compromise on divisive issues? Why do I have to choose between my ideal candidate and removing Trump, when the Democrats are willing to do nothing to compromise with me? Even when I suggested that Democrats should at a minimum be questioned about what they will do I was shouted down.

And I'm not even a Republican. Think what Democrats and many people here are asking moderate Republicans. To turn on everything they believe and vote for someone who they agree with on very little. With the only goal to remove/limit Trump, but without any hope of influencing the direction of the country once that happens.

At least people like me have some things in common with the left.

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 58833
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by LordMortis » Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:29 pm

Smoove_B wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:14 pm
What you did on on 11/8/16 doesn't matter as much (to me) as how you respond right now.
As we move further from history what you did matters less. As we approach now it matters more. If you have been consistently atrocious in your actions, attitudes, and beliefs I find it hard to be believe there's hope for you. I'm sad to say that as much as I've lived most of my life hating the us and them mentality of our nation in these last years I've worn down over time and I find there is this a them who remain consistently them from history until now and I find it hard to believe we'll all be OK and that I'm going to have it in my heart to forgive them their trespasses, as it were. That breaks my heart nearly but not quite as much as the idea that they're unreachable. That attempts to fill the void of their life is contingent on the suffering of their fellow man. But I still hold a hope for others because for some when tomorrow comes, what they do tomorrow will then become more important than what they are doing today. That they are lost, desperately trying to protect what they know rather than trying to protect what they know by trying to hold others back. If I don't reach out to the former, I feel lost. The later, I have no use for. Get them out of the cultural pool. Our president is one of them. He has found them and they him. They all have to go and as much as I universally condemn his support there are still supporters who may be reached tomorrow. I find it doesn't take long in most conversations to see who is desperate to hole up and protect what they know and those who are desperate to kick others in the teeth. All it takes is ten seconds of any Trumpian discussion on bigotry, it's a veritable wall in the sand paid for by Mexicans.

User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 5389
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by gbasden » Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:59 pm

Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:15 pm


And I'm not even a Republican. Think what Democrats and many people here are asking moderate Republicans. To turn on everything they believe and vote for someone who they agree with on very little. With the only goal to remove/limit Trump, but without any hope of influencing the direction of the country once that happens.

At least people like me have some things in common with the left.
I totally get that. The Democrats are a wide ranging party from moderately conservative folks like Conor Lamb and Joe Manchin to Democratic Socialists like Bernie. Most Democrats don't agree on everything either, and the party is fairly split between centrists who want to reach out to the independents and those who want to move left and energize the base.

That said, I think you and moderate Republicans and Democrats agree on a lot of items. Corruption shouldn't be tolerated. We should embrace our traditional allies and protect the Western alliance and NATO. We should have a rational trade policy. We should stand up to dictators instead of give in to them. Canadians are nice people.

What Democratic policies are you against? What do you wish they would be doing? How do you think they can reach out to you without violating their beliefs?

User avatar
naednek
Posts: 8544
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:23 pm
naednek’s avatar
Snooze

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by naednek » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:09 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:55 pm
I'm with Zarathud on this one. The time for polite disagreement is over. I chose to start with our resident self proclaimed asshole. It was a conscious choice. I don't really care that it's an ugly choice. I've always struggled with my own inner asshole. It's clearly the age of letting your asshole flag fly. That it puts me in conflict with other assholes is a net positive, imo.
so when is the asshole pride parade?
hepcat - "I agree with Naednek"

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 35681
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by GreenGoo » Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:08 pm

I've learned that every day is asshole day.

The president taught me that.

User avatar
Fireball
Posts: 4425
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fireball » Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:16 pm

Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:15 pm
The question I am hoping to see answered here comes down to this: Is Donald Trump a unique and horrible danger that must be removed and every American should be willing to sacrifice to remove or is Donald Trump just another opportunity for one party to gain the upper hand?
He is a unique danger to the republic, which is why you're seeing conservatives like Steve Schmidt and George Will asking people to vote for Democrats to rein him in.
Given that, why are the Democrats not reaching out to independents and moderate republicans? The only outreach I've seen is the above, Trump is a unique danger and must be stopped. If he is this huge danger, if the republicans are a huge danger, shouldn't the Democrats be doing everything possible to bring in as big a group of people to vote for Democrats? Up to and including the shelving of more left and divisive policy ideas?
Define "the Democrats" here. The Democratic leadership is working very hard to find qualified candidates with broadly-appealing profiles to run in swing districts across the country — lots of business owners, veterans, women, etc. They are pushing these candidates to run on local issues, and to avoid super-charged left wing rhetoric, to the point that a lot of the fringy elements of the Democratic party are accusing the DCCC of being nothing more than a bunch of Republican-lite types. The national DCCC messaging is trying to focus on pocketbook and economic issues, and away from social issues or Bernie-type messaging. I'd say that "the Democrats", to the degree that a party without a president has a clear leader, are doing everything they can to put forward a slate of center-left candidates in order to broaden their appeal going into the election. They're backing an anti-choice candidate in West Virginia, and Pelosi is directing money and resources to candidates who have vowed to not vote for her in a Speaker election.

Ultimately, what we need is for reasonable people to vote Democratic this year for Congress, and in 2020 for President. After that, everyone can return to their own corners.

What I have been hoping for over the last 10 years is for the fever to break in the Republican Party. The party has been going crazy since the early 2000s, when some group therein decided that if a majority of Americans won't agree with their policies, then they need to undermine democracy enough to ensure permanent rule by a white, conservative minority. Before 2016, this manifested itself most clearly in the Tea Party movement, which was always slimed up by ties to the white nationalism and really racist rhetoric against Barack Obama. After 2008, this faction of the GOP decided that they lost because McCain wasn't extreme enough. After 2012, they doubled down because now Romney wasn't extreme enough. My hope when Trump was nominated in 2016 was that his loss would finally make the Republican Party realize that it has to change along with the country, not try to prevent the electorate (if not the country) from changing out from under it. Instead, Trump won in a fluke, and American democracy may well be doomed.

I don't want permanent single-party Democratic rule. I want to beat Trump, beat back the Tea Party filth that have destroyed the Republican Party, and either have a reformed GOP or a new center-right party emerge that actually accepts democracy. I want to have two parties, one of which I support, and the other of which I'll be bummed to lose to but not terrified.

I think people like Bill Kristol, George Will, David From, Steve Schmidt, Ana Navarro, etc, want the same thing. If there are enough real Republicans — pre-"Voter ID to stop the changing electorate", pre-Tea Party, pre-Karl Rove type Republicans — who are willing to take a loss in 2018 and 2020 to stop the fringe that has taken over the GOP, they might get their Republican Party back, and American democracy might — might — be saved.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)

User avatar
Holman
Posts: 18702
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Approximately Wissahickon

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Holman » Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:49 pm

I'm with Fireball.

User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 22728
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by noxiousdog » Wed Jul 11, 2018 6:02 pm

em2nought wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:30 am
GreenGoo wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:25 am
em2nought wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:17 am
<snip>
No one is even talking about you or to you.
It's a lonely life we Russian bots lead. :wink:
That's the most reasonable explanation I've heard.
My continuing adventures of learning to play piano. - Now Playing Moonlight Sonata

Amazon Kindle Book Loaning Thread

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog

User avatar
Combustible Lemur
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:17 pm
Location: houston, TX
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Combustible Lemur » Wed Jul 11, 2018 6:46 pm

Rip wrote:
Fretmute wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:34 am
Blackhawk wrote:
Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:19 pm
So, from their perspective, are they going to choose to be bad people for supporting his racism, or bad people for supporting his opposition's (to them) infanticide? Although I may not agree with them at all, I can sympathize with the fact that they're facing an impossible dilemma. I won't damn them as 'horrible people' for it.
Yet it's their fault that some children may never see their parents again. They don't get a pass.

So for the person who sees both as wrong they are stuck feeling they don't want either. Thus why so many tune out and don't even bother. If there is a representation issue in the country it is because of the non-voters not some redrawing of voting district lines or stupid Russian propaganda. A big chunk of the population has never voted and never will. Another good chunk rarely do.

http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-an ... 0-overview
You can cling to that idealism all you want but both parties fight the war in the real margins of that 10 - 20%. Those margins are what elected a traitor to the presidency and has the republican party focusing on distilling the fox News Republican voters into a super solid bloc. It's why the democratic party which has a solid national majority consistently loses so often. The larger pluralities of demographics that trend democratic vote less than the demographics that through biology and culture trend conservative and have been carefully courted to conflate theocratic oligarchy as American conservatism.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Is Scott home? thump thump thump Crash ......No.

User avatar
Fireball
Posts: 4425
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fireball » Wed Jul 11, 2018 7:20 pm

If Donald Trump had been elected as a Democrat, and proceeded to undermine our electoral system, enrich himself obscenely through his office, demand personal loyalty from actors who should be loyal to the country not the president, had covered up Russian interference in the election, was undermining NATO, and destroying America's place in the world — I would vote against him in 2020, even if he was appointing judges I liked and passed a tax bill that I liked.

If Donald Trump had been the Democratic candidate in 2016, I would not have voted for him. If he had been running against Bush, Kasich, Rubio, Paul, Christie, Fiorina... or Romney or McCain or Jindal or Perry or Graham or Pataki... I would have voted for the Republican nominee.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)

User avatar
Combustible Lemur
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:17 pm
Location: houston, TX
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Combustible Lemur » Wed Jul 11, 2018 7:25 pm


Fireball wrote:If Donald Trump had been elected as a Democrat, and proceeded to undermine our electoral system, enrich himself obscenely through his office, demand personal loyalty from actors who should be loyal to the country not the president, had covered up Russian interference in the election, was undermining NATO, and destroying America's place in the world — I would vote against him in 2020, even if he was appointing judges I liked and passed a tax bill that I liked.

If Donald Trump had been the Democratic candidate in 2016, I would not have voted for him. If he had been running against Bush, Kasich, Rubio, Paul, Christie, Fiorina... or Romney or McCain or Jindal or Perry or Graham or Pataki... I would have voted for the Republican nominee.
Yeah, this. Maaaaybe not Jindal, that fucker gives me the creeps.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Is Scott home? thump thump thump Crash ......No.

User avatar
Fitzy
Posts: 1836
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Silver Spring, MD

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fitzy » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:01 pm

Fireball wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:16 pm
Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:15 pm
The question I am hoping to see answered here comes down to this: Is Donald Trump a unique and horrible danger that must be removed and every American should be willing to sacrifice to remove or is Donald Trump just another opportunity for one party to gain the upper hand?
He is a unique danger to the republic, which is why you're seeing conservatives like Steve Schmidt and George Will asking people to vote for Democrats to rein him in.
George Will is a big part of why I changed my mind on voting independent. I took a look at the numbers and there was a tiny chance of the independent throwing the race to the Republican. It was about the level of a teenager from a desert planet, flying his first space ship, hitting a 2 meter exhaust port and I can't risk those odds. I don't agree with Will on much, but I respect him for speaking his mind the way he does and even when I don't agree, his arguments are well reasoned and understandable. His going Democrat shocked me into reconsidering.

I hope you're right on the direction the Democrats will go, your knowledge is higher than mine and I'm basing most of mine on what I read in the papers. But I am susceptible to high drama headlines.

I suppose what I mostly wanted was shared pain. I'll vote for Democrats, it would have been nice to see them move towards the center. But Fireball is saying, if I'm reading correctly, that my worry of a sharp turn to the left isn't reality. I'll trust that, Fireball sometimes goes off, but when he's analytical and mostly calm like the above post, I've noticed he's generally accurate.

I don't want a Democrat party as tied to the socialist left as the Republicans are to the tea party. That has always been my primary worry.

User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 5389
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by gbasden » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:09 pm

Sure. The problem with the Democrats is that they've never had a supreme command like the Republicans that gives out uniform talking points and enforces orthodoxy. People joke about the D's embracing circular firing squads, and it's true. It frustrates me a lot of the time, but I'd rather support inefficient over evil. The DCCC has always supported the more centrist mainstream candidates, but as we saw with Bernie the base doesn't always follow along. If it makes you feel any better, they just aren't going to pass anything meaningful on Gun Control, and as much as I believe it's a moral imperative, nothing will happen on health care either. The best hope for ICE isn't being abolished, but some minor reform. Unlike the Republican rhetoric, almost nothing the D's are saying has a chance of happening short of convening investigations into the fraud and corruption that is the Trump regime.

User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 24449
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by YellowKing » Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:32 pm

Fireball wrote:Why didn't you fix that? The people running around screaming like our hair was on fire that Trump was an existential threat to the United States have been proven right on everything. I can tell you that no one I know was unaware of the danger Trump presented to the United States.
I think you're forgetting that nobody thought Trump had a chance in hell of winning. It certainly wasn't worth me getting in a shouting match with my mom over politics to try vainly to get her to change her vote from the guy who was going to lose anyway.

Hindsight's 20/20. People didn't fight harder because A) everyone thought Hillary had this in the bag and B) nobody in their wildest dreams thought Trump would be as bad as he actually was. The normalcy of the office had not yet been broken, and we expected he'd eventually succumb to normal bureaucracy.

User avatar
Combustible Lemur
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:17 pm
Location: houston, TX
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Combustible Lemur » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:07 pm

YellowKing wrote:
Fireball wrote:Why didn't you fix that? The people running around screaming like our hair was on fire that Trump was an existential threat to the United States have been proven right on everything. I can tell you that no one I know was unaware of the danger Trump presented to the United States.
I think you're forgetting that nobody thought Trump had a chance in hell of winning. It certainly wasn't worth me getting in a shouting match with my mom over politics to try vainly to get her to change her vote from the guy who was going to lose anyway.

Hindsight's 20/20. People didn't fight harder because A) everyone thought Hillary had this in the bag and B) nobody in their wildest dreams thought Trump would be as bad as he actually was. The normalcy of the office had not yet been broken, and we expected he'd eventually succumb to normal bureaucracy.
Not true, I specifically remember several conversations I had where I tried to convince people he could win. A large number of people just couldn't fathom the voting against self interest that would happen. A friend of mine voted stein with full knowledge it would help Trump because of the anti Hillary propaganda. My parent, voted third party because of decades of Hillary and lib hate despite their disgust with Trump. The signs were there.

Granted, I'm a self loathing cynic so I wrote off my bad feelings to that, pre election.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Is Scott home? thump thump thump Crash ......No.

User avatar
Fireball
Posts: 4425
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fireball » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:37 pm

Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:01 pm
I hope you're right on the direction the Democrats will go, your knowledge is higher than mine and I'm basing most of mine on what I read in the papers. But I am susceptible to high drama headlines.
I can only say where the leadership of the party is going. There is a growing far-left movement, which has been emboldened by Trump. I fear the formation of a Tea Party of the Left. The best way to push back against that is for center-left Democrats to win in these swing seats, and for as many credible candidates as possible to jump into the primaries for the presidential nomination next year. We fought off the populist surge in 2016, which the GOP didn’t. I hope we can again in 2018 and 2020.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)

User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 24449
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by YellowKing » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:12 pm

By "nobody" I'm generalizing. If you actually thought he would win you were in the minority. It's unreasonable to think that everyone should have known this was coming and taken steps (up to and including alienating their own parents) to prevent it.

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 32186
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:
Kraken’s avatar
Offline

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Kraken » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:35 pm

Fireball wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:37 pm
We fought off the populist surge in 2016,
And how did that work out for you?

The only Democrat that I can see going toe-to-toe with Trump is Warren, whom I am now convinced is going to run. If you nominate another safe, market-tested establishment figure, you will lose again.

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 37620
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Smoove_B » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:39 pm

I guess this is either "totally normal" or a "lib smear job", right?
Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh incurred tens of thousands of dollars of credit card debt buying baseball tickets over the past decade and at times reported liabilities that could have exceeded the value of his cash accounts and investment assets, according to a review of Kavanaugh’s financial disclosures and information provided by the White House.

White House spokesman Raj Shah told The Washington Post that Kavanaugh built up the debt by buying Washington Nationals season tickets and tickets for playoff games for himself and a “handful” of friends. Shah said some of the debts were also for home improvements.

In 2016, Kavanaugh reported having between $60,000 and $200,000 in debt accrued over three credit cards and a loan. Each credit card held between $15,000 and $50,000 in debt, and a Thrift Savings Plan loan was between $15,000 and $50,000.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 30234
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo » Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:50 am

Smoove_B wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:39 pm
I guess this is either "totally normal" or a "lib smear job", right?
Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh incurred tens of thousands of dollars of credit card debt buying baseball tickets over the past decade and at times reported liabilities that could have exceeded the value of his cash accounts and investment assets, according to a review of Kavanaugh’s financial disclosures and information provided by the White House.

White House spokesman Raj Shah told The Washington Post that Kavanaugh built up the debt by buying Washington Nationals season tickets and tickets for playoff games for himself and a “handful” of friends. Shah said some of the debts were also for home improvements.

In 2016, Kavanaugh reported having between $60,000 and $200,000 in debt accrued over three credit cards and a loan. Each credit card held between $15,000 and $50,000 in debt, and a Thrift Savings Plan loan was between $15,000 and $50,000.
It's interesting, but I doubt this will go anywhere, UNLESS Kavanaugh either owed money to unsavory people, or had his debts paid off by unsavory individuals.

$iljanus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10097
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:46 pm
Location: Under the bed...your bed...

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by $iljanus » Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:54 am

El Guapo wrote:
Smoove_B wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:39 pm
I guess this is either "totally normal" or a "lib smear job", right?
Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh incurred tens of thousands of dollars of credit card debt buying baseball tickets over the past decade and at times reported liabilities that could have exceeded the value of his cash accounts and investment assets, according to a review of Kavanaugh’s financial disclosures and information provided by the White House.

White House spokesman Raj Shah told The Washington Post that Kavanaugh built up the debt by buying Washington Nationals season tickets and tickets for playoff games for himself and a “handful” of friends. Shah said some of the debts were also for home improvements.

In 2016, Kavanaugh reported having between $60,000 and $200,000 in debt accrued over three credit cards and a loan. Each credit card held between $15,000 and $50,000 in debt, and a Thrift Savings Plan loan was between $15,000 and $50,000.
It's interesting, but I doubt this will go anywhere, UNLESS Kavanaugh either owed money to unsavory people, or had his debts paid off by unsavory individuals.
Those whom you call "unsavory" are the great capitalists of this nation who know a good investment when they see one!

Go Nats!
tl;dr

Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 30234
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo » Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:03 am

The only thing that gives me any hope about Kavanaugh not getting confirmed is that supposedly McConnell was trying to get Trump to pick someone else. Which could possibly suggest that he knows something that gives him pause about Kavanaugh, either that there's something not publicly known that could cause a confirmation issue, or that he has some reason to believe that one or more GOP senators might vote no.

It's a thin reed, but it's something.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 30234
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo » Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:11 am



I assume Collins and Murkowski are just cynically looking for enough cover to pretend that the nominee doesn't want to overturn Roe, and if so this probably won't change anything, but if there's more like this that could cause an issue.

milo
Posts: 504
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 12:20 pm
Location: Irvine, CA, USA

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by milo » Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:14 am

Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:15 pm
And I'm not even a Republican. Think what Democrats and many people here are asking moderate Republicans. To turn on everything they believe and vote for someone who they agree with on very little. With the only goal to remove/limit Trump, but without any hope of influencing the direction of the country once that happens.
There are no moderate Republicans left. Trump's level of support from self-identified Republicans is nearly 90%. I'm not sure if the party can recover from this administration (assuming that the country itself is able to recover in the first place).
--milo

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 44176
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by LawBeefaroni » Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:01 am

In my state, if every independent vote went to Trump, he still wouldn't have taken the state. My vote truly did not matter, whether I went D or IND. Well, it may have padded the national popular vote. So yea?


Obviously votes mattered in other states. And everyone knew going in what those states were.


My feeling on people who admit they know nothing about politics or candidates, they are voting irresponsibly if they vote. Ignorance does not absolve them of their poor choice.

I'm not going to tell anyone they shouldn't vote but it is their duty and responsibility to cast an educated vote. If they do not, they'd do everyone a favor by staying home.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 58833
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by LordMortis » Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:29 am

milo wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:14 am
Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:15 pm
And I'm not even a Republican. Think what Democrats and many people here are asking moderate Republicans. To turn on everything they believe and vote for someone who they agree with on very little. With the only goal to remove/limit Trump, but without any hope of influencing the direction of the country once that happens.
There are no moderate Republicans left. Trump's level of support from self-identified Republicans is nearly 90%. I'm not sure if the party can recover from this administration (assuming that the country itself is able to recover in the first place).

Let it be the implosion I've been waiting for. Let it be the implosion I've been waiting for. Marginalize them so bad they never get to come back. Ever. Sadly, I think I've grossly underestimated how many horrible people I walk among. How many people believe their life is made a comparative success by institutionalizing making others lives a failure and pretend this is what it means to be strong and independent. How many think their religion is an excuse to be shitty treat that as righteousness. How many demand from government and demand to give back nothing and conflate that with liberty. How are angry to eat their shit sandwich and then blame their choice of meal on the people the people being fed an Atkins shit a sandwich with no bread.

User avatar
Fireball
Posts: 4425
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fireball » Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:49 am

Kraken wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:35 pm
Fireball wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:37 pm
We fought off the populist surge in 2016,
And how did that work out for you?
We didn't win. But we most likely wouldn't have won with Bernie, either, and in nominating him would have legitimized some of the worst, most dishonest, most unhinged thinking in America's political left.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)

User avatar
Combustible Lemur
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:17 pm
Location: houston, TX
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Combustible Lemur » Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:56 am

YellowKing wrote:By "nobody" I'm generalizing. If you actually thought he would win you were in the minority. It's unreasonable to think that everyone should have known this was coming and taken steps (up to and including alienating their own parents) to prevent it.
Fair.

I do think it was indicative of a larger problem in the democratic party that is a strength among conservatives and thats the purity push. Just questioning the zealous makes you the enemy, why don't you change your life experience to suddenly be activist woke, you must secretly hate liberals and be a bad person.


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Is Scott home? thump thump thump Crash ......No.

User avatar
Fitzy
Posts: 1836
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Silver Spring, MD

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fitzy » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:07 am

LawBeefaroni wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:01 am
In my state, if every independent vote went to Trump, he still wouldn't have taken the state. My vote truly did not matter, whether I went D or IND. Well, it may have padded the national popular vote. So yea?


Obviously votes mattered in other states. And everyone knew going in what those states were.


My feeling on people who admit they know nothing about politics or candidates, they are voting irresponsibly if they vote. Ignorance does not absolve them of their poor choice.

I'm not going to tell anyone they shouldn't vote but it is their duty and responsibility to cast an educated vote. If they do not, they'd do everyone a favor by staying home.
The party system is a bypass to education. You don't have to read up about candidates if all you need to do is check the D or R. Even better, because only the diehards vote in the primary system, only a tiny fraction of the US population needs to educate themselves on a candidate!

I'll jump in with a story about my Grandmother. I love my grandmother. I also know she is/was a racist. She grew up and lived in rural South Dakota her entire life. I wouldn't be surprised if she never met an African American, however Native Americans were not uncommon. Her racism was of the quiet, ignorant stereotyping type, if you never spent a considerable amount of time with her, you'd never see it. There were a few comments over the years that made it obvious, they were broad stereotypes that did not make sense, but were "known" to be true where she lived. Our family is non-confrontational, including myself to my shame. We don't contradict each other to each other faces. It's just not done.

In 2008 and 2012 it wasn't race that made her vote for the Republican. It was her Catholic priest who flat out told the congregation that Obama was going to allow abortions up until the 9th month. A couple of us grandkids did push back against that, it's obviously false except in the case of saving a life, but faith is powerful and religion takes advantage of that. You can't argue against god, even with a family connection.

She's never said anything about Trump that I know of, but I have a ranching/farming side of the family who were vocal supporters of him. They don't see themselves as ignorant. I know you were talking about people who vote despite admitting to knowing nothing, but those who mark R or D without thought my be just as dangerous. They know they are in the right. That is hard to contradict and harder when our current climate is right and wrong, black and white, binary.

Now for my aside. I know my grandmother is/was racist even if it's not the screaming type, it's there, I love her and I'm not going to stop. I also know she is a flawed, but good person. I am not a racist, but I know my grandmother is a better person than I am. Anyone can argue against that, but it's true. She is gentle. She is loving. She is supportive. She's spent 90 years helping, giving to others to her own detriment.

Now here's the part that made me reconsider my belief in a binary racist/not racist good/bad system. When my grandmother met my then girlfriend, now wife, a Native American, she came straight up to her and hugged her and said welcome to the family. It was sincere. My wife mentions it occasionally in shock. No one explicitly warned my grandmother that my wife was Native American, but it's not hard to figure out. Maybe my grandmother thought about it and trusted me to make the right decision. Maybe family outweighed a lifetime of exposure to prejudice.

I don't know. All I know is that afterward I never heard her or heard of her speaking badly about race. Did she change? I have no idea, we don't talk about it. I know she treats my wife like one of the family. The rancher side of my family are still idiots though. Geez.

It's not excusing, but I think if we want to change the country we have to do it one person at a time. We have to do it by not screaming at people, not mocking people, not labeling people. We have to go slow and steady, standing up as examples and challenging hateful beliefs in a calm, but persistent manner. It's not easy. It's not fast. Nor does it require accepting hateful beliefs especially in government and law. We can and should stand up for civil rights, but at some point it's not enough to protect civil rights (which we should hold strongly and firmly to though), we need to change beliefs. It is happening and it will continue slowly.

I'd like to believe my grandmother changed due to the example of her grandchildren and granddaughter-in-law. It took a long time, but it works.

Now for a second grandmother story! Because I'm on a roll and I have no idea if anyone is even reading this far. My other grandmother, also a rural person, though rural North Dakota native, proudly and loudly voted for President Obama in 2008. She took delight in shocking the other (racist old biddies according to her) residents of the manor she lived in. Great delight. The descriptions the aide sent us described her as cackling and mocking the others for days. I loved my grandmother, but she was not a good person. She was awesome though.

User avatar
Fitzy
Posts: 1836
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Silver Spring, MD

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fitzy » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:26 am

Fireball wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:37 pm
Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:01 pm
I hope you're right on the direction the Democrats will go, your knowledge is higher than mine and I'm basing most of mine on what I read in the papers. But I am susceptible to high drama headlines.
I can only say where the leadership of the party is going. There is a growing far-left movement, which has been emboldened by Trump. I fear the formation of a Tea Party of the Left. The best way to push back against that is for center-left Democrats to win in these swing seats, and for as many credible candidates as possible to jump into the primaries for the presidential nomination next year. We fought off the populist surge in 2016, which the GOP didn’t. I hope we can again in 2018 and 2020.
Huh. I "left" the Democrats years ago because the candidates they were fielding in my area didn't match what I liked. I briefly returned this year because Maryland is a registered party only vote in primary state, which I'm not knocking, but I voted for an extreme long shot in my district primary, I think she lost by like 80-10 or something. :lol: I really liked her. I'm one person who is an introvert, but maybe it's worth considering being more active. I've just never felt it fair, if the majority of Democrats wanted to go left, it seemed better to step out and hope for a center party to form. I've been waiting a long time. It's something to consider I suppose.
LordMortis wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:29 am

Let it be the implosion I've been waiting for. Let it be the implosion I've been waiting for. Marginalize them so bad they never get to come back. Ever. Sadly, I think I've grossly underestimated how many horrible people I walk among. How many people believe their life is made a comparative success by institutionalizing making others lives a failure and pretend this is what it means to be strong and independent. How many think their religion is an excuse to be shitty treat that as righteousness. How many demand from government and demand to give back nothing and conflate that with liberty. How are angry to eat their shit sandwich and then blame their choice of meal on the people the people being fed an Atkins shit a sandwich with no bread.
I'm more optimistic/naive I see the bad people as a small minority and trapped people (people stuck between Trump and their beliefs) as a bigger part, and apathetic people as a really big part. I'm also empathetic and can understand each group while agreeing with none.

But I do hope the Republican party finally implodes. It's time.
gbasden wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:09 pm
Sure. The problem with the Democrats is that they've never had a supreme command like the Republicans that gives out uniform talking points and enforces orthodoxy. People joke about the D's embracing circular firing squads, and it's true. It frustrates me a lot of the time, but I'd rather support inefficient over evil. The DCCC has always supported the more centrist mainstream candidates, but as we saw with Bernie the base doesn't always follow along. If it makes you feel any better, they just aren't going to pass anything meaningful on Gun Control, and as much as I believe it's a moral imperative, nothing will happen on health care either. The best hope for ICE isn't being abolished, but some minor reform. Unlike the Republican rhetoric, almost nothing the D's are saying has a chance of happening short of convening investigations into the fraud and corruption that is the Trump regime.
Vote for the Democrats because they can't get anything done? :lol:

I support health care reform, I just don't think the country is capable of doing single payer right now. Not in the way the rest of the world does. The ACA should have been the right direction. Using the free market and Federalism to enact change was something I would have thought Republicans could get behind, but stickin it to the Democrats has become the important platform of their party. The ACA as a framework to be improved over the years could have done a lot of good with Republican support.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 30234
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:30 am

LawBeefaroni wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:01 am

Obviously votes mattered in other states. And everyone knew going in what those states were.
This isn't really true. Very few people expected Trump to carry Michigan and Wisconsin, and not that many people expected him to carry Pennsylvania. And independents / third party voters exceeded Trump's margin of victory in all three states, meaning independent / third party voters (to say nothing of people in those states who didn't vote) had the power to swing the election, and probably very few in those states appreciated that in advance. Plus other states that Clinton was expected to (and did) carry were much closer than expected - in particular NH and VA.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 30234
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:37 am

Fitzy wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:07 am

The party system is a bypass to education. You don't have to read up about candidates if all you need to do is check the D or R. Even better, because only the diehards vote in the primary system, only a tiny fraction of the US population needs to educate themselves on a candidate!
This is kind of true, but not exactly. As a practical matter anyone running under the R or D label can be expected to vote for whoever the party leadership is (or someone close to that). Their is an unusual amount of uncertainty on both sides as to who the new speaker would be in 2018 for either party, but it's still likely to be Kevin McCarthy or Nancy Pelosi respectively, and if it's not them then it's going to be someone who agrees with 90% of the party platform (and there's virtually no uncertainty on the Senate side). That leadership vote, as a practical matter, is more important than 98% of any individual official's other votes during their time in office (especially in the House). One should definitely read up on the candidates, but as a practical matter their party affiliation is inevitably and by far the most important determinant of what the policy impact will be from their election.

So yes, read up on the candidates, but if you're really invested in the likely electoral policy outcomes, you're probably better off reading up on the likely 2019 congressional leadership, and on the party platforms.

Incidentally, this is another reason why (in an ideal world) we'd just go ahead and switch to a parliamentary / explicitly party-based system. It's what we have as a practical matter, only a shittier version of it.

User avatar
Fireball
Posts: 4425
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fireball » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:46 am

Fitzy wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:26 am
Huh. I "left" the Democrats years ago because the candidates they were fielding in my area didn't match what I liked. I briefly returned this year because Maryland is a registered party only vote in primary state, which I'm not knocking, but I voted for an extreme long shot in my district primary, I think she lost by like 80-10 or something. :lol: I really liked her. I'm one person who is an introvert, but maybe it's worth considering being more active. I've just never felt it fair, if the majority of Democrats wanted to go left, it seemed better to step out and hope for a center party to form. I've been waiting a long time. It's something to consider I suppose.
There's no such thing as "the center". There's no such thing as "the middle." Those are amorphous phrases that have no bearing in actual policy discussions. You can't form a political party around an approach as opposed to a platform. And the American political system can't support three major parties.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)

User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 24515
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana
Contact:
Blackhawk’s avatar
Offline

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Blackhawk » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:48 am

Fitzy wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:07 am
Her racism was of the quiet, ignorant stereotyping type, if you never spent a considerable amount of time with her, you'd never see it.
Her racism was racism, but it was largely a function of that generation. Our grandparents grew up in a world where those stereotypes were presented as simple reality, alternate viewpoints weren't communicated or taught, and segregation guaranteed that people didn't get much of an opportunity to learn otherwise beyond casual encounters.

It wasn't the racism of hatred, it was the racism of misinformation. They're very different things.
[This space left intentionally blank.]

User avatar
Fireball
Posts: 4425
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Fireball » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:49 am

El Guapo wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:37 am
Incidentally, this is another reason why (in an ideal world) we'd just go ahead and switch to a parliamentary / explicitly party-based system. It's what we have as a practical matter, only a shittier version of it.
Yes, this 100%. Parties in our country are way too weak for the type of politics we now have. We have Presidential-system-weak parties but Parliamentary-system-strong partisanship.

Almost all of the existing problems in our political system would be addressed by switching the German governing system. We'd then have some new problems, but they'd be smaller, in my opinion.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 32186
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:
Kraken’s avatar
Offline

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Kraken » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:35 pm

Fireball wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:49 am
Kraken wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:35 pm
Fireball wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:37 pm
We fought off the populist surge in 2016,
And how did that work out for you?
We didn't win. But we most likely wouldn't have won with Bernie, either, and in nominating him would have legitimized some of the worst, most dishonest, most unhinged thinking in America's political left.
Alternate histories can be whatever one wants to believe, and we're going to disagree here...but I believe Bernie would have won it. 2016 was going to be a change election, and Bernie was generally well-liked -- certainly better than Trump. The Democrats chose an unlikable establishment figure who was exactly wrong for the time. I hope they won't make the same mistake in two years.

Under President Sanders we might not be cruising smoothly to our socialist utopia -- Congress would have nothing to do with that, and we'd be bracing for a red wave right now -- but at least we wouldn't be picking fights with Europe's social democracies! :lol:

User avatar
ImLawBoy
Forum Admin
Posts: 10694
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by ImLawBoy » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:51 pm

Bernie would have been routed in 2016.
We had subs. It was crazy

Post Reply