|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Aaannnnnnnd all hell breaks loose. Of course, as predicted, most republicans (not even speaking about McConnell) are breaking their vows not to confirm another judge on an election year, because you know, Supreme Court is THE only way they have to counteract demographic changes in the country and keep up their power for two dozen years, even if they themselves are not reelected.
I can't believe the luck of Trump, getting to appoint 3 judges in a single term. Has that happened ? It is going to ultra-motivate republican voters to get out and vote, and overall coalesce Trump's support I believe since Supreme Court > all.
I am expecting a successful appointment to discourage a non-negligible part of the democratic electorate (I hope I'm wrong on that one) if it happens before election day.
I am sadly unsurprised by McConnell. Before her body was even cold, he was already trampling on RBG's dying wish (not to be replaced before a new president is appointed). Worst asshole I've ever seen. Trump has no conscience, but that guy is somehow even worse.
Now... Will democrats, IF they get into power, expand the court ? Going to 11 would not even be enough since it would still be 6-5.
I'd probably agree with them to go up to eleven, to keep things "fair" and restore balance (Roberts being mostly fair these days), but anything past that, I would despise as a power grab on the same level I do to republicans currently.
I'd even argue that it would be beneficial for Trump politically to NOT nominate another candidate before the election, to give an appearance of fairness that could bring him voters, and "force" all conservatives to vote for him. It could win him the election (but at the same time also motivate democrats)
|
On September 19 2020 18:12 Nouar wrote:
Aaannnnnnnd all hell breaks loose. Of course, as predicted, most republicans (not even speaking about McConnell) are breaking their vows not to confirm another judge on an election year, because you know, Supreme Court is THE only way they have to counteract demographic changes in the country and keep up their power for two dozen years, even if they themselves are not reelected.
I can't believe the luck of Trump, getting to appoint 3 judges in a single term. Has that happened ? It is going to ultra-motivate republican voters to get out and vote, and overall coalesce Trump's support I believe since Supreme Court > all.
I am expecting a successful appointment to discourage a non-negligible part of the democratic electorate (I hope I'm wrong on that one) if it happens before election day.
I am sadly unsurprised by McConnell. Before her body was even cold, he was already trampling on RBG's dying wish (not to be replaced before a new president is appointed). Worst asshole I've ever seen. Trump has no conscience, but that guy is somehow even worse.
Now... Will democrats, IF they get into power, expand the court ? Going to 11 would not even be enough since it would still be 6-5.
I'd probably agree with them to go up to eleven, to keep things "fair" and restore balance (Roberts being mostly fair these days), but anything past that, I would despise as a power grab on the same level I do to republicans currently.
I'd even argue that it would be beneficial for Trump politically to NOT nominate another candidate before the election, to give an appearance of fairness that could bring him voters, and "force" all conservatives to vote for him. It could win him the election (but at the same time also motivate democrats)
Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years.
Fuck fairness. Fuck balance. Republicans don't care about being fair or stuff being balanced. They care about winning, and only about that. They have zero principles. I have long gone by "what would Darth Vader do" to try to predict republican actions, and it is surprisingly effective. If there is an evil reaction possible to any stimulus, republicans will choose that without fail.
It is time that non-republicans stop trying to be fair to them. Appoint 10 new justices to the supreme court.
|
On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 18:12 Nouar wrote:
Aaannnnnnnd all hell breaks loose. Of course, as predicted, most republicans (not even speaking about McConnell) are breaking their vows not to confirm another judge on an election year, because you know, Supreme Court is THE only way they have to counteract demographic changes in the country and keep up their power for two dozen years, even if they themselves are not reelected.
I can't believe the luck of Trump, getting to appoint 3 judges in a single term. Has that happened ? It is going to ultra-motivate republican voters to get out and vote, and overall coalesce Trump's support I believe since Supreme Court > all.
I am expecting a successful appointment to discourage a non-negligible part of the democratic electorate (I hope I'm wrong on that one) if it happens before election day.
I am sadly unsurprised by McConnell. Before her body was even cold, he was already trampling on RBG's dying wish (not to be replaced before a new president is appointed). Worst asshole I've ever seen. Trump has no conscience, but that guy is somehow even worse.
Now... Will democrats, IF they get into power, expand the court ? Going to 11 would not even be enough since it would still be 6-5.
I'd probably agree with them to go up to eleven, to keep things "fair" and restore balance (Roberts being mostly fair these days), but anything past that, I would despise as a power grab on the same level I do to republicans currently.
I'd even argue that it would be beneficial for Trump politically to NOT nominate another candidate before the election, to give an appearance of fairness that could bring him voters, and "force" all conservatives to vote for him. It could win him the election (but at the same time also motivate democrats) Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Fuck fairness. Fuck balance. Republicans don't care about being fair or stuff being balanced. They care about winning, and only about that. They have zero principles. I have long gone by "what would Darth Vader do" to try to predict republican actions, and it is surprisingly effective. If there is an evil reaction possible to any stimulus, republicans will choose that without fail. It is time that non-republicans stop trying to be fair to them. Appoint 10 new justices to the supreme court.
Not supporting that. I do have a conscience, and I would not go lower than an opponent, because I want to be able to live in peace with myself (Cruz ? Graham ? Ahahahaahahahah. Graham.). Even if that means I get shafted sometimes, at least I don't have to hate myself.
I despise hypocrisy, so I cannot contemplate doing the same thing I am accusing others of.
(Besides, I'm just an observer, not actually an american)
If a republican voter supports these kind of shenanigans for the sake of power, I'll just not associate with any single one of those who do, ever, for any reason. That's about all. There are no excuses.
|
On September 19 2020 19:40 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:On September 19 2020 18:12 Nouar wrote:
Aaannnnnnnd all hell breaks loose. Of course, as predicted, most republicans (not even speaking about McConnell) are breaking their vows not to confirm another judge on an election year, because you know, Supreme Court is THE only way they have to counteract demographic changes in the country and keep up their power for two dozen years, even if they themselves are not reelected.
I can't believe the luck of Trump, getting to appoint 3 judges in a single term. Has that happened ? It is going to ultra-motivate republican voters to get out and vote, and overall coalesce Trump's support I believe since Supreme Court > all.
I am expecting a successful appointment to discourage a non-negligible part of the democratic electorate (I hope I'm wrong on that one) if it happens before election day.
I am sadly unsurprised by McConnell. Before her body was even cold, he was already trampling on RBG's dying wish (not to be replaced before a new president is appointed). Worst asshole I've ever seen. Trump has no conscience, but that guy is somehow even worse.
Now... Will democrats, IF they get into power, expand the court ? Going to 11 would not even be enough since it would still be 6-5.
I'd probably agree with them to go up to eleven, to keep things "fair" and restore balance (Roberts being mostly fair these days), but anything past that, I would despise as a power grab on the same level I do to republicans currently.
I'd even argue that it would be beneficial for Trump politically to NOT nominate another candidate before the election, to give an appearance of fairness that could bring him voters, and "force" all conservatives to vote for him. It could win him the election (but at the same time also motivate democrats) Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Fuck fairness. Fuck balance. Republicans don't care about being fair or stuff being balanced. They care about winning, and only about that. They have zero principles. I have long gone by "what would Darth Vader do" to try to predict republican actions, and it is surprisingly effective. If there is an evil reaction possible to any stimulus, republicans will choose that without fail. It is time that non-republicans stop trying to be fair to them. Appoint 10 new justices to the supreme court. Not supporting that. I do have a conscience, and I would not go lower than an opponent, because I want to be able to live in peace with myself (Cruz ? Graham ? Ahahahaahahahah. Graham.). Even if that means I get shafted sometimes, at least I don't have to hate myself. I despise hypocrisy, so I cannot contemplate doing the same thing I am accusing others of. (Besides, I'm just an observer, not actually an american) If a republican voter supports these kind of shenanigans for the sake of power, I'll just not associate with any single one of those who do, ever, for any reason. That's about all. There are no excuses.
Are you a pacifist?
|
Dunno. It is just so frustrating to see these assholes always get away with it and get whatever new evil thing they want.
The big problem is that i am generally for non-evil politics, for principles and all that stuff. But that doesn't seem to work in the US at all. Because for some reason, the republican party can get away with becoming ever more evil and hypocritical, and their voters don't care. (Probably due to the abundantly bad FPTP shit). A minority can win elections, and a minority can somehow hold more power than the the majority.
It is so horribly frustrating to see them get not one, not two, but THREE supreme court justices for the next decades, just because they got their incompetent and disgustingly assholeish in every way guy elected to president with a minority of the votes. And having them thus ruin every attempt for progress for decades, while very obviously consistently ignoring any of the principles they claim to care about. And progress is already hard in the broken US system.
It is simply beyond my understanding why a party as evil as the republicans have any power whatsoever in what claims to be a first-world country.
But i am only a spectator too, and quite happy to not be caught in the shithole that the US is. And if i were in the US, i would probably get out.
|
Let's see if at least 4 of these have balls.
https://www.motherjones.com/2020-elections/2020/09/a-long-list-of-gop-senators-who-promised-not-to-confirm-a-supreme-court-nominee-during-an-election-year/
On September 19 2020 19:46 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 19:40 Nouar wrote:On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:On September 19 2020 18:12 Nouar wrote:
Aaannnnnnnd all hell breaks loose. Of course, as predicted, most republicans (not even speaking about McConnell) are breaking their vows not to confirm another judge on an election year, because you know, Supreme Court is THE only way they have to counteract demographic changes in the country and keep up their power for two dozen years, even if they themselves are not reelected.
I can't believe the luck of Trump, getting to appoint 3 judges in a single term. Has that happened ? It is going to ultra-motivate republican voters to get out and vote, and overall coalesce Trump's support I believe since Supreme Court > all.
I am expecting a successful appointment to discourage a non-negligible part of the democratic electorate (I hope I'm wrong on that one) if it happens before election day.
I am sadly unsurprised by McConnell. Before her body was even cold, he was already trampling on RBG's dying wish (not to be replaced before a new president is appointed). Worst asshole I've ever seen. Trump has no conscience, but that guy is somehow even worse.
Now... Will democrats, IF they get into power, expand the court ? Going to 11 would not even be enough since it would still be 6-5.
I'd probably agree with them to go up to eleven, to keep things "fair" and restore balance (Roberts being mostly fair these days), but anything past that, I would despise as a power grab on the same level I do to republicans currently.
I'd even argue that it would be beneficial for Trump politically to NOT nominate another candidate before the election, to give an appearance of fairness that could bring him voters, and "force" all conservatives to vote for him. It could win him the election (but at the same time also motivate democrats) Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Fuck fairness. Fuck balance. Republicans don't care about being fair or stuff being balanced. They care about winning, and only about that. They have zero principles. I have long gone by "what would Darth Vader do" to try to predict republican actions, and it is surprisingly effective. If there is an evil reaction possible to any stimulus, republicans will choose that without fail. It is time that non-republicans stop trying to be fair to them. Appoint 10 new justices to the supreme court. Not supporting that. I do have a conscience, and I would not go lower than an opponent, because I want to be able to live in peace with myself (Cruz ? Graham ? Ahahahaahahahah. Graham.). Even if that means I get shafted sometimes, at least I don't have to hate myself. I despise hypocrisy, so I cannot contemplate doing the same thing I am accusing others of. (Besides, I'm just an observer, not actually an american) If a republican voter supports these kind of shenanigans for the sake of power, I'll just not associate with any single one of those who do, ever, for any reason. That's about all. There are no excuses. Are you a pacifist?
I have been an active duty soldier for 15+ years. A soldier's goal is peace. Sometimes though, we don't have a choice. But I would not support my country starting a war for the wrong reasons.
|
On September 19 2020 19:53 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 19:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 19 2020 19:40 Nouar wrote:On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:On September 19 2020 18:12 Nouar wrote:
Aaannnnnnnd all hell breaks loose. Of course, as predicted, most republicans (not even speaking about McConnell) are breaking their vows not to confirm another judge on an election year, because you know, Supreme Court is THE only way they have to counteract demographic changes in the country and keep up their power for two dozen years, even if they themselves are not reelected.
I can't believe the luck of Trump, getting to appoint 3 judges in a single term. Has that happened ? It is going to ultra-motivate republican voters to get out and vote, and overall coalesce Trump's support I believe since Supreme Court > all.
I am expecting a successful appointment to discourage a non-negligible part of the democratic electorate (I hope I'm wrong on that one) if it happens before election day.
I am sadly unsurprised by McConnell. Before her body was even cold, he was already trampling on RBG's dying wish (not to be replaced before a new president is appointed). Worst asshole I've ever seen. Trump has no conscience, but that guy is somehow even worse.
Now... Will democrats, IF they get into power, expand the court ? Going to 11 would not even be enough since it would still be 6-5.
I'd probably agree with them to go up to eleven, to keep things "fair" and restore balance (Roberts being mostly fair these days), but anything past that, I would despise as a power grab on the same level I do to republicans currently.
I'd even argue that it would be beneficial for Trump politically to NOT nominate another candidate before the election, to give an appearance of fairness that could bring him voters, and "force" all conservatives to vote for him. It could win him the election (but at the same time also motivate democrats) Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Fuck fairness. Fuck balance. Republicans don't care about being fair or stuff being balanced. They care about winning, and only about that. They have zero principles. I have long gone by "what would Darth Vader do" to try to predict republican actions, and it is surprisingly effective. If there is an evil reaction possible to any stimulus, republicans will choose that without fail. It is time that non-republicans stop trying to be fair to them. Appoint 10 new justices to the supreme court. Not supporting that. I do have a conscience, and I would not go lower than an opponent, because I want to be able to live in peace with myself (Cruz ? Graham ? Ahahahaahahahah. Graham.). Even if that means I get shafted sometimes, at least I don't have to hate myself. I despise hypocrisy, so I cannot contemplate doing the same thing I am accusing others of. (Besides, I'm just an observer, not actually an american) If a republican voter supports these kind of shenanigans for the sake of power, I'll just not associate with any single one of those who do, ever, for any reason. That's about all. There are no excuses. Are you a pacifist? I have been an active duty soldier for 15+ years. A soldier's goal is peace. Sometimes though, we don't have a choice. But I would not support my country starting a war for the wrong reasons.
Probably have some explaining to do about the Sahel.
I expect people to berate this position (like they do voting one's conscience) for being naively self-righteous.
Simberto: It is simply beyond my understanding why a party as evil as the republicans have any power whatsoever in what claims to be a first-world country.
You have to meet more US citizens.
|
On September 19 2020 20:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 19:53 Nouar wrote:On September 19 2020 19:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 19 2020 19:40 Nouar wrote:On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:On September 19 2020 18:12 Nouar wrote:
Aaannnnnnnd all hell breaks loose. Of course, as predicted, most republicans (not even speaking about McConnell) are breaking their vows not to confirm another judge on an election year, because you know, Supreme Court is THE only way they have to counteract demographic changes in the country and keep up their power for two dozen years, even if they themselves are not reelected.
I can't believe the luck of Trump, getting to appoint 3 judges in a single term. Has that happened ? It is going to ultra-motivate republican voters to get out and vote, and overall coalesce Trump's support I believe since Supreme Court > all.
I am expecting a successful appointment to discourage a non-negligible part of the democratic electorate (I hope I'm wrong on that one) if it happens before election day.
I am sadly unsurprised by McConnell. Before her body was even cold, he was already trampling on RBG's dying wish (not to be replaced before a new president is appointed). Worst asshole I've ever seen. Trump has no conscience, but that guy is somehow even worse.
Now... Will democrats, IF they get into power, expand the court ? Going to 11 would not even be enough since it would still be 6-5.
I'd probably agree with them to go up to eleven, to keep things "fair" and restore balance (Roberts being mostly fair these days), but anything past that, I would despise as a power grab on the same level I do to republicans currently.
I'd even argue that it would be beneficial for Trump politically to NOT nominate another candidate before the election, to give an appearance of fairness that could bring him voters, and "force" all conservatives to vote for him. It could win him the election (but at the same time also motivate democrats) Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Fuck fairness. Fuck balance. Republicans don't care about being fair or stuff being balanced. They care about winning, and only about that. They have zero principles. I have long gone by "what would Darth Vader do" to try to predict republican actions, and it is surprisingly effective. If there is an evil reaction possible to any stimulus, republicans will choose that without fail. It is time that non-republicans stop trying to be fair to them. Appoint 10 new justices to the supreme court. Not supporting that. I do have a conscience, and I would not go lower than an opponent, because I want to be able to live in peace with myself (Cruz ? Graham ? Ahahahaahahahah. Graham.). Even if that means I get shafted sometimes, at least I don't have to hate myself. I despise hypocrisy, so I cannot contemplate doing the same thing I am accusing others of. (Besides, I'm just an observer, not actually an american) If a republican voter supports these kind of shenanigans for the sake of power, I'll just not associate with any single one of those who do, ever, for any reason. That's about all. There are no excuses. Are you a pacifist? I have been an active duty soldier for 15+ years. A soldier's goal is peace. Sometimes though, we don't have a choice. But I would not support my country starting a war for the wrong reasons. Probably have some explaining to do about the Sahel. I expect people to berate this position (like they do voting one's conscience) for being naively self-righteous. Simberto: Show nested quote + It is simply beyond my understanding why a party as evil as the republicans have any power whatsoever in what claims to be a first-world country.
You have to meet more US citizens.
You mean, like, the part about supporting the countries we have defense agreements with and that asked for our help (Sabre/Serval/Barkhane) ? Or the part about rooting terrorists that are killing the local population and want to impose sharia in a separatist state ? Or the part about training the local army in hope for it to be able to defend their country by themselves instead of rolling over and defecting when faced with attacks ?
I'll add one little thing so that you understand the main difference in how our army does things compared to say, the american one :
When we have a base somewhere (Ivory Coast for example), it is integrated into the local area, we have a lot of local workers and suppliers, we use facilities from the area and we go outside as much as we can to support the local economy and gain the approval of the people (of course, there are always some issues about drunk soldiers, won't deny that...). That opens us up with more risks of being attacked, but that's the price to pay to keep good relations with the people there and gain trust and informants.
An american base is a contested area is usually a full-on bunker with extremely heavy security, no or very few local workers and supplies coming from america (and endless fire pits burning inside the base poisoning the soldiers).
While I was in Ivory Coast, one of the soldiers there got a citation for "while being on checkpoint duty at the entrance of a base in Kandahar in 2012 (Afghanistan), faced with two pick-ups full of talibans with AK-47 and RPGs rushing towards the base, set himself in front of the cars, held his ground without appearing too threatening, negotiated with the assaillants, and managed to get them to back away peacefully without firing a single shot". This guy had balls of steel.
What do you think would have happened in front of a US Army base ?
|
On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:
Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years.
Julius Caesar did pretty much the same thing towards the very end of the Roman Republic.Expanded the senate (to 900) in AD 47, three years before he was announced dictator for life.Doing what you suggest would end in civil war.Personally i think conservatives would end up on top, they have all the guns and live in rural areas.Depends who the military backs i suppose and if they can even continue to be paid when the fiat currency collapses.
Back to the current situation I'd advise democrats not to protest/riot too vehemently toward the upcoming senate vote announced by McConnell.It really can turn off more moderate and swing voters.
|
On September 19 2020 20:17 Nouar wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 20:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 19 2020 19:53 Nouar wrote:On September 19 2020 19:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 19 2020 19:40 Nouar wrote:On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:On September 19 2020 18:12 Nouar wrote:
Aaannnnnnnd all hell breaks loose. Of course, as predicted, most republicans (not even speaking about McConnell) are breaking their vows not to confirm another judge on an election year, because you know, Supreme Court is THE only way they have to counteract demographic changes in the country and keep up their power for two dozen years, even if they themselves are not reelected.
I can't believe the luck of Trump, getting to appoint 3 judges in a single term. Has that happened ? It is going to ultra-motivate republican voters to get out and vote, and overall coalesce Trump's support I believe since Supreme Court > all.
I am expecting a successful appointment to discourage a non-negligible part of the democratic electorate (I hope I'm wrong on that one) if it happens before election day.
I am sadly unsurprised by McConnell. Before her body was even cold, he was already trampling on RBG's dying wish (not to be replaced before a new president is appointed). Worst asshole I've ever seen. Trump has no conscience, but that guy is somehow even worse.
Now... Will democrats, IF they get into power, expand the court ? Going to 11 would not even be enough since it would still be 6-5.
I'd probably agree with them to go up to eleven, to keep things "fair" and restore balance (Roberts being mostly fair these days), but anything past that, I would despise as a power grab on the same level I do to republicans currently.
I'd even argue that it would be beneficial for Trump politically to NOT nominate another candidate before the election, to give an appearance of fairness that could bring him voters, and "force" all conservatives to vote for him. It could win him the election (but at the same time also motivate democrats) Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Fuck fairness. Fuck balance. Republicans don't care about being fair or stuff being balanced. They care about winning, and only about that. They have zero principles. I have long gone by "what would Darth Vader do" to try to predict republican actions, and it is surprisingly effective. If there is an evil reaction possible to any stimulus, republicans will choose that without fail. It is time that non-republicans stop trying to be fair to them. Appoint 10 new justices to the supreme court. Not supporting that. I do have a conscience, and I would not go lower than an opponent, because I want to be able to live in peace with myself (Cruz ? Graham ? Ahahahaahahahah. Graham.). Even if that means I get shafted sometimes, at least I don't have to hate myself. I despise hypocrisy, so I cannot contemplate doing the same thing I am accusing others of. (Besides, I'm just an observer, not actually an american) If a republican voter supports these kind of shenanigans for the sake of power, I'll just not associate with any single one of those who do, ever, for any reason. That's about all. There are no excuses. Are you a pacifist? I have been an active duty soldier for 15+ years. A soldier's goal is peace. Sometimes though, we don't have a choice. But I would not support my country starting a war for the wrong reasons. Probably have some explaining to do about the Sahel. I expect people to berate this position (like they do voting one's conscience) for being naively self-righteous. Simberto: It is simply beyond my understanding why a party as evil as the republicans have any power whatsoever in what claims to be a first-world country.
You have to meet more US citizens. You mean, like, the part about supporting the countries we have defense agreements with and that asked for our help (Sabre/Serval/Barkhane) ? Or the part about rooting terrorists that are killing the local population and want to impose sharia in a separatist state ? Or the part about training the local army in hope for it to be able to defend their country by themselves instead of rolling over and defecting when faced with attacks ?
I suppose when the French government tell people that it's easier to buy than when the US says the same stuff to justify its neoimperialist rent seeking. Beyond that I guess it's for the euro thread.
|
On September 19 2020 20:22 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:
Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Julius Caesar did pretty much the same thing towards the very end of the Roman Republic.Expanded the senate (to 900) in AD 47, three years before he was announced dictator for life.Doing what you suggest would end in civil war.Personally i think conservatives would end up on top, they have all the guns and live in rural areas.Depends who the military backs i suppose and if they can even continue to be paid when the fiat currency collapses. Back to the current situation I'd advise democrats not to protest/riot too vehemently toward the upcoming senate vote announced by McConnell.It really can turn off more moderate and swing voters.
It is easy to advise caution if everything is going as you want.
Sadly, the sane part of the country will have to deal with the fallout of the republicans insanity for a long time.
|
On September 19 2020 20:22 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:
Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Julius Caesar did pretty much the same thing towards the very end of the Roman Republic.Expanded the senate (to 900) in AD 47, three years before he was announced dictator for life.Doing what you suggest would end in civil war.Personally i think conservatives would end up on top, they have all the guns and live in rural areas.Depends who the military backs i suppose and if they can even continue to be paid when the fiat currency collapses. Back to the current situation I'd advise democrats not to protest/riot too vehemently toward the upcoming senate vote announced by McConnell.It really can turn off more moderate and swing voters. so what your telling us is that when Republicans do it (deny Obama appointing a new SCJ) the Democrats should accept it. And when the Democrats do it, you will threaten civil war...
sigh, this is why playing by the rules with Republicans doesn't work. Because they don't care about hypocrisy and will freely ignore rules if it suits them and then complain when others do the same.
|
On September 19 2020 20:22 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:
Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Julius Caesar did pretty much the same thing towards the very end of the Roman Republic.Expanded the senate (to 900) in AD 47, three years before he was announced dictator for life.Doing what you suggest would end in civil war.Personally i think conservatives would end up on top, they have all the guns and live in rural areas.Depends who the military backs i suppose and if they can even continue to be paid when the fiat currency collapses. Back to the current situation I'd advise democrats not to protest/riot too vehemently toward the upcoming senate vote announced by McConnell.It really can turn off more moderate and swing voters.
why would moderate and swing voters be turned off by democrat's pointing out obvious hypocrisy?
edit: Also, I wonder why they can't just make like 10-15 year term on a supreme court nominee so they won't have to worry about re-election/political pressure. Age should not be such an important factor when picking a supreme court justice.
|
On September 19 2020 20:27 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 20:17 Nouar wrote:On September 19 2020 20:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 19 2020 19:53 Nouar wrote:On September 19 2020 19:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 19 2020 19:40 Nouar wrote:On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:On September 19 2020 18:12 Nouar wrote:
Aaannnnnnnd all hell breaks loose. Of course, as predicted, most republicans (not even speaking about McConnell) are breaking their vows not to confirm another judge on an election year, because you know, Supreme Court is THE only way they have to counteract demographic changes in the country and keep up their power for two dozen years, even if they themselves are not reelected.
I can't believe the luck of Trump, getting to appoint 3 judges in a single term. Has that happened ? It is going to ultra-motivate republican voters to get out and vote, and overall coalesce Trump's support I believe since Supreme Court > all.
I am expecting a successful appointment to discourage a non-negligible part of the democratic electorate (I hope I'm wrong on that one) if it happens before election day.
I am sadly unsurprised by McConnell. Before her body was even cold, he was already trampling on RBG's dying wish (not to be replaced before a new president is appointed). Worst asshole I've ever seen. Trump has no conscience, but that guy is somehow even worse.
Now... Will democrats, IF they get into power, expand the court ? Going to 11 would not even be enough since it would still be 6-5.
I'd probably agree with them to go up to eleven, to keep things "fair" and restore balance (Roberts being mostly fair these days), but anything past that, I would despise as a power grab on the same level I do to republicans currently.
I'd even argue that it would be beneficial for Trump politically to NOT nominate another candidate before the election, to give an appearance of fairness that could bring him voters, and "force" all conservatives to vote for him. It could win him the election (but at the same time also motivate democrats) Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Fuck fairness. Fuck balance. Republicans don't care about being fair or stuff being balanced. They care about winning, and only about that. They have zero principles. I have long gone by "what would Darth Vader do" to try to predict republican actions, and it is surprisingly effective. If there is an evil reaction possible to any stimulus, republicans will choose that without fail. It is time that non-republicans stop trying to be fair to them. Appoint 10 new justices to the supreme court. Not supporting that. I do have a conscience, and I would not go lower than an opponent, because I want to be able to live in peace with myself (Cruz ? Graham ? Ahahahaahahahah. Graham.). Even if that means I get shafted sometimes, at least I don't have to hate myself. I despise hypocrisy, so I cannot contemplate doing the same thing I am accusing others of. (Besides, I'm just an observer, not actually an american) If a republican voter supports these kind of shenanigans for the sake of power, I'll just not associate with any single one of those who do, ever, for any reason. That's about all. There are no excuses. Are you a pacifist? I have been an active duty soldier for 15+ years. A soldier's goal is peace. Sometimes though, we don't have a choice. But I would not support my country starting a war for the wrong reasons. Probably have some explaining to do about the Sahel. I expect people to berate this position (like they do voting one's conscience) for being naively self-righteous. Simberto: It is simply beyond my understanding why a party as evil as the republicans have any power whatsoever in what claims to be a first-world country.
You have to meet more US citizens. You mean, like, the part about supporting the countries we have defense agreements with and that asked for our help (Sabre/Serval/Barkhane) ? Or the part about rooting terrorists that are killing the local population and want to impose sharia in a separatist state ? Or the part about training the local army in hope for it to be able to defend their country by themselves instead of rolling over and defecting when faced with attacks ? I suppose when the French government tell people that it's easier to buy than when the US says the same stuff to justify its neoimperialist rent seeking. Beyond that I guess it's for the euro thread.
Half of Mali was taken over and Mali officially sent a help request to the UN and specifically France.
But hey, indeed it's not due for this thread. You should research a little bit though. We had some questionable interventions in the past, but definitely not that one.
|
On September 19 2020 21:01 Anc13nt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2020 20:22 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On September 19 2020 18:43 Simberto wrote:
Fuck no. Expand the court to 15 so the trump-appointed assholes have no power anymore, then use that court to change the way it works, because it is absurdly stupid. It is absurd that being lucky enough to be in power when a bunch of justices die means you are in power for the next 30 years. Julius Caesar did pretty much the same thing towards the very end of the Roman Republic.Expanded the senate (to 900) in AD 47, three years before he was announced dictator for life.Doing what you suggest would end in civil war.Personally i think conservatives would end up on top, they have all the guns and live in rural areas.Depends who the military backs i suppose and if they can even continue to be paid when the fiat currency collapses. Back to the current situation I'd advise democrats not to protest/riot too vehemently toward the upcoming senate vote announced by McConnell.It really can turn off more moderate and swing voters. why would moderate and swing voters be turned off by democrat's pointing out obvious hypocrisy? edit: Also, I wonder why they can't just make like 10-15 year term on a supreme court nominee so they won't have to worry about re-election/political pressure. Age should not be such an important factor when picking a supreme court justice.
In Germany, supreme court justices serve for 12 years, and need a 2/3 majority to be appointed half get appointed by our parliament, half by our senate-equivalent (which is a lot less stupid). It makes for a very broadly accepted and well-respected court.
That obviously wouldn't work in the US due to the shitty two-party FPTP system, the death of any bipartisanship thanks to the republicans, and republicans would simply block any democrat nominee forever.
|
Waking up to see 70 new posts in this thread was a big surprise. I was worried they're all about whose sexual misconduct allegations are worse.
How likely it is Trump decides to play statesman and declare he's not going to confirm a judge before the election? If he delivered that message correctly, it could be more beneficial to him than rushing a confirmation. "Look at me, I can follow the rules even if they are bad for me! Just remember to vote for me or the RADICAL LEFT will have one more of their biased judges in the SC!"
|
How likely it is Trump decides to play statesman and declare he's not going to confirm a judge before the election?
Are you serious? It is Trump we are talking about here. I'd place the odds of that happening at 1% or less. Trump never acts like a statesman, or just like a decent human being. I don't think he is capable of that.
|
Why would he care about what happens to the supreme court if he doesn't get reelected? If pretending to be a statesman will seem like a more optimal move in regard to the election, he'll do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
