Sign up with Google
Vorastra
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2013
- Messages
- 14,117
They literally keep voting for him. That must mean something.
-
Ask a question and get free supportUnlock new privileges and see hidden discussionsWin prizes and earn reputation
-
Question of the day ~ How often do you braai?
-
Afristay giveaway.Win a 2-night stay for two people at an establishment of your choice with R1,000 in spending money. Enter here.
US Election 2020 - Pt 3
- Thread starter bwana
- Start date
- Status
TheMightyQuinn
Not amused...
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 31,961
Yep, there has to be better Republican candidates for sure.
Fox host tells South Carolina voters not to vote for Lindsey Graham
"I don't know why anyone in the great state of South Carolina would ever vote for Lindsey Graham," Lou Dobbs sayswww.salon.com
rietrot
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2016
- Messages
- 33,193
TheMightyQuinn
Not amused...
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 31,961
The Left would rather let hundreds of thousands of people lose their lively hoods, than accept help from the Right.
A shameful example of cutting your nose to spite your face...
surface
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2006
- Messages
- 26,594
Remember we consider CNN as fake news.
TheMightyQuinn
Not amused...
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 31,961
Ag shem....
cerebus
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2007
- Messages
- 49,114
There's plenty of precedent for expanding or shrinking the court.
Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?
The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.
www.history.com
rietrot
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2016
- Messages
- 33,193
There's plenty of precedent for expanding or shrinking the court.
Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?
The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.
Yeah it's only been 9 since 1869. Not that long.
If the Democrats get a turn again why not shrink it again why expand?
TheMightyQuinn
Not amused...
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 31,961
Fox host tells South Carolina voters not to vote for Lindsey Graham
"I don't know why anyone in the great state of South Carolina would ever vote for Lindsey Graham," Lou Dobbs says
Isn't Fox ALSO fake news?
TheMightyQuinn
Not amused...
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 31,961
There's plenty of precedent for expanding or shrinking the court.
Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?
The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.
Especially now during these Democratic salty times.............
cerebus
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2007
- Messages
- 49,114
I mean no, this is just false
During a campaign appearance, McConnell was asked whether he believed that a compromise on a deal between $1.8 trillion and $2.2 trillion was possible.
"I don't think so," he said, adding, "That's where the administration's willing to go.
"My members think what we laid out — a half a trillion dollars, highly targeted — is the best way to go. So that's what I'm going to put on the floor."
So let’s cut through all that and focus on this unfortunate reality:
Mitch McConnell will do all he possibly can to kill any big stimulus bill before the election. And he’ll probably succeed.
If President Trump wins reelection on Nov. 3, there will probably be a sizable stimulus passed shortly after, with the Senate majority leader’s support.
If Joe Biden wins and Republicans hold the Senate, McConnell will do all he can to strangle the Biden presidency by preventing any big stimulus from passing, no matter how bad the economic misery from the recession gets.
If Biden wins and Democrats take the Senate, we’ll get a big stimulus in the new year.
surface
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2006
- Messages
- 26,594
Have you checked yourself for TDS ?Isn't Fox ALSO fake news?
Kieppie
Executive Member
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2013
- Messages
- 9,230
That's nonsense.I mean no, this is just false
During a campaign appearance, McConnell was asked whether he believed that a compromise on a deal between $1.8 trillion and $2.2 trillion was possible.
"I don't think so," he said, adding, "That's where the administration's willing to go.
"My members think what we laid out — a half a trillion dollars, highly targeted — is the best way to go. So that's what I'm going to put on the floor."
So let’s cut through all that and focus on this unfortunate reality:
Mitch McConnell will do all he possibly can to kill any big stimulus bill before the election. And he’ll probably succeed.
If President Trump wins reelection on Nov. 3, there will probably be a sizable stimulus passed shortly after, with the Senate majority leader’s support.
If Joe Biden wins and Republicans hold the Senate, McConnell will do all he can to strangle the Biden presidency by preventing any big stimulus from passing, no matter how bad the economic misery from the recession gets.
If Biden wins and Democrats take the Senate, we’ll get a big stimulus in the new year.
Both sides are putting crap inside their bills which the other side then use to shoot it down. So far however it is more the Democrats side that have shot down proposed bills. They even shot down a smaller one from the more junior members in their own party.
They refused to accept a Republican bill which had almost all the things they asked for and called it unworkable. Seems that they want the perfect bill, for them, right from the onset. So far the Republicans have given much more ground and the Democrats have yet to budge. Using the public health as a bargaining chip while at the same time hoping it harms Trump's election. Dirty politics with meaningless peons, just like always.
The_Right_Honourable_Brit
High Tory
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Messages
- 41,689
Can you explain what the Republicans did that was *illegal* in appointing Barrett? Hypocrisy, maybe but that's not illegal.
In other news, the Supreme Court has ruled that Wisconsin can only count your mail in ballots if received by end of election day: https://t.co/dPMF5sS8WL?amp=1
NO LAZY DEMOCRATS' VOTES WILL BE COUNTED. You have had how many weeks to request an absentee ballot? Also two weeks of EARLY IN-PERSON voting + ED itself.
cerebus
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2007
- Messages
- 49,114
Did I say it was illegal? It's perfectly legal just like it would have been to appoint Garland. It would also be legal to expand the court to maintain partisan balance.
greg0205
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2010
- Messages
- 28,863
You'll find the argument for thirteen is centred on the fact that there are thirteen appellate courts... But using your snowflak-ery, 94 judges would make more sense than 100 'cos there are 94 judicial districts.
The_Right_Honourable_Brit
High Tory
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Messages
- 41,689
Thankfully Biden will not pack the courts. He's been in the politics game for far too long to know this ends (in a thumping Democrat defeat in the mid-terms). Moderate Republicans who vote for Biden are not voting for left-wing court-packing. Very likely new senators like Mark Kelly in Arizona, Sara Gideon in Maine, and Hickenlooper in Colorado are highly unlikely to vote for court-packing.
- Status