Oh shit.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/18/politics ... index.html
RBG has died.
RBG has died.
“Are you crazy?! You think I’m going to go for seven years and try to get there? You enjoy the 2030 draft picks that we have holding? I want to try to see the game today.” — Ish 3/13/25
Re: RBG has died.
Trump is so broken up about it he has ordered all champagne glasses half filled for the first round.
In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.
Re: RBG has died.
And McConnell is on it like flies on shit.
Synchronicity and all that jazz, man.
"Cool is getting us blown out!"
-Shaheen Holloway
"Cool is getting us blown out!"
-Shaheen Holloway
Re: RBG has died.
We are so fucked. Horrible news.
Re: RBG has died.
Synchronicity and all that jazz, man.
"Cool is getting us blown out!"
-Shaheen Holloway
"Cool is getting us blown out!"
-Shaheen Holloway
Re: RBG has died.
I would sign the petition but, that would mean I would get 20 new political emails a day asking for money.
In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.
Re: RBG has died.
You can easily unsubscribe and filter them.
Synchronicity and all that jazz, man.
"Cool is getting us blown out!"
-Shaheen Holloway
"Cool is getting us blown out!"
-Shaheen Holloway
Re: RBG has died.
I don't think there is much we can do to stop Trump and the GOP from filling the seat. The real scare is if they try to contest the election and it goes to the Supreme Court, which will now be packed with Trump appointees. We could be looking at a stolen election.
If that happens, it's time to either leave the country or take to the streets. I think a rough time may be ahead.
If that happens, it's time to either leave the country or take to the streets. I think a rough time may be ahead.
Re: RBG has died.
Instead of going to SCOTUS, I think it is more likely to have election night controversy (not counting mail-in/absentee ballot and Trump trying to force a winner to be called the same night), and then neither party ends up with a clear 270 delegates. At that point, it goes to the House to pick the president. And you would think that would be OK, but the entire house doesn't vote. You get one vote per state. So that vote would go to Trump. Then the Senate (Senate after the election, not today's) would pick the VP. How crazy would that be?Mori Chu wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:25 amI don't think there is much we can do to stop Trump and the GOP from filling the seat. The real scare is if they try to contest the election and it goes to the Supreme Court, which will now be packed with Trump appointees. We could be looking at a stolen election.
If that happens, it's time to either leave the country or take to the streets. I think a rough time may be ahead.
Re: RBG has died.
I donated to Tulsi and got put on two mailing lists that I eventually got off of.
I just got another letter from Trump asking for money. They have my long form name written out too. They must have gotten my name off of something official and put me on the spam list.
I firmly believe the real goal of all these mailers, surveys, polls and petitions is at the end of every single one of them. Make your check out to....
I will vote and hopefully my vote will be counted. Other than that I prefer to remain anonymous to as many people on the web as possible and avoid as many scams as I can. A petition isn’t going to stop Trump from making a SC pick and it won’t bother Mitch McConnell one tiny little bit either.
In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.
Re: RBG has died.
Sure looks like the GOP is going to rush Amy Coney Barrett through to confirmation before the election. Blech. Roe v Wade is a goner, as is ObamaCare.
How will this affect the election? Will Republican voters turn out in appreciation and celebration of Trump's success appointing justices? Will angry Dems rush to the polls to vote him out? Feels like turnout was already going to be sky-high, and now only more so.
How will this affect the election? Will Republican voters turn out in appreciation and celebration of Trump's success appointing justices? Will angry Dems rush to the polls to vote him out? Feels like turnout was already going to be sky-high, and now only more so.
Re: RBG has died.
Turn out may be sky high, but I am wondering if counted votes will be similar.Mori Chu wrote: ↑Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:37 amSure looks like the GOP is going to rush Amy Coney Barrett through to confirmation before the election. Blech. Roe v Wade is a goner, as is ObamaCare.
How will this affect the election? Will Republican voters turn out in appreciation and celebration of Trump's success appointing justices? Will angry Dems rush to the polls to vote him out? Feels like turnout was already going to be sky-high, and now only more so.
Re: RBG has died.
Anybody watching these Amy Coney Barrett hearings? They're mostly ho-hum in my opinion. It's a foregone conclusion that she'll be confirmed, basically along a party-line vote. And no matter what they ask her, she basically just refuses to answer. And why shouldn't she? What's the point of even having these hearings? What a sham our processes of government have become. She could confess to drinking baby blood and they'd still confirm her.
Re: RBG has died.
I’m curious why Supreme Court justices don’t have to get some bipartisan support. Seems like requiring like a 60/100 vote to confirm would prevent problems like this and keep most judges fairly moderate and impartial.
Re: RBG has died.
There used to be a Supreme Court filibuster where the minority party could effectively block a SCOTUS nominee if they could get 40+ senators to agree to do so. Mitch McConnell removed that filibuster so now if you can get 50 votes for a justice, they're in.
I loathe McConnell, but I actually don't think filibusters are a good way to do things. Bipartisanship is ideal and a good thing, but the current Republican party has decided to go all-in on obstructing everything the Democrats try to do. They quite simply won't vote for anything at all that the Dems propose, whether it's a bill or a judicial appointment. In many cases they won't even permit there to be a vote in the first place, since McConnell can deny things from being sent to a vote in the Senate. Having the minority party able to block all governmental progress like this is really bad and makes it worth getting rid of all filibusters IMO.
Longer-term we need to figure out how to incentivize compromise and bipartisanship; right now there's no perceived benefit to doing so and therefore nobody does it.
Re: RBG has died.
This (extremely long) video from Fox News should be required viewing for any citizen in this country.
-
Flagrant Fowl
- Posts: 14533
- Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 8:04 am
- Location: Haeundae, Busan, South Korea
Re: RBG has died.
Love the FOX clickbait "ASKS NO QUESTIONS".
As far as I could tell, if you listen to the man, he's asking all the right questions.
As far as I could tell, if you listen to the man, he's asking all the right questions.
Send me a PM if you're interested in joining the phx-suns.net fantasy basketball league.
Re: RBG has died.
I have it saved in a tab to watch after work.
Synchronicity and all that jazz, man.
"Cool is getting us blown out!"
-Shaheen Holloway
"Cool is getting us blown out!"
-Shaheen Holloway
Re: RBG has died.
It's a nice speech about corruption and money in politics. My main quibble with it is that it is out of place for a Supreme Court justice nomination hearing. I feel like a lot of these Congresscritters use their allotted speaking time to just rant and rave about things they want to get a message out about rather than the actual topic at hand. Sen. Whitehouse's speech is great in itself, but shouldn't he be using his valuable time to ask Barrett questions or directly talk about her judicial record, rather than just seizing the large national audience to rail against the broader issue of money in politics?
Re: RBG has died.
Have you seen her answer any democratic questions? I got much more out of his comments than I have from all of the other senators' questions combined. I already knew about The Federalist Society, but didn't know about their leader, or the associated masking groups that allow dark money into judicial nominees. The 82-0 talk was also not something I had heard before. All of those go directly to suitability of SCOTUS members.Mori Chu wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:27 amIt's a nice speech about corruption and money in politics. My main quibble with it is that it is out of place for a Supreme Court justice nomination hearing. I feel like a lot of these Congresscritters use their allotted speaking time to just rant and rave about things they want to get a message out about rather than the actual topic at hand. Sen. Whitehouse's speech is great in itself, but shouldn't he be using his valuable time to ask Barrett questions or directly talk about her judicial record, rather than just seizing the large national audience to rail against the broader issue of money in politics?