Viper1j
Diamond Member
- Jul 31, 2018
- 4,406
- 4,082
- 136
And then he'll go home, and bang his mother, or sister, or both.
This brings me to something I found disturbing. I saw a news story on TV about Trump supporters' demonstration in my region. I live in Alameda County, which is adjacent San Francisco County, CA. It was essentially apparently scores of trucks in the more rural and suburban portions of the county; as far as I could tell, just trucks with signs, shouting people and traversing the streets, maybe highways, probably blaring horns, hubbub, etc. Reporter(s) interviews a couple people.
This seems to me to kind of sum up Trump support. The stereotype would be rednecks, and redneck stereotype is pickup truck drivers. Am I wrong? I mean, WTF. Run the streets, contribute air pollution, noise pollution and AFAIK nothing in terms of meaningful information, just the fact that they are in Trump's camp, a parade of stereotypical Trump supporters. Word was they plan further such action(s). If they came to my town, Berkeley, and tried driving our streets with that spectacle there would almost certainly be violence, but I doubt they'd dare.
That is a disconcerting idea, Barr on the SC. That would cap off a 2020 from Hell.Goddamn you. Don't say stuff like this.
Now where's my holy water.....?
A heady, nuanced discussion of SCOTUS calculus at this point:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Passes Away
ElectoralVote
Track the election with a red/blue map of the US updated daily using the latest state polls.www.electoral-vote.com
Correct. But, the term "shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour." has been interpreted to mean that they cannot be removed other than for bad behaviour (impeachment) or voluntary retirement. There is nothing there that indicates that there could be term limits, so it does appear out of the hands of the legislature.I checked a few sources. The constitution does not specify "lifetime appointments"
Yup they are overcompensating for something. And why they support the bully in chief.This seems to me to kind of sum up Trump support. The stereotype would be rednecks, and redneck stereotype is pickup truck drivers. Am I wrong? I mean, WTF. Run the streets, contribute air pollution, noise pollution and AFAIK nothing in terms of meaningful information, just the fact that they are in
This seems to me to kind of sum up Trump support. The stereotype would be rednecks, and redneck stereotype is pickup truck drivers. Am I wrong? I mean, WTF. Run the streets, contribute air pollution, noise pollution and AFAIK nothing in terms of meaningful information, just the fact that they are in Trump's camp, a parade of stereotypical Trump supporters. Word was they plan further such action(s). If they came to my town, Berkeley, and tried driving our streets with that spectacle there would almost certainly be violence, but I doubt they'd dare.
Yup, here in FL it's ALWAYS a giant truck, usually on huge tires with a confederate flag bolted to the bed. The low-IQTry living in the Deep South (Mississippi) and being surrounded by them. Most of them are uneducated morons who don't give a damn about anything except their guns and confederate statues. The GOP has done an excellent job instilling fear in them that a vote for any non-right wing president will lead all of their guns being taken away.
That's close to the truth.
And now it's a different situation. Now it's the republican's looking to get another justice nominated. Why is that so hard to understand? They will most likely pull it off, then Joe will expand the court to eleven members and appoint two new justices. When the republican's are back in power they'll add enough body's to flip it the other way.
Yup, here in FL it's ALWAYS a giant truck, usually on huge tires with a confederate flag bolted to the bed. The low-IQ
gang loves Trump, dumb-fucks gotta vote too 'ya know!.
If the Democrats win the senate Biden should appoint 5 new justices, end the filibuster, and admit Puerto Rico, South DC, and North DC as new states in the union in time for the 2022 midterms. Or maybe even carve DC into 4 states.
I don't think you can just split existing states so easily or consolidating them either.The people have to consent. Then you have to have new political and governing bodies arise not to mention all the administrative tasks get duplicated. It'd be a massive expense for the people involved (in fact its crazy enough that we have 50 states because we could cut down on serious administrative overhead by slimming to like 10 states or something).I was thinking splitting California in 2, consolidating Wyoming and Montana into one, and consolidating both Dakotas into 1.
The bisons don't vote, they don't need that many senators
In fact its crazy enough that we have 50 states because we could cut down on serious administrative overhead by slimming to like 10 states or something.
I don't think you can just split existing states so easily or consolidating them either.The people have to consent. Then you have to have new political and governing bodies arise not to mention all the administrative tasks get duplicated. It'd be a massive expense for the people involved (in fact its crazy enough that we have 50 states because we could cut down on serious administrative overhead by slimming to like 10 states or something).
Realistically speaking, you'd have an easier time making states by just adding DC and current US territories: guam, puerto rico, island of samoa all vote blue generally speaking. You could also do the virgin islands and the north mariana islands.
That would be the ultimate F-U to the republican party for their years of BS.
Uh, we already have some Putin, so maybe we're just defending the status quo, then?I mean, sure - I guess we can talk about that... But as far as doing away with term limits just sounds like a recipe for some Putin.
I wonder if Scotus justices ever vote against what they really believe in order to get more famous. So they can be more remembered in history. Not so much for a book or movie deal after they retire although that may be a secondary reason.
I'm glad that one or two conservative justices voted against Trump's policies in a couple rulings in the last year or two. I hope that's the way they really thought and that they didn't vote against their beliefs in an attempt to get more publicity. Would be nice if the replacement justice for RBG did that a few times. Sorry if it sounds like a conspiracy theory.
Can't even park correctly either...
I mean, sure - I guess we can talk about that... But as far as doing away with term limits just sounds like a recipe for some Putin.
Trump is on Fox and Friends this morning musing that this confirmation fight helps Gardner in CO and spending time attacking Collins and Murkowski.
And this is just nuts