- 8,749
- 7,525
Aren't FOX news employees required as well? lol
***Official Political Discussion Thread***
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by rico x hood,
- Start date
Aren't FOX news employees required as well? lol
- 6,910
- 16,900
When James Carville has his bi-monthly rant about how “18 percent of the population pick 40 percent of the Senate, so we gotta live with it and cut out all this ‘woke’ nonsense,” my thinking is that that stat should be a call to arms. If not a literally call for armed Revolution, then, at the very least, the 18-40 split is certainly a call for some combination of voter mobilization with extra-electoral direct action to at least balance populations and electoral outcomes.
At some point, pointing out the rules of a rigged game is a form of support for said rigged game.
- 7,636
- 13,506
- 64,966
- 196,172
Like her or hate her.
Hillary tried to warn people
- 151,106
- 202,498
- 64,966
- 196,172
The energy Delk and the conservative judge loving crew give out every day...
Last edited:
- 8,749
- 7,525
My Republican friends have categorized Roe being reversed as fear mongering since I've been following politics (Bush) I remember having a conversation about this a couple years ago and being told how all of this overturn stuff will go away as soon as Trump was out of office, as if it's some talking point used to spur voter turnout by dems. Hope I don't have to go back and say I told you so, what reality are these people living in?
- 151,106
- 202,498
- 6,910
- 16,900
Unless a President Hillary Clinton got voting rights done, we’d still end up with a right wing court. Eventually, the GOP would get a trifecta and they’d see a 5-4 liberal Court and Mitch McConnell would abolish the filibuster and expand the court to 21 and let a Republican President pick 14 new Judges.
Beruseruku Desu
Supporter
- 12,597
- 26,506
Saw Biden's speech today..
He's not looking so good man. Seems like his health isn't well right now sadly.
He's not looking so good man. Seems like his health isn't well right now sadly.
- 64,966
- 196,172
Then the Dems can expand it with another 21, and the court loses legitimacy
Plus the filibuster is gone
So yeah, Hillary winning in 2016 would have been a much better outcome no matter what in regards to the court
Last edited:
- 6,910
- 16,900
After McConnell blocked Obama from filling that seat in 2016, the court packing was already underway. McConnell rushing to fill the open seat in 2020 was the bookend to this court packing.
Whether it’s 9 or 21, the court is obviously rigged and yet this current Democratic trifecta has no chance of undoing any of this. I doubt that McConnell adding judges would have motived enough centrists Democratic Senators to add yet more judges at a later date.
Look, it would have been better if Clinton beat Trump in 2016. My issue is with this discourse that the 2016 election is some profound hinge point in history. Before 2016, it was the case that the GOP was a minoritarian, norm breaking party and the Democratic Party is handicapped by too many members, who prize unilateral norm keeping, over social justice or even just stopping fascism.
Who knows, maybe a Hillary Clinton Presidency would change this decades’ long trajectory. But unless she could, her winning in 2016 changes very little in the long run.
- 64,966
- 196,172
Every election has consequences, and whenever the Dems lose one it has major consequences. Including 2016 same as 2014 and 2010 before them.
It is fair to admit that Clinton was dead right on some things that leftists were not
These "it doesn't really matter" take just seem dumb to me. It all matters, every time.
Last edited:
- 6,910
- 16,900
Elections have consequences in a very asymmetrical way. Dems get a trifecta and things get a little bit better, the GOP get a trifecta and it gets much worse. That dynamic has been in place before 2016 and it’s still in place right now and it’s hard to see a Hillary Clinton Presidency changing those dynamics.
Sure, if Democrats won every single election since 1982, things would be better but that’s not the case. It seems like the Democrats, who hold a trifecta right now, should do something with that power right now.
- 64,966
- 196,172
Ok man whatever
I'm not gonna go in circles about this
I'm not gonna go in circles about this
- 14,880
- 36,038
None of this is relevant.
You are comparing something whose primary function is to cause harm, to other things whose primary function is not to cause harm.
All the things in your list have regulations around them to minimize harm. Applying similar regulations to guns to achieve a reduction of harm would be the equivalent of making guns useless.
- 11,997
- 3,286
No matter what the primary function is, the impact is that cars cause more harm (deaths) than gun violence.
Like I said earlier, the only harm many licensed gun owners cause is to paper targets. And the vast majority of gun deaths are suicides.
There are already regulations around buying guns. There are more regulations around buying guns than there are around buying cars. And cars are more deadly in the US.
I support enhanced background checks for gun buying. And I think we should have more regulation for buying cars.
None of that would likely prevent the devastating shootings that spark these conversations. Or the devastating results of the car plowing into the crowd at the Wisconsin Holiday parade.
We need more of a focus on mental health, poverty, and education.
- 11,997
- 3,286
- 17,811
- 43,327
Not sure if posted but WHAT THE ****
- 14,880
- 36,038
They've been gaslighting you or they don't know what it is they support.
The most important belief of conservative ideology, regardless of the political context, is that there must be a hierarchy with someone at the top lording over the masses. It's an authoritarian ideology, and anyone who subscribes to it without understanding that is bound to be disappointed sooner or later.
- 151,106
- 202,498
- 151,106
- 202,498
- 151,106
- 202,498
sonoftony
Supporter
- 29,206
- 23,375
- 11,997
- 3,286
Roe is not going to be reversed. A lot of people don’t understand the Roe decision. It did not create an absolute right to abortion. Instead, it outlined when states could regulate or prohibit abortion. Based on Roe, states can regulate or prohibit abortion after viability.
This decision will likely just clarify what viability means. My guess is they come down around 20-24 weeks.
The idea that the Supreme Court is going to overturn Roe and women are going to be forced to give birth—no matter what—is what the kids call cap. It’s not happening.
When it doesn’t happen, folks in here will come up with some spin.
Similar threads
