Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by onejayhawk, Oct 22, 2015.
But in an election year, one lets the voters decide who that president will be, you see.
people just disagree with your worldview so they voted differently. elections have consequences. deal with it because youll be forced to one way or another.
not going to happen. no matter who is elected trumps nomination will be confirmed after the election before the next presidential term begins.
Basically I agree with you. Like it or not that's ho w it works in the USA.
If the Democrats capture the Senate, house and presidency however they can change the size of the supreme court, eliminate the filibuster etc.
No one is "holding out." There's nothing to hold out on. There hasn't been an appointment. McConnell is absolutely not going to bring any confirmation vote to the floor before the election. No GOP senator has said a single word about not having a confirmation vote in the lame duck session and ramming it to America on their way out. This is basically a done deal unless the election is such a catastrophy for the GOP that Senate Republicans looking ahead to 2022 or 2024 campaigns decide their individual futures hinge on convincing McConnell to just let it go.
i doubt that would make it through the courts
And that aint never gonna happen. They'll count on people to forget by then. There's a reason why Trump always promises he'll provide things in "two weeks." He knows people's attention span is less than that. Let alone 2-4 years!
Sorry thug, but actually I'm not getting "forced" into anything. My assets are out of country and I can be right behind them if the merry band of authoritarians suborn the process. My oath to defend the constitution is expired.
But none of this has anything to do with your continued insistence that the grotesque hypocrisy of the GOP position or their obvious disdain for the principles of the constitution is really gross.
I didn't say it was going to happen and of course it is far-fetched. It is merely what the democrats are hoping for.
What makes you so sure? Is there no sitting of congress until after the election? If that is the case, I stand corrected.
If this election goes as predicted there is a very brutal conflict about to break out in the GOP. It doesn't matter what voters think or remember, the battle for control of the GOP is going to be bloody, and the losers are done. Election day and the period right after as the votes are counted is when the battle lines will get laid down, because that's when the crystal balls are going to have some indication of which way it will go in the end. If it looks to be going against the Trumpists then his nominee will be put off and quietly disposed of.
Well, okay, I'll watch for that. I figure they'd unite for a SCJ. They care about that more than almost anything.
Especially since it won't be Trump's in any meaningful way; he just draws from a list drawn up by the Heritage Foundation.
There's a congress, but the senate is sitting on their hands. The two you called "hold outs" have stated "there shouldn't be a confirmation vote until after the election" because if there is a vote before the election it puts a stake through the heart of their possible re-election. McConnell knows that, and he is never going to make them deal with that kind of lose/lose vote before election day.
Some of their base does, for sure, but at the top control of the party is more important than anything....not almost anything, anything.
the gop base is more united than ever. in 2016 trump forced the republican party to become the party of the middle class. democrats are just too stupid to see the election for what it was. 2020 will be the election of the heartland vs the liberal coastal elites.
And smaller than ever. United by pathological hatred of "ebil lib'ruls" just has too narrow an appeal too compensate for the destruction the GOP inevitably rains down from every office they ever achieve.
i wish you well over the next 4 years. hopefully covid wont impede your travels.
ill be looking forward to trumps soctus pick. he just announced its going to be made next week. his top 3 - all excellent choices. cheers!
(bold is my emphasis)
I'm not so sure. It may help bolster support for Trump. The question is how it would affect undecided voters?
There are no undecided voters.
Some uninteresting generic nebulous emotional tale I'm sure. And sheesh, give us a break no one ever asks you that question.
Being an ex-right wing nationalist is something I'm ashamed of can't take back. It's not a spicy tidbit for me to add to arguments. Abandoning terrible ideas does not make your current opinions more deep or relevant. It's not a badge of honor.
So please spare us the transparent "ex-leftist" dodging act and just address what you currently believe.
A dwindling minority isn't really advantaged by being "united." The GOP has done an incredibly gross array of things to manage to hold onto their power despite their dwindling numbers, but the payoff is immanent. Using voter suppression and other mechanical trickery is great...until it isn't. But when you've been making up for a six...seven...eight point disadvantage in raw numbers via smoke and mirrors the day that you lose your grip and can't keep the smoke and mirrors in place you are through, because from there the contests shift towards fair and are more and more likely to be decided just by the numbers.
The GOP is rapidly approaching that day of reckoning, and that's when they find out about the tiger they have by the tail. Because when the "unity through hatred" loses effectiveness the hate will turn inward.
There are no undecided voters. The problem for Gardner in Colorado (et al) is that he has to appeal to traditional Republicans who are turned off by the stench of Trump and to the rabid Trumpists or he has no shot against Hickenlooper. It's not like Alabama where the Democrats are a small enough minority that he can afford to appeal to one group of Republicans whole heartedly and occasionally pander to the other, he has to appease both.
Separate names with a comma.