• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Interesting opinion piece, what do you think?

apdst said:
Clinton didn't get a majority of the vote. He put two justices on the court, Ginsberg being one of them.
Click to expand...

Please take a moment to think about that. Clinton was in a three way race, and DID get the most votes, unlike Trump who got 3 million less votes than his opponent. Ginsberg was confirmed 96-3, Breyer 87 - 9. Both confirmations were by Senators representing the great majority of the country. The two situations have ZERO in common.

Your "but Clinton" carries zero weight.
 
Renae said:
The popular vote doesn't and hasn't mattered for a reason in the election of Presidents. Damn, a Presidential Candidate making it clear "If you elect me, this is what I want to make happen." Damn that's crazy, and SCOTUS judges?

Oh and stop it with the Trump is terrible **** about SCOTUS.... how quickly you forget..

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/289643-clintons-court-shortlist-emerges
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/19/hillary-clinton-heres-what-i-want-in-the-supreme-court.html
Click to expand...

Obviously you miss my point that since this unpopular Justice was nominated by an unpopular president, and confirmed by unpopular Senators, there will most likely be a popular revolt about some decisions coming up.
The Supreme Court is not a tool to overcome the will of the people, and Trump pandered to his base by making a campaign promise to render it a partisan body.

Lest you forget, Merrick Garland was a MODERATE judge, with a long history of same, and Clinton was expected to rename him to the court. Even your listed "evidence" states that as fact.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Our vastly degraded SCOTUS has been a political body rather than a legal body for a long time, this corruption of the court was not the first place that Washington got ruined by corruption but it was the worst place (DOJ being the second worst).

Dont blame this all on Kav, or TRump, this has been decades in the making, and almost no one cared.
Click to expand...

Which SC decisions do you feel are examples of this political corruption?
 
JMR said:
Please take a moment to think about that. Clinton was in a three way race, and DID get the most votes, unlike Trump who got 3 million less votes than his opponent. Ginsberg was confirmed 96-3, Breyer 87 - 9. Both confirmations were by Senators representing the great majority of the country. The two situations have ZERO in common.

Your "but Clinton" carries zero weight.
Click to expand...

Clinton didn't a majority, nor "most of the votes".
 
apdst said:
Clinton didn't a majority, nor "most of the votes".
Click to expand...

Please read, don't misquote me. I said Clinton got The Most votes....not most of the votes. Does this game of yours usually work for you?
 
independentusa said:
I think most of the job growth started with Obama, over 80 months and has just kept in line with that growth. Not exactly "Trump's" economy. There have been fewer immigrants trying to get in for several years. And separating children from their parents and stopping people from asking for asylum against our laws may not be the American way of doing things. And according to our own intelligence agencies NK continues to build nukes and may have as many as 60 and already has the missiles to get them here. And the present trade treaty with Mexico and Canada was already hashed out under the Obama administration. I guess the only thing added was a milk deal. And the hostages, well one came back and died, what a few days later. And what did Trump do about that, he said he had a bromance with the NK dictator. Anything else you can mention. Like the tax cut that 80% went to the top 2%, and which will add trillions to our deficit. Oh yes, I remember, the GOP is the party that tells us how bad deficits are for the economy unless hey are creating them.
Click to expand...

I like how Trump is suddenly the beneficiary of Obama polices that failed to work for Obama for eight years. Yes, the market may have been on a surge before Trump but it certainly hasn't hesitated to continue under him. Job growth is greatly improved. We're finally starting to look at border security as a serious issue. Oh, and anyone can apply for asylum. They simply have to follow the rules rather than sneak in and then ask for it.

On NK, even if nothing happens in the end, the effort was made. So, how is that worse than doing nothing? We also got back 3 very much alive hostages from them after Otto Warmbier had died. We've gotten out of the weak and unverifiable Iran deal. We've made the allies start to carry their own weight for a change and stopped being doormats for every country we trade with. All in all, I think Trump has done a very credible job but the left will never admit to Trump having done anything right; not one thing.
 
Last edited:
JMR said:
Please read, don't misquote me. I said Clinton got The Most votes....not most of the votes. Does this game of yours usually work for you?
Click to expand...

My mistake. I'm glad we agree that Clinton didn't win the majority of the popular vote and was elected by the Electoral College.
 
apdst said:
My mistake. I'm glad we agree that Clinton didn't win the majority of the popular vote and was elected by the Electoral College.
Click to expand...

Yes we do. Clinton did win the popular vote and the electoral college, unlike Trump. Glad to agree.
 
JMR said:
Yes we do. Clinton did win the popular vote and the electoral college, unlike Trump. Glad to agree.
Click to expand...

No, Clinton didn't win the popular vote.
 
apdst said:
No, Clinton didn't win the popular vote.
Click to expand...

How dense do you want to be? Clinton had the MOST votes. He won the popular vote. Trump did not have the MOST votes. He lost the popular vote.

Clinton was the candidate with the MOST popular votes of all candidates. Trump was the candidate with the LEAST popular votes of the major candidates. I understand he beat the Green Party. That is very impressive...:roll:

Does this need a marching band and banners to get in your understanding?
 
JMR said:
How dense do you want to be? Clinton had the MOST votes. He won the popular vote. Trump did not have the MOST votes. He lost the popular vote.

Clinton was the candidate with the MOST popular votes of all candidates. Trump was the candidate with the LEAST popular votes of the major candidates. I understand he beat the Green Party. That is very impressive...:roll:

Does this need a marching band and banners to get in your understanding?
Click to expand...

He didn't win a majority. He won a plurality. He was elected by the EC.
 
independentusa said:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...-court-legitimacy_us_5bb7757ae4b028e1fe3d25a5
It kind of says what I have been thinking for years, that the conservative court has and will continue to favor the GOP in its decisions. The worst of those is of course the "citizens" decision that has not only allowed the wealthy to buy elections, but with the help of the GOP, to hide what they are doing from the public scrutiny. It says that corporations are people and money is free speech. I have read the constitution and its amendments many times and have never found those words anywhere. And the cons complain about the "liberal" judge "making" laws. I have never seen anywhere the kind of stretching of our constitution to make corporations people and money free speech. But all of the other decisions helping the GOP to gain and win control by the conservatives on the court make me wonder where our democracy is going.
Click to expand...
I think it's nonsense. SCOTUS doesn't "favor" one party or the other. Did approving same sex marriage "favor" Republicans, for instance?


Corporations are groups of people joined together for a common purpose. The reason that they have free speech rights individually yet lose that right when the join together is ludicrous. Same argument also applies to unions, BTW.


And no, Citizen United DIDN'T favor wealth - the ruling applies to labor unions as well, And if you check the data labor unions are some of the biggest donors year after year - overwhelmingly to Dems.
 
JMR said:
Obviously you miss my point that since this unpopular Justice was nominated by an unpopular president, and confirmed by unpopular Senators, there will most likely be a popular revolt about some decisions coming up.
The Supreme Court is not a tool to overcome the will of the people, and Trump pandered to his base by making a campaign promise to render it a partisan body.

Lest you forget, Merrick Garland was a MODERATE judge, with a long history of same, and Clinton was expected to rename him to the court. Even your listed "evidence" states that as fact.
Click to expand...

I didn't miss the point, I pointed out how pointless the point was, quite pointedly.
 
noonereal said:
Elections have consequences, that is what I think.

Sure, this is extreme but the extreme nature of this evil presidency should cause an uprising that will, in the end, move things back to normalcy.
Click to expand...

Shaking fists and screaming into a megaphone is not much of an uprising.
Which uprising are you talking about should be caused by this evil president?

a revolution?
a second civil war where one side hates guns and can't shoot?

What kind of uprising are you speaking of?
 
What if...? said:
It most certainly does.

In defiance of more than one precendent.

And far beyond what either party was seeking.
Click to expand...

Look at it this way. Rich people are morally superior. That’s why they have more money. So they should be the ones who have a disproportionate effect on our elections. Not quite fascism, but close enough. How dare lawmakers try to level the playing field?

Remember the days when property owning males were allowed to vote? This is a nod in that direction. And look, we allowed all powerful labor unions to do the same. But the court will try to eliminate that mistake ASAP.
 
if you don't like the direction that the country has taken, vote. i will.
 
apdst said:
He didn't win a majority. He won a plurality. He was elected by the EC.
Click to expand...

Please point out where I stated he won a majority....He won the most popular votes of all the candidates.
 
JMR said:
Please point out where I stated he won a majority....He won the most popular votes of all the candidates.
Click to expand...

You said he won the popular vote. The only way to win the popular vote is to win the majority. Most of the votes went to someone else.
 
Helix said:
if you don't like the direction that the country has taken, vote. i will.
Click to expand...

Agreed, get out there and vote.

I'm voting for more economic opportunity for American workers, more pay in our pockets and less government regulations. I'm voting for Ted Cruz over O'Rourke for example because damn, that guy is a mess.

I'm voting to help send a message that Innocent until proven Guilty matters in America.

I'm voting GOP, I ask anyone who loves America, cherishes our judicial system of fairness and is against ugly tactics like using the specter of sexual abuse as a political weapon with unfounded, unsubstantiated accusations to try and destroy innocent people to join me. Push back against the madness.
 
independentusa said:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...-court-legitimacy_us_5bb7757ae4b028e1fe3d25a5
It kind of says what I have been thinking for years, that the conservative court has and will continue to favor the GOP in its decisions. The worst of those is of course the "citizens" decision that has not only allowed the wealthy to buy elections, but with the help of the GOP, to hide what they are doing from the public scrutiny. It says that corporations are people and money is free speech. I have read the constitution and its amendments many times and have never found those words anywhere. And the cons complain about the "liberal" judge "making" laws. I have never seen anywhere the kind of stretching of our constitution to make corporations people and money free speech. But all of the other decisions helping the GOP to gain and win control by the conservatives on the court make me wonder where our democracy is going.
Click to expand...

LOL. Stretching happens on both sides. Judges are supposed to base their decisions on the law. The left want judges to make laws. Judges aren't supposed to make laws.
 
independentusa said:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...-court-legitimacy_us_5bb7757ae4b028e1fe3d25a5
It kind of says what I have been thinking for years, that the conservative court has and will continue to favor the GOP in its decisions. The worst of those is of course the "citizens" decision that has not only allowed the wealthy to buy elections, but with the help of the GOP, to hide what they are doing from the public scrutiny. It says that corporations are people and money is free speech. I have read the constitution and its amendments many times and have never found those words anywhere. And the cons complain about the "liberal" judge "making" laws. I have never seen anywhere the kind of stretching of our constitution to make corporations people and money free speech. But all of the other decisions helping the GOP to gain and win control by the conservatives on the court make me wonder where our democracy is going.
Click to expand...

Do you know what was actually decided in Citizen’a United?
 
independentusa said:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...-court-legitimacy_us_5bb7757ae4b028e1fe3d25a5
It kind of says what I have been thinking for years, that the conservative court has and will continue to favor the GOP in its decisions. The worst of those is of course the "citizens" decision that has not only allowed the wealthy to buy elections, but with the help of the GOP, to hide what they are doing from the public scrutiny. It says that corporations are people and money is free speech. I have read the constitution and its amendments many times and have never found those words anywhere. And the cons complain about the "liberal" judge "making" laws. I have never seen anywhere the kind of stretching of our constitution to make corporations people and money free speech. But all of the other decisions helping the GOP to gain and win control by the conservatives on the court make me wonder where our democracy is going.
Click to expand...

If the Dems can't get Kavanaugh impeached there is always the option of increasing the size of the court to 11. It will require a Democratic Congress and President but that is quite likely by 2020. It only requires an act of Congress to do.
 
PleasantValley said:
a revolution?
a second civil war where one side hates guns and can't shoot?
Click to expand...


We are in a cold civil war now.

It is up to the blue states to put it down as it did last time. (minority rule never works)

We are so fat as a society that violent protest is thankfully not likely. It needs be done at the ballot box.

Unfortunately with the court now part of the uprising we will be challenged to sort it all out when peace does returns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom