• 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!

SCOTUS rules against democracy in Gerrymandering case!!!

Ummmmmmmmm. There are a lot of restrictions, rules, etc for changing the government, in fitting with social changes. That's why there have been several amendments to the constitution. The Supreme Court does not have the authority to amend the constitution due to their feelings.

And there it is!
T/Y
 
Keep remembering what you said as the right continues to complain about the impeachment investigation process.

Not sure what you mean by that but it is a given that the House will impeach. The Senate has a trial and they need 67 votes. Good luck with that. Are you willing to accept that elections have consequences when the Republican Senate does not remove Trump from office?
 
It's up to Congress, not the Supreme Court, to pass a bill making gerrymandering illegal. Then let the state's sue Congress if they wish to proceed with this unfair practice. It could possibly put a 'stay' into effect to prohibit gerrymandering until the courts get to hear arguments.

The problem is that the states that have been gerrymandered, will not let this go through as they do not want to give up the power it gives them.
 
It's sickening that the SCOTUS refuses to stop gerrymandering.
 
That's because the Founding Fathers formed a republic not a democracy. The leaders of two of the three branches of our government are indeed elected in democratic elections. However, those leaders are bound by the constitutional limits, so their power has definite limits. That is the definition of a democratic republic.

And yet the minions on both sides seem to believe that the presidency is a dictatorship and whatever policy ideas the nominee tauted during the campaign will become reality. There is no Trump wall across the southern border and there will be no MFA or any of the other crap that Democratic candidates have been promising such as a wealth tax or a $15 per hour living wage.
 
The Founders never mentioned democracy a single time in The Constitution.

So you are okay with no democracy. You sound like you think Trump is the way to go. no democracy and that dictatorships are the best.
 
Political machines tend to be bad news for voters, no matter the party.

If we just got rid of democracy, or severely limited it to only those worth 1,000,000 or more this wouldn’t be an issue
 
Ok.

So you admit that in order to win politicians must rig the game.

I will withhold my vote from a democrat that engages in gerrymandering.

Are you prepared to do the same?

Or will you vote for them because power is more important to you than true representative democracy?

Gerrymandering is nothing more than an excuse for losing. Hillary filled up an entire book with excuses.
 
Read the intent of the founders. We the people have the authority to change this government, in fitting with social changes.

Just because the word isnt used doesn't mean it wasnt intended.

Through constitutional amendment. Not because some stupid Marxists keep crying “but it’s <insert current year here>”
 
Political machines tend to be bad news for voters, no matter the party.

But it is delusional for someone to think that politics can be done without a political machine. Democracy sucks - until you see what the alternative is.
 
Not sure what you mean by that but it is a given that the House will impeach. The Senate has a trial and they need 67 votes. Good luck with that. Are you willing to accept that elections have consequences when the Republican Senate does not remove Trump from office?

My point was all the complaining from the right about how these impeachment inquiries are proceeding. The 2018 election had big consequences for the House and that's precisely why the democrats are leading the investigation. Out of the grasp of Devin Nunes.
Oh I am FULLY prepared to accept that the Republican Senate will NOT impeach Trump. They're all in his pocket and a presidential impeachment in the Senate has never happened in United States history.
 
And that is what Roberts explicitly stated in the majority decision. It is not a Constitutional issue.

Not a radical conclusion.

No, Robert and the rest of the cons on the court have made SCOTUS a kangaroo GOP court. We no longer have a SCOTUS that anyone except Trumpsters believe in. It is a shame, but many Americans no longer believe in this court. It is apparent to anyone with a brain that all three branches of our government are seen as corrupt. Is it any wonder that there are a growing number of survivalists who see the end of our country coming. We have trump talking about having a third and fourth term and his followers are cheering him on. Not a good sign.
 
And yet the minions on both sides seem to believe that the presidency is a dictatorship and whatever policy ideas the nominee tauted during the campaign will become reality. There is no Trump wall across the southern border and there will be no MFA or any of the other crap that Democratic candidates have been promising such as a wealth tax or a $15 per hour living wage.

Nobody from either side believes that it should be a dictatorship and that's what it's becoming under a Trump administration.
 
Gerrymandering is nothing more than an excuse for losing. Hillary filled up an entire book with excuses.

Oh come on, are you seriously saying Gerrymandering doesn't affect elections or give power or advantage to the side that draws up the lines? I can at least show where that indeed does and that the left does it as well. It doesn't change the fact that Gerrymandering is wrong or doesn't give the side drawing up the lines an advantage. Just because it gives the Dems advantage in states doesn't make it any less wrong than in states where Republicans have the advantage due to Gerrymandering. Gerrymandering at worse is a tool used by each side to silence any other party but the Dem or Reps and at best it is a tool used to give one side an advantage over the other. If it's one thing that people should be united on is that Gerrymandering is wrong when it is done by one side.
 
If we just got rid of democracy, or severely limited it to only those worth 1,000,000 or more this wouldn’t be an issue

a62989db597756447f0e81dbc1eaef2b.jpg
 
Which might be a reasonable argument if gerrymandering only impacted State offices, but it doesn’t. It also influences the outcome of Federal elections. And politicians obviously don’t share your confidence in their electability or they wouldn’t be gerrymandering in the first place.

But federal elections are run by the states. States even have different rules from each other for federal elections.
 
But it is delusional for someone to think that politics can be done without a political machine. Democracy sucks - until you see what the alternative is.

The problem is we are becoming the alternative.
 
Ummmmmmmmm. There are a lot of restrictions, rules, etc for changing the government, in fitting with social changes. That's why there have been several amendments to the constitution. The Supreme Court does not have the authority to amend the constitution due to their feelings.

Which is where we get the term "legislating from the bench". Not something the founders had in mind.
 
But it is delusional for someone to think that politics can be done without a political machine. Democracy sucks - until you see what the alternative is.

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
 
Gerrymandering is nothing more than an excuse for losing. Hillary filled up an entire book with excuses.

Do you know how wrong you are. In my state we had an election where the GOP got 45% of the votes for our Assembly, but got 55% of the seats. I guess you would will call that an excuse for losing, but I call it gerrymandering, big time. On now this GOP SCOTUS has made it legal.
 
Which is where we get the term "legislating from the bench". Not something the founders had in mind.

What do you call Citizens decision but legislating from the bench. Show me where in the Constitution it say money is Free Speech and Corporations are people. The Cons on the court legislated that by their decision. But determining that gerrymandering undercuts the whole meaning of our political decision making is legislating?
 
No, Robert and the rest of the cons on the court have made SCOTUS a kangaroo GOP court. We no longer have a SCOTUS that anyone except Trumpsters believe in. It is a shame, but many Americans no longer believe in this court. It is apparent to anyone with a brain that all three branches of our government are seen as corrupt. Is it any wonder that there are a growing number of survivalists who see the end of our country coming. We have trump talking about having a third and fourth term and his followers are cheering him on. Not a good sign.

I disagree.

Your response just sounds hyperbolic partisan blather. The Supreme Court has a critical responsibility and they handle it relatively well. Some topics are controversial/emotional and difficult to rule on.

The "fiery attacks" we commonly hear in social media venues typically come from posters who never bother to actually read the content/reasoning of the court's decisions. (Both Majority and Dissenting.
 
It's sickening that the SCOTUS refuses to stop gerrymandering.

It is not in their power to stop gerrymandering, just as wealth redistribution is not in their power. The Court merely said, "You have come to the wrong place for this".
 
So you are okay with no democracy. You sound like you think Trump is the way to go. no democracy and that dictatorships are the best.

How is Trump a dictator? He has wanted several things and has been stopped by the resistance.
 
My point was all the complaining from the right about how these impeachment inquiries are proceeding. The 2018 election had big consequences for the House and that's precisely why the democrats are leading the investigation. Out of the grasp of Devin Nunes.
Oh I am FULLY prepared to accept that the Republican Senate will NOT impeach Trump. They're all in his pocket and a presidential impeachment in the Senate has never happened in United States history.

The 2018 election gave a body where a vote of 218-217 allows the winning side to abuse their power.
 
Back
Top Bottom