• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

Senate Dems deliver stunning warning to Supreme Court: ‘Heal’ or face restructuring

apdst said:
Upholding The Constitution is the court's soul purpose. It doesn't exist to do as the majority wishes.
Click to expand...

Not so, it largely goes along with what the representatives of the majority wish (as signed into law by the executive) so long as no gross violations of the Constitution or prior SCOTUS precedent have been successfully argued before the nine robed umpires.

The SCOTUS also has the power to simply decline to accept a case for appeal - allowing what is to remain so without further comment.
 
Last edited:
Athanasius68 said:
Yes. And you were incorrect in the past.
Click to expand...

We will not discuss this thing here. My intervention was to alert people who do not know much about the subject that what you try to pass as a fact is not really a fact.
 
bomberfox said:
How many is many? Sounds like someone who isnt interested in actually governing but ruling. Every trumpist shows how deranged they are even if they have to lie about a thought experiment that was never an actual rule.
Click to expand...

What?
 
Barnacle said:
Real voter suppression does not exist - idiot voters, however, exist in abundance.

If you don't know how to spell your name correctly and end up being registered with slight differences to your name on various registrations, maybe you shouldn't vote.

If you move and neglect to register in your new voting district, maybe you shouldn't vote. (I bet you don't neglect to register your car.)

If you don't know how to obtain a photo ID outside of a driver's license, you shouldn't vote because you are too stupid.

If you are dead, you definitely must not vote.
Click to expand...

Being dead is a barrier to voting, being 'stupid' (another code word?) should not be. These are just Republican excuses to suppress minority voters and we all know it.
 
Conservative said:
Not sure what country you live in but I live in the greatest country on the face of the earth that you people want to change. Everything you do is right and everything the Republicans do is wrong IN YOUR OPINION. You don't seem to have any clue as to the foundation upon which this country was built and it certainly wasn't a massive central gov't usurping state and local responsibilities. I grew up a staunch Democrat but your party today is a disaster, you don't make the country greater by packing the courts with political appointees or making more people dependent on the federal bureaucrats. You do so by promoting individual responsibilities and accountability.

Your Democratic Party today is run by a group of radicals and there is no reason to vote for any one of those bozos in 2020. Elections have consequences as does the Constitution, doesn't seem that either matter to you any more as long as you get your way. Pack the courts, let California select the President, ignore personal responsibility and bail out people who make bad choices. Those are all prescriptions for failure which is why the left will never win another national election
Click to expand...

This tirade doesn't really reflect on the topic. Your opinion of me is also unwelcome. A country can always be better than it was yesterday and this is a goal all Americans should strive for. By allowing red states to suppress the vote however, SCOTUS allowed them to slip back to the bad old pre-civil rights days.

Moreover 'the left' already has the numbers to win elections if only the EC and districting were not skewed in favor of 'the right'. That is a fact. The Dems have won the popular vote in every election for the last 30 years except 2004. Progressive policies are more popular, progressive states are more populous, and the country is held hostage by an old white minority with its cold clammy grip on the levers of power.
 
pamak said:
We will not discuss this thing here. My intervention was to alert people who do not know much about the subject that what you try to pass as a fact is not really a fact.
Click to expand...

what i try to pass as a fact is a fact.
 
Athanasius68 said:
what i try to pass as a fact is a fact.
Click to expand...

What you try to pass as a fact is your personal opinion which is based on faulty logic as I explained to you in the relevant thread about the gerrymandering.
 
uptower said:
Moreover 'the left' already has the numbers to win elections if only the EC and districting were not skewed in favor of 'the right'. That is a fact. The Dems have won the popular vote in every election for the last 30 years except 2004. Progressive policies are more popular, progressive states are more populous, and the country is held hostage by an old white minority with its cold clammy grip on the levers of power.
Click to expand...

Its not a "fact" at all. Presidential campaigns are designed to win the electoral vote; it cannot be said that Clinton still would have had the popular majority if both candidates had to win the popular vote and thus campaign differently.
Moreover its not true the 'gerrymandering' causes discrepancies-- that is based upon unequal distribution of populations. Not much to be done about that.
 
The absolute gaul liberal progressives have today. It's clear today that Obama was successful in packing the lower court, and these senators see that their chances of removing Trump, or winning the next election are miniscule, so a handful of them from a body they don't even control send this insulting trash. Then they'll all claim in disbelief that they lost again...what a bunch of clowns.

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk
 
Keep making threats like this Dems! That will just make 2020 easier for Trump!
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Not so, it largely goes along with what the representatives of the majority wish (as signed into law by the executive) so long as no gross violations of the Constitution or prior SCOTUS precedent have been successfully argued before the nine robed umpires.

The SCOTUS also has the power to simply decline to accept a case for appeal - allowing what is to remain so without further comment.
Click to expand...

My point, is that the court isn't supposed allow unconstitutional laws to stand just because said law is popular.
 
bomberfox said:
There actually are ways to deal with it. Non partisan commissions. Take the districting process completely out of the partys’ hands.
Click to expand...

A "non-partisan" commission? There's no way you would be able create such a thing. I mean, who picks the commission? The legislature? What pool do they choose from? Politicians, ex-politicians and bureaucrats?
 
Conservative said:
Senate Dems deliver stunning warning to Supreme Court: ‘Heal’ or face restructuring | Fox News


Radicals ought to be ashamed of themselves as this is absolutely radical behavior over losing an election. Radical liberalism gone crazy
Click to expand...

Radicals? Go rake Moscow Mitch over the coals for his radical screwing around with the structure of the Supreme Court, or have you forgotten his denial of a vote on President Barack Obama's last legitimate SC pick?

If there ever was anyone in the Senate that needed to be ashamed of their behavior it is Moscow Mitch.

There has got to be a special enhanced place in hell for that man, there just has to be, has to be!
 
Conservative said:
Give me a fricken break, that is nothing more than a bull**** argument that doesn't address the real issue of Democrats wanted judicial activists on the Court. The 9 Justices worked quite well the decades when the Democrats controlled the House and the Congress. When are you going to realize that liberalism is a disease and not the foundation upon which this country was built?
Click to expand...

Not the foundation upon which the country was built? Right. It was built on genocide, exploitation of slave labor, and a phony war with Mexico, tho liberals like Jefferson laid the foundational principles changing some of that. Then liberals showed up in the form of abolitionists. They reappeared in the late 19th century and lasted to the present day, creating national parks, busting trusts, making the workplace bearable, passing civil rights laws, and correcting the overkill of the environment, among other things. Not bad for a disease.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Its not a "fact" at all. Presidential campaigns are designed to win the electoral vote; it cannot be said that Clinton still would have had the popular majority if both candidates had to win the popular vote and thus campaign differently.
Moreover its not true the 'gerrymandering' causes discrepancies-- that is based upon unequal distribution of populations. Not much to be done about that.
Click to expand...

To a point it will always be true that country votes are worth more than city votes for the sake of balancing. However redrawing districts solidifies power bases and effectively lets a candidate choose his voters, not the other way around. Likewise for voter suppression tactics.
 
Mr Person said:
If you wanted this sort of thing firmly off the table, you should have gotten your GOP reps not to refuse to vote on Garland based on a made-up bull**** rule - the kind of standard DP conservatives love to invent on the spot and tailor to suit their position - that because someone hadn't been nominated in that exact amount of time before a President is out of office, they shouldn't be so much as voted on.

Guess what, the Dems are threatening to fight fire with fire. It was only a matter of time before they got sick of getting kicked in the nuts for taking a higher road.
Click to expand...

j-mac said:
So, I guess you're saying that that Constitution is a dead document in liberal progressive minds? Sad
Click to expand...

So I guess you're saying that Santa Clause should be raped with a half-rotted squirrel and then turned into a grapefruit. Sad.



:roll:
 
Pound4abrown said:
The court wouldn't be the way it is today if Mitch McConnell did not hold a seat hostage to give it to a conservative judge that was not appointed by Obama.
So, you know what, you can take your "radical liberalism gone crazy" and be off with your bad self.
Click to expand...

Did you report this "hostage" to the police at the time?
 
aociswundumho said:
Reminds me of FDR's threats to pack the court in order to prevent them from striking down parts of his fascist new deal. It's the same with all this talk about abolishing the electoral college. When the left can't win by the rules the solution is always to change the rules rather than concede that their ideas are just terrible.
Click to expand...

FDR was wrong about the courts, but “fascist New Deal”? You mean the one that fed my parents when they were hungry, protected me on the job, assisted me when I was laid off, helps me in my retirement, takes care of a paralyzed friend? You mean the same stuff all other developed nations enjoy, only more so in most cases. People gotta stop giving fascists (and commies in other posts) so much credit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom