• 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!

Supreme Court says Ginsburg released from hospital 11 minutes ago (1 Viewer)

He gave that "no quid-pro-quo" line after finding out there was a whistle blower, lol.

And all testimony has been consistent. It points to some troubling actions which we should be more determined to get to the bottom of. I don't think the impeachment is "successful" because GOP-Partisans aren't open to actually hearing what is said, only deflecting and attacking. Rational and sane people DO see it as evidence that there could be misdeeds on the part of Trump and Co.

The Deep State conspiracy theory is just some nutty, half-assed excuse and deflection. Some real QAnon tinfoil hat nuttery. And Rational and Sane people also see that.

Your efforts are wasted, unfortunately. There is no rock bottom for Trump loyalists. They will defend and support him no matter what.

All we can hope for is a swift defeat in the next election.
 
You clown yourself with the claim that the democrats have had interest in working with the republicans in the last 40 years. And thats OK, because no doubt, the republicans have been no better. This goes back to 2000. Even though there have always been partisan divides, Congress USED to be able to work together. That ended following Bush/Gore and hasnt come back...nor will it as long as the supporters of both parties keep sending back the same partisan clowns.

I dont discount the acts of the GOP. The two parties are the same. But if you think what the GOP is doing is any MORE partisan than what the democrats have done, thats the big joke.

UGH. 'Both sides do it... one side is no better'.

Clinton was a center-right Democrat who implemented Republican-inspired policy. Obama was center-left who implemented Republican-inspired policy.

These are indisputable facts; empirical reality.

How could Democrats work with Republicans more than implementing their healthcare ideas, welfare reform ideas, criminal justice ideas, tax cut and deregulation ideas? Obama offered the Republican cuts to social security.

Democrats bend over backwards to work with Republicans. It's actually embarrassing watching them cede every argument.
 
He gave that "no quid-pro-quo" line after finding out there was a whistle blower, lol.

Guy 1 - [going about his normal job...]

Guy 2 - "Why did you rob that bank!?"

Guy 1 - "What? I didn't rob any banks..."

Guy 2 - "Suuuure you didn't. If you didn't rob the bank, then why did you wait until just now to deny it?!"

:roll: :lamo


And all testimony has been consistent. It points to some troubling actions which we should be more determined to get to the bottom of. I don't think the impeachment is "successful" because GOP-Partisans aren't open to actually hearing what is said, only deflecting and attacking. Rational and sane people DO see it as evidence that there could be misdeeds on the part of Trump and Co.

Sure it has been consistent when only the Democrats are allowed to call witnesses. Holy crap, do you actually think before you type?

And it is also consistent..ly absent any actual evidence of wrongdoing.

The Deep State conspiracy theory is just some nutty, half-assed excuse and deflection. Some real QAnon tinfoil hat nuttery. And Rational and Sane people also see that.

Well, clearly it isn't. The Democrats managed to cobble together a handful of bureaucratic witnesses able to testify to their efforts to undermine Trump's foreign policy goals and supplant them with their own.

For THAT there is ample evidence in the testimony.
 
Guy 1 - [going about his normal job...]

Guy 2 - "Why did you rob that bank!?"

Guy 1 - "What? I didn't rob any banks..."

Guy 2 - "Suuuure you didn't. If you didn't rob the bank, then why did you wait until just now to deny it?!"

:roll: :lamo




Sure it has been consistent when only the Democrats are allowed to call witnesses. Holy crap, do you actually think before you type?

And it is also consistent..ly absent any actual evidence of wrongdoing.



Well, clearly it isn't. The Democrats managed to cobble together a handful of bureaucratic witnesses able to testify to their efforts to undermine Trump's foreign policy goals and supplant them with their own.

For THAT there is ample evidence in the testimony.

It's too bad so sad that reality doesn't live up to your narrative. The testimony has been consistent, Republicans did get to call witnesses. I know, you want the whistle blower, but there's enough testimony from enough government employees to show the story for what it was. Trump tried to use Guiliani to go around the State Department in order to pressure Ukraine into opening an investigation against Biden for his own political gains.

I suppose partisans don't care too much if foreign powers are enticed to interfere in our own elections so long as that interference is for their side.

But keep on with the Deep State nuttery, that's really selling the case.

lol
 
Whoever supported McConnell's obstruction against Garland would never have supported Trump nominating him.

probably not, but by the time the court is 6-3 against progressive judges it would have been OK to throw the Dems a bone.

Not anymore. After Kavanaugh I have no good will left for that band of miscreants.
 
Of course not. But that comment just reinforces my point. Politics is not a death sport no matter what professional politicians, a corrupt media, and the power of the almighty dollar being weaponized by special interests against the American public have brainwashed voters into believing. When you look at American politics through a global lens, it becomes pretty clear that Republicans and Democrats are not as unlike as the masses think they are. That's why words like "fascist" and "socialist" get thrown around with no meaning. The relatively small differences between the parties have to be exaggerated so that the easily controlled really believe that their party stands for everything good and right and necessary and the other party was conjured from the depths of hell to destroy the earth and every living thing on it. It's all just more evidence that no matter how far our technology and civil societies and scientific understanding progress, humans are just the same brute beasts we were 350,000 years ago.

interesting analysis-perhaps you have a solution?
 
It's too bad so sad that reality doesn't live up to your narrative. The testimony has been consistent, Republicans did get to call witnesses. I know, you want the whistle blower, but there's enough testimony from enough government employees to show the story for what it was. Trump tried to use Guiliani to go around the State Department in order to pressure Ukraine into opening an investigation against Biden for his own political gains.

I suppose partisans don't care too much if foreign powers are enticed to interfere in our own elections so long as that interference is for their side.

But keep on with the Deep State nuttery, that's really selling the case.

lol

:roll:The Republicans called numerous witnesses, they got one. The Democrats actively instructed witnesses one what they could and could not answer from Republicans...

Again, You really have to be in a bad way mentally to force yourself into believing that it was the DEMOCRATS who were hamstrung. :roll:
 
probably not, but by the time the court is 6-3 against progressive judges it would have been OK to throw the Dems a bone.

Not anymore. After Kavanaugh I have no good will left for that band of miscreants.

Ok. I'll have to take your word for it. I just don't really believe that there's a partisan anywhere in the world who would ever let the other side have a bone. Kavanaugh probably shouldn't be on the Court, but that I agree that that entire confirmation was a travesty.
 
probably not, but by the time the court is 6-3 against progressive judges it would have been OK to throw the Dems a bone.

Not anymore. After Kavanaugh I have no good will left for that band of miscreants.

I'm glad we're agreed that no quarter should be given to the other side.

Trump will probably get three SCOTUS seats and the far-right Supreme Court and Lower Courts the right have always wanted. You'll get your overturn of Roe V. Wade, repeal of Affirmative Action, repeal to Obamacare, overturn of gay marriage, more pro-discrimination laws, probably some more corporate-centered rulings, etc.

Then what?

Careful what you ask for.
 
I'm glad we're agreed that no quarter should be given to the other side.

Trump will probably get three SCOTUS seats and the far-right Supreme Court and Lower Courts the right have always wanted. You'll get your overturn of Roe V. Wade, repeal of Affirmative Action, repeal to Obamacare, overturn of gay marriage, more pro-discrimination laws, probably some more corporate-centered rulings, etc.

Then what?

Careful what you ask for.

roe v wade is settled precedent and should remain in place since so much of society relies on that--same with the unconstitutional expansions of the commerce clause that created institutions that too many people now rely upon-Social Security, Medicare, Title VII and IX, Medicaid etc.

Attempts to expand the powers of congress using the Commerce clause such as additional gun control or the socialized medical schemes some want should be struck down. So should blatant unconstitutional nonsense such as the 1934 NFA -eliminating that gun laws does not cause any social upheaval.
 
Of course not. But that comment just reinforces my point. Politics is not a death sport no matter what professional politicians, a corrupt media, and the power of the almighty dollar being weaponized by special interests against the American public have brainwashed voters into believing. When you look at American politics through a global lens, it becomes pretty clear that Republicans and Democrats are not as unlike as the masses think they are. That's why words like "fascist" and "socialist" get thrown around with no meaning. The relatively small differences between the parties have to be exaggerated so that the easily controlled really believe that their party stands for everything good and right and necessary and the other party was conjured from the depths of hell to destroy the earth and every living thing on it. It's all just more evidence that no matter how far our technology and civil societies and scientific understanding progress, humans are just the same brute beasts we were 350,000 years ago.

It's an interesting argument, but I think what makes it more interesting is to consider it in the light of 2016, and the aftermath.

What Trump represented, for good or bad, was an actual departure from business as usual in Washington DC. His election was as scary to the entrenched Republicans as it was the entrenched Democrats. Trump represented a successful revolution in the Republican party of the loping, uncouth, blue collar masses of the flyover states and he won against the epitome of the entitled, Business as Usual political class in Washington.

The average working class American was sick of it. The Republican base was tired of hearing "wait until next election" whenever it seamed like it was time for their concerns to be addressed, and the Democrat working class in the Midwest was tired of unanswered promises, and fail policies when Democrats attempted to address them.

I think, if nothing else, Trump turned the tide in the election with one statement that he almost certainly didn't write himself: "It used to be that they built cars in Flint and you couldn't drink the water in Mexico. Now they build cars in Mexico and you can't drink the water in Flint."

That line cut to the core of what pissed off the rust belt more than anything else. Creeping, persistent, Democrat lead decline and all Hillary could offer them was "well, get a different job!" .. her "let them eat cake" moment.

Trump is still seen as a thorn in the side of establishment Washington, and Establishment Washington is a term that is increasingly associated with Democrats now that so many anti-Trump Republicans have bailed from politics in favor of the chattering class. That isn't a good place to be for Democrats, and I think, given the severe distrust of Washington in both parties, being the party of bigger authoritarian government programs will not serve them well in 2020.

one last point: Sweeping government benefits is an effective political selling point during recessions when the electorate is feeling most vulnerable and looking for easy hope. That is increasingly looking to be an unlikely scenario in 2020... and yet the Democrats keep pushing forward like they'll get a recession just in time for election day.
 
roe v wade is settled precedent and should remain in place since so much of society relies on that

That's a quaint notion. The Federalist Society exists almost exclusively to overturn Roe v. Wade and that's where Trump is getting his court picks. There are not shy about it and anyone who doesn't see where this is headed has, IMO, the political acumen of a child. Whether its by a thousand cuts or a simple majority ruling, the result is the same.
 
Ok. I'll have to take your word for it. I just don't really believe that there's a partisan anywhere in the world who would ever let the other side have a bone. Kavanaugh probably shouldn't be on the Court, but that I agree that that entire confirmation was a travesty.

Well, I have seen partisans willing to compromise after compromise suits them politically. I think it might have been advantageous to defuse the Garland bomb after it became clear that the appointment of Garland by Obama would have made no difference to the court ideological lean.

Granted, if RBG and Breyer leave the bench whiles Trump is in office then that would be proven true regardless of Trump throwing the Democrats a bone.

Edit: Let's face it, the problem of increasing conservatism on the Supreme Court has nothing to do with Merrick Garland and everything to do with 4 Progressive Justices who refused to retire under Obama and thought they'd wait for Hillary.

But then, again, throwing the Democrats a bone would have required the Democrats to behave very differently than they have for the last 3 years (or 11.. or 19, depending on how you look at it). They can't put that toothpaste back in the tube, no matter how much they may want to if they lose in 2020.
 
Last edited:
That's a quaint notion. The Federalist Society exists almost exclusively to overturn Roe v. Wade and that's where Trump is getting his court picks. There are not shy about it and anyone who doesn't see where this is headed has, IMO, the political acumen of a child. Whether its by a thousand cuts or a simple majority ruling, the result is the same.

you are lying about the federalist society and I know that for a fact since four of the five founders were close college friends: one was a suite mate. Two of them were agnostic Jews who had no religious bias against abortion. The society has noted that abortion is one of those issues that its members are split over. Do many anti Roe v Wade attorneys support the Federalist Society? of course
 
roe v wade is settled precedent and should remain in place since so much of society relies on that--same with the unconstitutional expansions of the commerce clause that created institutions that too many people now rely upon-Social Security, Medicare, Title VII and IX, Medicaid etc.

Attempts to expand the powers of congress using the Commerce clause such as additional gun control or the socialized medical schemes some want should be struck down. So should blatant unconstitutional nonsense such as the 1934 NFA -eliminating that gun laws does not cause any social upheaval.

Correct on all counts. I don't think curtailing abortion would come from a repeal of Roe v. Wade anyway, in the grand scheme of things it was a limited but unbound decision that was just applied liberally and has been narrowed by several rulings over the subsequent decades. I think if Roe is challenged directly it will be done in a limited fashion and target the SCOTUS decision on personhood of the unborn within Roe.
 
It may have been, true. But it was clear that the GOP was running a stall tactic. It wasn't because Obama happened to have picked someone who never would have made it through. Obama's choice didn't matter, the GOP was stalling to see who won the election. When Trump won, they continued their stall in order to get their choice through instead of Obama.
You say that like it was a bad thing. One of the reasons Trump has so many vacancies to fill is that Reid held up lower court appointees for years, on at least one occasion for a decade. If RBG's seat becomes vacant, McConnell will not hesitate to have hearings on the replacement. Politics as usual for both parties.
 
How is that partisan? Did she name loyalty to a party? No, she was saying that Trump is unqualified, and it's true.

You can call out a bad Presidential candidate without it being about partisanism.

And you would recognize that... if you weren't hyperpartisan.
Its hyperpartisan to declare someone who went through the vetting process and qualified to run as unqualified.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Mmm...yes. Severe sanctions. Handing of Syria, screwing around with Ukraine's funding, etc.

lol

Trump is the best thing to happen to Putin.
Ukraine ..that reminds me Obama gave them blankets an MREs to fight Russian tanks. Trump sold them offensive weapons including Javelin anti tank missiles. And yes the Ukraine got their funding once Trump felt like they were trying to combat corruption. Even people like Lt. Col. Vindman admitted Trump has done more for Ukraine than Obama ever did. How do you think Putin feels about knowing if he moves his tanks more into the Ukraine they will have a US made Javelin missile jammed up their A**es. I bet he is pissed at his puppet. :roll:
 
As did the ones after the Civil War.

Can't wait for the young folks to take over (after watching all this Republican corruption) and "consequencing" corrupt Republican voters back into the dark.

You guys brought what's about to happen on yourselves by sacrificing your collective integrity.

20-30somethings. Rise up!!
You mean when the Democrats were all in the KKK? And when the Democrat KKK members were hanging blacks that voted and white Republicans that helped them? Yep elections had consequences and they could get you hanged.
 
How do you think Putin feels about knowing if he moves his tanks more into the Ukraine they will have a US made Javelin missile jammed up their A**es.

Fine, because he knows Ukrainian soldiers can't aim for ****.
 
Don't worry it uses automatic infrared guidance that allows the user to seek cover immediately after launch.

Yeah that won't help.

We didn't give arms to the Ukrainians as soon as the Russians invaded because it would have ended up in Russian hands. Huge chunks of the Ukrainian military either deserted their posts or defected to the Russians and Separatists once the fighting start, often times turning over their hardware and weaponry in the process. By May of 2014 the entire Ukrainian ground forces had been reduced to just 6,000 troops actually capable of carrying out operations. They're better* now, but no amount of hardware or equipment is going to offset the simple fact that the Russians are better skilled than the Ukrainians are. You cannot spend your way to military competence, as the Saudis have shown, nor can you really overshadow it with copious amounts of weaponry, as the Iraqis showed.

*Better in the sense that the most incompetent troops and leaders have either been killed or discharged at this point, but they still have a very thin crust of reliable leadership at all levels.
 
Its hyperpartisan to declare someone who went through the vetting process and qualified to run as unqualified.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

No it isn't. I'm an independent, I don't have party loyalty.

There's nothing partisan about where I'm coming from. :roll:

People need to stop throwing around words they don't understand.
 
No it isn't. I'm an independent, I don't have party loyalty.

There's nothing partisan about where I'm coming from. :roll:

People need to stop throwing around words they don't understand.

Your opinion may be that Trump is a walking disaster as a president but as you said people should not be throwing around words they dont understand. Anyone who passes the vetting process is qualified to be president regardless of your opinion of them.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
How is that partisan? Did she name loyalty to a party? No, she was saying that Trump is unqualified, and it's true.

You can call out a bad Presidential candidate without it being about partisanism.

And you would recognize that... if you weren't hyperpartisan.

Imagine Clarence Thomas saying same about Hillary....we all know it would be true but would it be proper?:roll:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom