tshile Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 9 minutes ago, mammajamma said: no, we don't like the electoral college because it gives the presidency to the person who doesnt get the most votes, and therefore doesnt represent america. according to you. Because you’ve decided most votes is the only way to “represent America”. unfortunately that’s not actually how things work. Quote and again, the guy who had less votes should not be appointing 1/3 of the supreme court. says you, person making arbitrary rules on the internet. the president gets to appoint people as justices. There’s no mention as to how many is too many. There’s no mention of how many votes they get mattering are all. you not liking the situation doesn’t mean you get to make up rules and force everyone to abide by them. This is sort of my point. Quote if he does, it definitely justifies expanding the court 😂 sure. Since he broke a bunch of rules that don’t actually exist, we’re justified in dramatically changing the system such that we have the majority and not them. 😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mammajamma Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 10 minutes ago, tshile said: according to you. Because you’ve decided most votes is the only way to “represent America”. unfortunately that’s not actually how things work. says you, person making arbitrary rules on the internet. the president gets to appoint people as justices. There’s no mention as to how many is too many. There’s no mention of how many votes they get mattering are all. you not liking the situation doesn’t mean you get to make up rules and force everyone to abide by them. This is sort of my point. 😂 sure. Since he broke a bunch of rules that don’t actually exist, we’re justified in dramatically changing the system such that we have the majority and not them. 😂 so your main argument is that its not bad because hes just going by the rules. my argument is that the current rules aren't setup to properly represent America, and that's why they need to change. Of course he's ALLOWED to appoint as many justices as he wants, but if you think its RIGHT that a guy that got less votes can control 1/3 of the most powerful court in the country, then I think our conversation is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 45 minutes ago, tshile said: the president gets to appoint people as justices. There’s no mention as to how many is too many. There’s no mention of how many votes they get mattering are all. “ 'That’s what the law says.' A hundred years ago, I could beat you with a ****ing mop handle and be like, “That’s what the law says.” Doesn’t make us right." - Bill Burr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 42 minutes ago, mammajamma said: so your main argument is that its not bad I certainly think it’s bad trump gets to stack scotus this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 I think Trump may have tried threatening Walt's family...😐 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 Sue the ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 We need a ****ing break from this guy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 19, 2020 Share Posted September 19, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 4 hours ago, tshile said: 😂 sure. Since he broke a bunch of rules that don’t actually exist, we’re justified in dramatically changing the system such that we have the majority and not them. 😂 There's no rule prohibiting double standards based on partisan expediency nor is there a rule prohibiting expansion of the number justices in SCOTUS. Setting aside whether one views such actions as right or wrong, it's naive to think that one party would somehow refrain from casting aside unwritten rules when the other side shows no regard for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 1 minute ago, bearrock said: There's no rule prohibiting double standards based on partisan expediency nor is there a rule prohibiting expansion of the number justices in SCOTUS. Setting aside whether one views such actions as right or wrong, it's naive to think that one party would somehow refrain from casting aside unwritten rules when the other side shows no regard for it. But what is the end result other than both parties trying to one up the other when they get the chance? It's going to be utter chaos, if that happens. There has to be some sort of workable realistic long term plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 Just now, visionary said: But what is the end result other than both parties trying to one up the other when they get the chance? It's going to be utter chaos, if that happens. There has to be some sort of workable realistic long term plan. I totally agree. Let's hope there's enough senators left in that chamber who can think about that instead of getting one up on the other side in the present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 5 hours ago, tshile said: Not a fan or expanding the Supreme Court just because the guys you don’t like that won the last election got to appoint enough of their own you don’t like the balance. Kind of like how I don’t like getting rid of the electoral college just because you have difficulty winning and so you’ve decided this other metric you don’t have difficulty winning should be the new way to do it (and along the way we’ll pretend to be the only ones with logical arguments on the topic) nobody is denying that rules of the system that exist are being followed. but this isn’t being a sore loser. For far too long, democracy has been slowly subverted with no effort to correct it. It has now gotten to the point where the next 50 years of this country will be decided by justices appointed by presidents that the majority of the country didn’t vote for, that were confirmed by senators that don’t represent a majority of the country. Sure, these are the rules but when you find that the rules are no longer logical, do not meet their original intention and dramatically shift power to a degree that it is a direct slap in the face to the democracy this country was founded upon, it is time to act. this is a system from 200 years ago, and as the country has grown, this system should grow as well so we should not have reached the point where we are essentially living under tyranny of the minority, where people do jot have the same value or voting power, the same opportunity for their voice to be heard or for them to enact change through their elected officials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 not that we didn’t know this already but this is what we are up against. We are all Adrianne in Rocky 2 laying in the hospital bed and looking up and Rocky and saying: “win” dems: just ****ing do it. Wield the power so many are busting their asses to give to you. Change the trajectory of this country and do what you need to do. We won’t have another chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 That Matt Walsh guy is a moron. So next time Dems hold both chambers and the WH, they should pack the courts because they want that result and they have the power to do so? Why stop there? Pack the courts by like a 1000 party loyalist (no law degree needed here) and expand the Sedition Act to include belonging to the Republican Party. That's just politics too right? Bunch of idiots treating politics as another form of spectator sport 🙄 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.