There is Nothing in the Constitution that Limits the SC to Nine Justices.

anonymoose said:
As long as Trump is president the S.C. would never get past 8 if dims were the majority. They'd never confirm anybody Trump nominated.
Click to expand...

Obviously you've missed much.

Trump will not be in office much longer .. 2020 at the worst.

Democrats could use the lame-duck season of Trump to talk up the issue and galvanize support for it.

No, they will never confirm anyone Trump nominates .. nor should they.
 
Bigdog said:
One-party rule would negate the politically based desire to increase the size of the court.
Click to expand...

There's not going to be continuous one party rule on the national level. I understand some cling to demographics are destiny but that implies people don't vote on the performance of those in office and that the attitude of people today will be the exact same in 30 years and history tells us otherwise.
 
Nomad said:
So what you are saying is that Kavanaugh is such an immature, thin-skinned vindictive pussy, that he'd let his butthurt feelings cloud the way he decides cases rather than be led by the law and the Constitution?

Really?

And that's the kind of guy you want making rulings that affect the lives of everyone in the country?

Actually, it doesn't surprise me that you would.
Click to expand...

Human beings are human beings.

But yeah if it fucks over liberals and keeps him being a originalist I am good

Don’t expect any sympathy from me. I have wanted this for years.
 
cawacko said:
There's not going to be continuous one party rule on the national level. I understand some cling to demographics are destiny but that implies people don't vote on the performance of those in office and that the attitude of people today will be the exact same in 30 years and history tells us otherwise.
Click to expand...

That history is based on a majority white nation.

You may not like demographics, but you have no evidence that suddenly the virtually all-white old Republican Party will become popular with a far more diverse population.

None
 
blackascoal said:
That history is based on a majority white nation.

You may not like demographics, but you have no evidence that suddenly the virtually all-white old Republican Party will become popular with a far more diverse population.

None
Click to expand...

I have evidence based on history that people vote nationally based on performance.

I have evidence that people switch their views over time.

I have evidence that political parties switch their views over time.


Edit: Am I interpreting your statement right that voters of color are so tied to one party performance in office doesn't matter?
 
Woman #4..........did he drug her as well?

Will he, in the future, be where cosby is right now?

If not, why not?
 
cawacko said:
I have evidence based on history that people vote nationally based on performance.

I have evidence that people switch their views over time.

I have evidence that political parties switch their views over time.
Click to expand...

This is not the nation of white men only that you call history.

What reason would non-white people, white people of conscious, or women have to switch their votes?

Your party of racists would have to switch far more then their views to become relevant in the coming future.

Your party has been reduced to third-party status in the state that you call home.
 
blackascoal said:
This is not the nation of white men only that you call history.

What reason would non-white people, white people of conscious, or women have to switch their votes?

Your party of racists would have to switch far more then their views to become relevant in the coming future.
Click to expand...

Why would people base their vote on the performance of people in office? People can vote however they would like but I find it difficult to believe that performance doesn't matter to voters of color.
 
blackascoal said:
This is not the nation of white men only that you call history.

What reason would non-white people, white people of conscious, or women have to switch their votes?

Your party of racists would have to switch far more then their views to become relevant in the coming future.

Your party has been reduced to third-party status in the state that you call home.
Click to expand...

In 2008 and 2012 you guys said the GOP would never win the White House again

Ooops

Oh yeah MUH RUSSIA
 
cawacko said:
Why would people base their vote on the performance of people in office? People can vote however they would like but I find it difficult to believe that performance doesn't matter to voters of color.
Click to expand...

RACISM matters to people of color.

How is it that you don't know that?

Point out large numbers of people of color supporting a fucking racist.

Your party is racist to the core .. which quite obviously does not matter to you.
 
blackascoal said:
This is not the nation of white men only that you call history.

What reason would non-white people, white people of conscious, or women have to switch their votes?

Your party of racists would have to switch far more then their views to become relevant in the coming future.

Your party has been reduced to third-party status in the state that you call home.
Click to expand...

California isn't the whole nation though. California can vote 100% for the Democratic candidate for President and it still only delivers 55 electoral votes (and 2 Senators). So you are correct the GOP in this state is close to being an afterthought but again, it's not the whole nation.
 
cawacko said:
There's not going to be continuous one party rule on the national level. I understand some cling to demographics are destiny but that implies people don't vote on the performance of those in office and that the attitude of people today will be the exact same in 30 years and history tells us otherwise.
Click to expand...

It's a one party rule right now, YOU'RE party.

A party that cheated it's way into office, not voted in by the American people.
 
I wouldn't really start with court packing, if we win in two years and begin court packing just to get more Democrats on the court it's obviously not going to look good. We can wait, if they make an outrageous decision, we'll use that as the excuse. Expanding the size of the court is constitutional, but it is like the last, theoretical resort against extreme judicial activism.

The supreme court knows, in any case, that it is an incredibly weak branch if it tries to go it alone against the rest of the government. That last all of like 2-3 years under Roosevelt, and he was facing one of the most judicially activist courts of all time, entirely trying to revert the New Deal on their own. Modern conservatives realize this; they will show restraint. I feel the Republicans are going to be out of power for the long time anyway. So I am not fearful.
 
blackascoal said:
RACISM matters to people of color.

How is it that you don't know that?

Point out large numbers of people of color supporting a fucking racist.

Your party is racist to the core .. which quite obviously does not matter to you.
Click to expand...

I don't agree that the party is racist to the core. Nor do I believe all Democratic policies help P.O.C. The Republican Party has a lot of work to do with voters of color but for the past 18 years I've been posting on these boards I've heard the Republican Party is dead, the Republican Party is dead. I'm sure the Democratic Party would love to be as dead as the Republican Party if it meant controlling as much as the Republicans do now.
 
cawacko said:
Why would people base their vote on the performance of people in office? People can vote however they would like but I find it difficult to believe that performance doesn't matter to voters of color.
Click to expand...

California Republicans hit rock bottom
New figures show the once-proud state GOP has been relegated to third-party status.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/30/california-republicans-third-party-status-613568

Don't look now but even the South is in play for democrats today .. and many of those states will become majority-minority.
 
cawacko said:
California isn't the whole nation though. California can vote 100% for the Democratic candidate for President and it still only delivers 55 electoral votes (and 2 Senators). So you are correct the GOP in this state is close to being an afterthought but again, it's not the whole nation.
Click to expand...

And this is how they cheat.

CA the state that keeps the country running and it only gets two senators.

Let that sink in.

The EC allows racist white men to stay in power.
 
cawacko said:
I don't agree that the party is racist to the core. Nor do I believe all Democratic policies help P.O.C. The Republican Party has a lot of work to do with voters of color but for the past 18 years I've been posting on these boards I've heard the Republican Party is dead, the Republican Party is dead. I'm sure the Democratic Party would love to be as dead as the Republican Party if it meant controlling as much as the Republicans do now.
Click to expand...

Of course you don't .. but that has nothing to do with the truth.

Half the country thinks Donald Trump is a racist. HALF.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/04/politics/donald-trump-quinnipiac-poll/index.html

.. blinders
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top