RBG Has Died

[brett05]

Why do folks here keep thinking that the Republicans started this in 2016 when they got the idea straight from.....Joe Biden himself?

[ewing]

Bolded………
Two reasons…

1. It was based on a phone conversation accusing the prez of a quid pro quo when the other participant of the cnversation said it never happened. (And FYI……quid pro quo happens all the time in government)

2. You needed 67 Senators to agree to remove the prez (you did know that, right???) That means you woul;d need about 20 repub sens to agree to impeachment. Do you think that could possible happen bases on a third party's assessment of the quid pro quo phone call.

Why was it dirty……see reasons 1 and 2 above. The entire point was to make the prez look bad. Months worth of time was wasted (during the early stages of the pandemic); billions of $$$ were wasted solely in the attempt to make the prez look bad. All for something that had no chance. So yeah, that was dirty.

One: I think it was based on the President using the power of his office to try and leverage a foreign power into doing something to help him politically. We will give you aid if you smear my rival. In fact I’m sure of it. I personally think they had the good on him. Not all quid pro quo’s are equal.

Two: the fact that they didn’t have the votes doesn’t mean you don’t raise the issue.

Three: doesn’t seem dirty to me. Your expanse numbers seemed pulled out your butt though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sluggo1]

One: I think it was based on the President using the power of his office to try and leverage a foreign power into doing something to help him politically. We will give you aid if you smear my rival. In fact I’m sure of it. I personally think they had the good on him. Not all quid pro quo’s are equal.

Two: the fact that they didn’t have the votes doesn’t mean you don’t raise the issue.

Three: doesn’t seem dirty to me. Your expanse numbers seemed pulled out your butt though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Biolded……is opinion and not fact. And even if it did happen (and the Ukraine guy denies that it did) I'm not sure if this qualifies as a quid pro quo that helps Trump and hurts the US.

Don't you thonk that some promises were probably made in the latest Middle East recognitions of Israel by the US to these othewr Arab countries.

Again……quid pro quo happens al the time in politics. What do you think campaign contributions are??? As long as no one is getting money for it (see Biden, Hunter), what is the big deal????

Hald the people in this forum probably thought quid pro quo was some Spanish dish before this all came up.

[spliff(TONE)]

Can we pause for a minute and point out how pathetic everyone is on the back/forth on who’s right and who’s wrong for SCOTUS nods here? This isn’t the thread for that.

Absolutely. Bunch of vultures foaming at the mouth.

[nessythegreat]

go for it. You guys are not winning back the house. You may end up keeping the senate/presidency but you are no winning back the house.

No we shouldn't. Because the way are levels of government are constructed are there for checks and balances. And you don't try to change the rules just because you lose elections. That's not how this works.
"You guys are not winning back the house" Very, very presumptuous of you.

[nessythegreat]

I don't cling to a political side like it's "good guys" vs "bad guys". Republicans and Democrats are monopolies tearing the country apart and I'd like to see it end in my lifetime. We have seen income inequality skyrocket over the last 40-50 years to the point that the millennial generation is expected to be the first generation in history that does worse than their parents (and it's not because we're not trying).

I understand trying to talk politics without the prism of "right vs left, us vs them" is baffling to you, but you're a sad fool if you think any of these politicians that you support (especially Trump) care about you in any way. They do not, it's all about power, and money, and greed, and Trump is the worst at it. American politics is nothing more than that.

They all need to be voted out, I've been saying that on this forum for a long time. And if you want to delude yourself into thinking an apocalypse isn't coming for the Republicans go right ahead, but you've been warned.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...er-than-trump/

https://www.voanews.com/usa/us-polit...en-wide-margin

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...te-jumps-to-77

Nor do I. There are many democrats and republicans who are career politicians and don't do anything for those who voted them in. They create horseshit policy and sell out our country for money. But the conservative side is the better way because it creates more room for growth and prosperity, not the socialist left side where everything needs to be controlled by government.
Why do you think many on the republican side are against Trump? Because they are career politicians and they don't want to upset the establishment that they have leeched off for decades. They are scared of him.
An "apocalypse for republicans"? We'll see come November.

[Crovash]

And admit that if the roles were reversed and Biden was president and senate dems had control you would want to see them nominate someone instead of waiting until the next election...

We all know it’s true.

You claim we all know the truth about something that has not happened yet? WTF?

[Crovash]

But not in the last 150 years. Not since the country has been formulated in its present state. Changing the court now simply because you don't like the make-up is wrong. It was wrong when FGDR trued iit and it would be wrong now.

It would be a fundamental change in the structure of the country. Just like statehood for DC and PR would be a fundamental change to the makeup of our country. It also sets precedents that no sensible [person wuld like to see.

Why not make NYC, Philly, and Chicago states??? Then conservatives in the rest of NY State, Pennsylvania and Illinois would be able to pick up their own senators and reps. As it is now, these areas have no representation in the Senate.

13 SC justices…why not 25 when the Repubs come back to power (if ever)????

What comes next…kick a few states out because you don't like their makeup???

No. Packing the court and "creating" states would not be acceptable to most sensible people. It would prove to be extremely divisive. The progressives would love it though so it may actually happen.

Whatever you do, for god’s sake, don’t change anything.

[Crovash]

Can we pause for a minute and point out how pathetic everyone is on the back/forth on who’s right and who’s wrong for SCOTUS nods here? This isn’t the thread for that.

By the same token, where else would you find some dickbrain suggesting that maybe Ginsburg herself caused this division?

[Kenny Powders]

I sense a barrage of question and exclamation marks are gonna hit this thread soon

[GGGGG-Men]

PR……cut them loose.

If you want to make PR a state, why not see if we can grab El Salvador while we're at it.

Hang on that’s ridiculous. PR is one of our territories for a long time. We’ve had governing rights and they’ve had no representation. It’s not like we’re conquering new land.

But yes I would agree we should phase them out if we’re not going to grant statehood.

This stuck in the middle status is silly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GGGGG-Men]

No idea!!! You really have no idea as to whether or not the dems would do the same thing???

No aggressive fight!!! Like the impeachment that had no chance to go anywhere???

Come on. You lost all your credibility with that post.

Oh wow the one time they did something. And they also botched that. They had legitimate violations of the emoluments clause etc etc they could have impeached for and they never did a thing until Trump messed with their potus candidate. Partisan crap. Not actual fight.

So no I have no ideal what a wishywashy weak party like the Dems would have done and nobody really does. They’d be too scared of losing moderates just like they are today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GGGGG-Men]

If they had the numbers…they wouldn't keep losing.

Do you need another lesson on the electoral system??

Do you need a lesson?

Dems get the majority of voters in general election. Their issues get a majority of support.

They lose because of the electoral system and a completely outdated system of senate representation that is not remotely fair representation of the public.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GGGGG-Men]

be upset. don't like how the Senate does things, control the Senate.

but I don't think the right is going to to care when if things were reversed Democrats would do the same thing.

If if if.

We’re not taking about ifs. We’re talking about what happened. Obama should have had his pick and Trump should have his. But Mitch set a new precedent with Obama. No appointees in an election year. Fine then let’s stick to it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nastynice]

Because the way are levels of government are constructed are there for checks and balances.

It sure dont feel like it..

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk