The never-ending POTUS Election thread....

[peplaw06]

Pep's boy Gary Johnson this morning: "What is Aleppo?"

It was a gotcha question. Aleppo is a city in Syria. It's not synonymous with the issue. That's like asking a question about transgender bathroom laws by saying, "what would you do about North Carolina?"

That said, he made a mistake, and he has owned up to it. I respect that a hell of a lot more than fucking Trump and Hillary who never admit mistakes.

In a campaign full of verbal diarrhea coming from your candidate and the lies coming from HRC, if this is the worst it gets, I'll take it every day.

 

[peplaw06]

Could be worse... like, say, if he didn't know why there are 13 stripes on the American flag. *cough* Trump *cough*

 

[peplaw06]

On the bright side, we've found a topic where Mid and Dbair are in lock step.

 

[Scot]

I would rather have Four possibly fucked up years of office with Trump's picks in the Supreme Court for the rest of my lifetime than 8 unthinkable years of Hillary with her Libtard and anti 2A choices for SCOTUS ruin this county for the remainder of my days

 

[Doomsday]

I would rather have Four possibly fucked up years of office with Trump's picks in the Supreme Court for the rest of my lifetime than 8 unthinkable years of Hillary with her Libtard and anti 2A choices for SCOTUS ruin this county for the remainder of my days

A case of "which would do the most and most lasting damage," eh?

 

[Scot]

Exactly
I'm not worried that Trump will fuck it up for four years or Hillary for four to eight. I'm worried about the next 30 years plus with which ever one gets to appoint SCOTUS

Both will make a shitty president IMO. I just don't want Hillary to have the ability to fuck this country up long term with her SCOTUS selections

 

[dbair1967]

I really hope everyone realizes this and considers that above all else when voting in November.

That said, the American people proved how painfully stupid they were when they elected someone like Obama, not just once but twice.

 

[peplaw06]

Trump is likely to fuck up SCOTUS appointments as well. Bush 41 appointed Breyer.

 

[ZeroClub]

The crappy choices that we have for the current election .... and the shitty state of Congress ... the whole notion that the executive and legislative branches of the federal government are broken, almost beyond repair.

People should stop and consider how we got here. How is it that the extremes of both parties now dominate moderates? Why is it that the parties are now reflexively obstructive and antagonistic? Why is there almost no hope of finding common ground in D.C. these days? What happened to working across the aisle?

An important part of what's wrong today is that a long-standing conservative Supreme Court has made a series of decisions (re: campaign funding, gerrymandering districts, etc.) that have promoted the deterioration of our nation's political climate to the point where we are now remarkably factionalized.

It is important to realize that there are problems associated with having an entrenched conservative court. It isn't that there is something wrong with the conservative perspective. However there is definitely something wrong with entrenchment.

Both perspectives (liberal and conservative) have strengths and weaknesses. If you allow the court to be dominated by one perspective for an extended period of time, the weaknesses associated with that perspective can become debilitating.

The shifting from liberal to conservative, back to liberal, and then back to conservative, is corrective. It is curative. It is a way, perhaps the only way, that ideologically-based missteps are fixed.

If you want more dysfunctional government today, one of your best moves would be to load the Supreme Court with more conservative justices to ensure that the conservative ideology retains its prolonged stranglehold over our third branch of government. Entrenchment will keep our country on the wrong path.

 

[Doomsday]

Trump is likely to fuck up SCOTUS appointments as well. Bush 41 appointed Breyer.

Umm, no. That was Billy.

Realistically, Hillary should have only two appointments, barring more deaths - and that's the one current vacancy and 80 year-old Kennedy. While potentially, Trump might have four - The aforementioned Breyer, Ginsberg, Kennedy, and the current vacancy.

Something to consider, for sure. But yeah, there's no telling at all WHO Trump might appoint.

 

[Sheik]

Roberts was W's mistake.

 

[bbgun]

Something to consider, for sure. But yeah, there's no telling at all WHO Trump might appoint.

he already submitted a list of names that pleased conservatives. with Hillary, you have no chance of avoiding a far-left activist on the bench. with Trump, you do.

 

[Doomsday]

he already submitted a list of names that pleased conservatives.

But like he said, that list really means Butkus. We don't KNOW what type of jurist(s) he would actually put forth as nominees.

with Hillary, you have no chance of avoiding a far-left activist on the bench. with Trump, you do.

Right, a chance. Not a likelihood.

By the way what you were saying earlier somewhere, about pot being made legal "because blacks can't help themselves" is something the left might never SAY, but we have examples of this everywhere. Condoms in schools "because adolescents can't help themselves," affirmative action "because blacks can't help themselves for not applying themselves in middle and high school," more welfare per child for baby mommas "because blacks can't help themselves" and so on. It's not only the "soft" bigotry of lowered expectations, it's lowered expectations because personal responsibility and self reliance and its rewards/pitfalls is anathema to the left. And Personal responsibility and self reliance are two things they've been systematically destroying for generations.

The winning argument so far on the pot thing is "make it legal like alcohol" and for at least a decade I've been surprised at otherwise Libertarian-minded people advocating this, "tax it like beer" all the while not realizing this merely grows government, funds it more, makes it even more intrusive than it was - every single thing these Libertarian types would otherwise be screaming bloody murder against.

Between that and this Trump thing, I finally came to realize that by and large most people WANT bigger and more intrusive government and don't mind more thievery by same government to get there - so long is this bigger and more intrusive government does what THEY WANT DONE!

This is why these purely emotional arguments totally devoid of rational objective thought, have been winning the day on some of these issues ('Love wins,' anyone? That'll be NAMBLA'S next battle cry since it's worked so well for LGBTQ) - and might well also win the White House.

 

[bbgun]

The winning argument so far on the pot thing is "make it legal like alcohol" and for at least a decade I've been surprised at otherwise Libertarian-minded people advocating this, "tax it like beer" all the while not realizing this merely grows government, funds it more, makes it even more intrusive than it was - every single thing these Libertarian types would otherwise be screaming bloody murder against.

Libertarianism isn't a serious governing philosophy, mainly because women are completely turned off by it. if you can't get a certain percentage of women to vote for you, you're dead in the water. also, the movement has been hijacked by lefty SJWs in recent years, with Johnson foremost among them (sadly). "liberty" and "open borders" are incompatible.

Between that and this Trump thing, I finally came to realize that by and large most people WANT bigger and more intrusive government and don't mind more thievery by same government to get there - so long is this bigger and more intrusive government does what THEY WANT DONE!

well yeah, winning elections is all about power/control, and most importantly, punishing your enemies.

 

[Doomsday]

Libertarianism isn't a serious governing philosophy

It's a serious core philosophy though, which is what I was referencing. Tons of these self described Libertarian types are more than willing to eschew their own core beliefs and philosophies, as long as they can just have their pot! They don't seem to care that "legalization" just grows the government and makes any pot crimes left (there will be many) federal beefs now instead of local misdemeanors.. (For the record, my position has always been the true Libertarian one on this, de-criminalization. Keep the government totally out of it. These morons don't understand the distinction between "legalization" and de-criminalization.)

well yeah, winning elections is all about power/control, and most importantly, punishing your enemies.

It was never about punishing anyone, until 2009.

But, you missed my point totally. Power/control might be what it's all about with politicians, but for the people it's never been that. I am saying, that your common conservative out there who's always said he is for smaller government throws that shit right out the window when it's a pet issue involved. He WANTS more and bigger government, for things like abortion, for example.

 

[peplaw06]

Umm, no. That was Billy.

Realistically, Hillary should have only two appointments, barring more deaths - and that's the one current vacancy and 80 year-old Kennedy. While potentially, Trump might have four - The aforementioned Breyer, Ginsberg, Kennedy, and the current vacancy.

Something to consider, for sure. But yeah, there's no telling at all WHO Trump might appoint.

My bad... it was Souter.

 

[junk]

So the DMN article talked about individual liberty as a core tenet of the Republican Party. Ignoring Trump, do people think that is still a core tenet of the Republican party?

 

[dbair1967]

Trump is likely to fuck up SCOTUS appointments as well. Bush 41 appointed Breyer.

You keep saying that, but there's zero evidence to support that Pep

Sounds like something you are hoping for, more than something that could actually happen.

 

[dbair1967]

But yeah, there's no telling at all WHO Trump might appoint.

He put the list of those he considered "strong candidates" for SCOTUS out there.

Unlike the Kunt, who I don't believe has done so yet.

 

[dbair1967]

Roberts was W's mistake.

Either Roberts was a Trojan horse or he just was plain bought.