Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ...
6
14
15
16
  1. #301
    The Undying
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    34,523
    Quote Originally Posted by jimboa24 View Post
    Even if Trump loses, it's highly unlikely that the Republicans will lose the House and the Senate. The presidency isn't a monarchy, so even if Hillary is elected, she still has to get her nominations confirmed through Congress.
    It's actually more likely than not that the GOP will lose control of the Senate - and there is an outside chance, very outside, that they will lose the House.

    The Presidency isn't a monarchy? Really? Thanks for that.

    The Senate is there to advise and consent, not categorically deny any nomination coming from a President.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by RaoBurning View Post
    Not even that long. I got my early voter papers in the mail this week and I've never scribbled a darker, more unambiguous line next to a candidate's name than I did Hillary's. The "legalize marijuana" line is a close second though. Much ink. I assume a whole mess of other people have done much the same.
    That legalize marijuana line is gonna get more Dems out for the vote. I'm very interested in how Texas will play out. Hillary won't win that state, but finishing within a few percentage points would be amazing.

  2. #302
    Quote Originally Posted by Healing Rain View Post
    Crooked Hillary would be impeached before she nominated anyone. Thankfully she won't be elected.
    trump is more likely to be impeached than hillary.
    they didnt even impeach Obama after so many threats of doing so. The republican party talk big but dont do anything.
    Anemo: traveler, Sucrose
    Pyro: Yanfei, Amber, diluc, xiangling, thoma, Xinyan, Bennett
    Geo: Noelle, Ningguang, Yun Jin, Gorou
    Hydro: Barbara, Zingqiu, Ayato
    Cyro: Shenhe, Kaeya, Chongyun, Diona, Ayaka, Rosaria
    Electro: Fischl, Lisa, Miko, Kujou, Raiden, Razor

  3. #303
    The Insane Kujako's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In the woods, doing what bears do.
    Posts
    17,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Zanjin View Post
    trump is more likely to be impeached than hillary.
    Liar... you have to be elected to be impeached.
    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning.

    -Kujako-

  4. #304
    Quote Originally Posted by Zanjin View Post
    trump is more likely to be impeached than hillary.
    they didnt even impeach Obama after so many threats of doing so. The republican party talk big but dont do anything.
    I was about to respond it's because he didn't do anything to get impeached and then decided to look it up.

    In the United States, impeachment can occur both at the federal and state level. The Constitution defines impeachment at the federal level and limits impeachment to "The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States" who may be impeached and removed only for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors".[21] Several commentators have suggested that Congress alone may decide for itself what constitutes a "high crime or misdemeanor", especially since Nixon v. United States stated that the Supreme Court did not have the authority to determine whether the Senate properly "tried" a defendant.[22] In 1970, then-House Minority Leader Gerald R. Ford defined the criterion as he saw it: "An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history."
    So I guess they technically could have impeached him for nothing if they gerrymandered about more.

    I'm more worried about Trump dropping nukes before he has the chance to be impeached if he got elected (which I don't think there is any chance of occurring at this moment).

  5. #305
    Quote Originally Posted by Kujako View Post
    Liar... you have to be elected to be impeached.
    totally missed my point.
    Anemo: traveler, Sucrose
    Pyro: Yanfei, Amber, diluc, xiangling, thoma, Xinyan, Bennett
    Geo: Noelle, Ningguang, Yun Jin, Gorou
    Hydro: Barbara, Zingqiu, Ayato
    Cyro: Shenhe, Kaeya, Chongyun, Diona, Ayaka, Rosaria
    Electro: Fischl, Lisa, Miko, Kujou, Raiden, Razor

  6. #306
    What threats of impeaching Obama? They've literally never said anything of impeachment about Obama other than that it was off the table. As was using the power of the purse to force compromise. The only two legitimate constitutional checks the Congress has on the executive branch have been explicitly off the table the entirety of the time the opposing party controlled one or both houses of Congress.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    Can you show me the provisions for that selection process in the Constitution? Oh, right. Good talk.
    Oh boy, bet you think you just said something terribly clever, too. The parameters of the selection process obviously aren't there -- but the same oath of office the justices would take is the same one the Senators take, including amongst other things to uphold and defend the Constitution. Y'know, the actual text of the thing. Not our feels about what we wish it meant now but can't be arsed to try to convince others, by process of amendment, to make it say, so instead appoint judges to dream it into being.

    You only have about three weeks of hope yet, then it's off to the races. Three weeks of delusions of Trumpeteering then it's time for reality.
    Trump is as asshat; Clinton is unmetaphorically evil, the most corrupt figure to ever seek the Presidency in at least 100 years. She will not lack for vigorous opposition if the world and human history is unfortunate enough for her to gain that office.

  7. #307
    Legendary! TZucchini's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Wish it was Canada
    Posts
    6,989
    Quote Originally Posted by Stormdash View Post
    Y'know, the actual text of the thing. Not our feels about what we wish it meant now but can't be arsed to try to convince others, by process of amendment, to make it say, so instead appoint judges to dream it into being.
    If the Constitution text were black and white, we wouldn't need judges to interpret it.
    Eat yo vegetables

  8. #308
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    If the Constitution text were black and white, we wouldn't need judges to interpret it.
    To apply the text and its mutual understanding by it's authors and those who ratified it, to the facts of cases brought under it. Originalism.

    Judges to interpret, yes. Judges to reshape, to redefine in terms of the way things "ought to be today" in their perceptions? To deem antiquated? Not appropriate. It is the moral and legal duty of any Senator to oppose a nominee with such a view of the law.

  9. #309
    Partying in Valhalla
    Annoying's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Socorro, NM, USA
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitantBadger View Post
    Except Democrats have done the exact same thing. How quickly we forget the sit in in Congress because the gun laws the democrats wanted got shut down in the Senate. Please stop trying to make Democrats look good when in reality all politicians no matter what party they are in are a bunch of whiny spoiled brats.
    But the comparison between the two is orders of magnitude in difference. There's quite a large difference between a short-lived sit-in in congress and systematic obstructionism. The GOP consistently shut down anything other than "vote to repeal Obamacare". Which they did more than 60 times.

    I agree with you end point, though, politicians on all sides are being pouty little brats.

  10. #310
    The Undying
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    34,523
    Quote Originally Posted by Stormdash View Post
    Oh boy, bet you think you just said something terribly clever, too. The parameters of the selection process obviously aren't there -- but the same oath of office the justices would take is the same one the Senators take, including amongst other things to uphold and defend the Constitution. Y'know, the actual text of the thing. Not our feels about what we wish it meant now but can't be arsed to try to convince others, by process of amendment, to make it say, so instead appoint judges to dream it into being.
    I wish you had been able to do the same. The sad fact is that McCain is already walking back his comments because they were beyond ridiculous. Only people like yourself fail to recognize the insane implications of categorically blocking Supreme Court nominees from a specific President.

    And I hope you're aware that the Constitution is a fluid document - amendable to the times. Just as one example: the right to privacy. Why do you continue to argue that we aren't afforded a right to privacy? Why do you hate privacy so much?

  11. #311
    Merely a Setback breadisfunny's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    flying the exodar...into the sun.
    Posts
    25,923
    Quote Originally Posted by provaporous View Post
    Good, anyone Clinton picks is going to be in her pocket and will legislate from the bench to further erode American values.
    people like you are the reason this country is going to rot.
    r.i.p. alleria. 1997-2017. blizzard ruined alleria forever. blizz assassinated alleria's character and appearance.
    i will never forgive you for this blizzard.

  12. #312
    The Undying
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    34,523
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    If the Constitution text were black and white, we wouldn't need judges to interpret it.
    He doesn't get it, and if he does, he'll never admit being wrong - it's the sad mantra of anonymous forums.

  13. #313
    Quote Originally Posted by Ragedaug View Post
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/1600/legislative-branch

    "All legislative power in the government is vested in Congress, meaning that it is the only part of the government that can make new laws or change existing laws. Executive Branch agencies issue regulations with the full force of law, but these are only under the authority of laws enacted by Congress."

    So herein lies part of the problem as well.

    The executive branch should NOT be legislating at ALL...that's not it's role. And we have too many people who have no clue how our government was designed to work, so it just stays broken.
    Very well, I shouldn't have used the word "legislate" there as technically the executive branch only signs legislation into law or passes vetos. I think it's beside the point I was making though.

    The legislation in question is put forward by the senators that belong to the political party of the executive. In reality it makes little difference.

    Unless Trump gets in I suppose, in that case we might see an executive who can't get his own party to cooperate with him in the Senate :P

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Seranthor View Post
    Maybe Obama or one of his representatives should ask to meet with the Judiciary committee and they can negotiate a different nominee, one that the committee will vote on and then pass to the floor. Unfortunately that would require both parties (Obama and the GOP) to act like adults. I am convinced that neither ARE, because IF Obama was inclined to negotiate then he would have used that as a weapon to say 'Look here I tried to work with the committee but they wont talk to me or whatever' but I have yet to see anything like that out of the WH.

    You are right, the founders decided the system should be adversarial but the left and the right have gone way way way beyond adversarial into cockblock land. Sadly we as an electorate are the problem, we continue to elect these folks.
    It's really only become a big issue in the US in the last 10 years or so, here in Australia trenchant partisan politics have been de rigueur for pretty much my whole lifetime. I used to look at American politics and be surprised how much the two parties actually worked together. Relatively speaking.

    I blame the neo-cons and their modern splinter movements :P
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  14. #314
    The Lightbringer fengosa's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Canada, Eh
    Posts
    3,612
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitantBadger View Post
    Except Democrats have done the exact same thing. How quickly we forget the sit in in Congress because the gun laws the democrats wanted got shut down in the Senate. Please stop trying to make Democrats look good when in reality all politicians no matter what party they are in are a bunch of whiny spoiled brats.
    90% of Americans support improved background checks. I doubt half as many support blocking SCOTUS nominations.

    Let's not pretend that both parties are equal on the subject because you can cite one example. That doesn't make up for 8 years of obstructionism and a 12% approval rating.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Stormdash View Post
    To apply the text and its mutual understanding by it's authors and those who ratified it, to the facts of cases brought under it. Originalism.

    Judges to interpret, yes. Judges to reshape, to redefine in terms of the way things "ought to be today" in their perceptions? To deem antiquated? Not appropriate. It is the moral and legal duty of any Senator to oppose a nominee with such a view of the law.
    The 4th amendment protects against illegal search and seizure of yourself and your home. It says nothing about your car however SCOTUS deemed that your car should be protected by the 4th. I'm going to go out on a limb and say most Americans agree with that decision even though it's not the actual text in the constitution. The same applies to phone tapping and there's a modern day discussion on digital communications as well.

    You're essentially living in a dream world where you think the rules should be bent to fit your own agenda despite the fact that the constitution has never worked that way and never will.
    Last edited by fengosa; 2016-10-19 at 12:35 AM.

  15. #315
    Neither party should be using dirty tactics that are just a waste of everyone's time. Most frustrating of all is that nobody on either side has any principles. Its always wrong and shouldnt be allowed when its the other side, but perfectly justified when the tables are turned.

  16. #316
    McCain is becoming senile in his old age, also we need senate term limits ASAP. We also collectively need to stop being stupid enough to reelect these clowns.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •