Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[PACOX]

I'm saying if Biden restores the penalty, then the argument is rendered null: if it's only unconstitutional by virtue of having a $0 penalty, then if the penalty is no longer $0 it's no longer unconstitutional.

How does Biden just restore it?

[Zan15]

I'm saying if Biden restores the penalty, then the argument is rendered null: if it's only unconstitutional by virtue of having a $0 penalty, then if the penalty is no longer $0 it's no longer unconstitutional.

oh I know but if trump shuts it down in Jan..

Even for just a few days because the SCoTUS loses their minds, restarting it would be a mess?
Of course this depends on how Trump does it, if it immediately shuts down all payments and funding or has a window.

[DarkTZeratul]

How does Biden just restore it?

Didn't Trump simply remove it via Executive Order? Or am I misremembering?

[Zan15]

How does Biden just restore it?

that's what I mean, does a president have the ability to re-activate something that required congressional approval?

imagine the lawsuits filed by republicans and how long it would take for the courts to decide if Biden could even reinstate the penalty and if he could reinstate an act of congress after its "turned off".

[DarkTZeratul]

oh I know but if trump shuts it down in Jan..

How, though? Trump lacks the ability to simply "shut it down." It's why they're throwing their support behind a dubious Supreme Court case.

[Zan15]

Didn't Trump simply remove it via Executive Order? Or am I misremembering?

sure if the ACA law is still active, regulating the fee and many parts are easy through EO and management by CMS.

But once the law becomes null and void can you restart it without congressional action?

[DarkTZeratul]

But once the law becomes null and void can you restart it without congressional action?

Again, Trump can't simply make the law null and void. There is no way for him to do that, or he'd have done it already. They're banking on the Supreme Court doing that, but they pushed the case off until after the inauguration which gives the Democrats ample time to simply fix the part that's claimed to be unconstitutional.

[Zan15]

How, though? Trump lacks the ability to simply "shut it down." It's why they're throwing their support behind a dubious Supreme Court case.

if the SCoTUs says $0 is not a penalty and invalidates the ACA as a whole...then the ACA goes poof and the president can enforce their ruling.

But I don't think after that fact the president could reactivate a congressional action that just got invalidated without actual congressional participation??

- - - Updated - - -

Again, Trump can't simply make the law null and void. There is no way for him to do that, or he'd have done it already. They're banking on the Supreme Court doing that, but they pushed the case off until after the inauguration.

yes I know I am saying IF they rule its unconstitutional before trump leaves office, would biden have the power to undo it?

[Thelxi]

It looks like the VP shortlist is even shorter now: Kamala, Warren, Val Demings, Lance Bottoms. The VP will be announced at the start of August (perhaps even earlier), so not a lot of time left.

Kamala: Imo she is the best overall choice. She is extremely charismatic with good jokes that land, comes across as very genuine and is overall a great communicator that is easy to listen to. She also makes the strongest case for supporting Biden "no matter what". She looks great too, has great style, and could be from anywhere and belong to any racial minority. Her still being a front runner after weeks (months?) of vetting, probably also means that she doesn't have too much baggage from her DA and AG careers.

Personally I don't find her to be very trustworthy, and I would much prefer Warren to take over from Biden if necessary, but whatever this is not the time to split hairs.

Warren: I love this woman I am very biased. Her brains and heart put everyone else to shame. She inspires great trust in me which is ultimately all I can ask from a politician. I can think of no one else I'd rather have take over if Biden has to step down. If anyone can heal and transform the country it's her.

My adoration aside, she is the only one on the short list that has not been overtly campaigning for the job. I'm a bit surprised she is evidently still participating in the process, and kinda shocked that she apparently was the front runner before BLM blew up. I was under the impression that she didn't even want the job. While I think she is by far the best choice here, I don't see many political arguments in her favor and I would be surprised if they announce her. But hey, she's in the top 4!

Val Demings: Outclassed by Kamala in the charisma department. She's a very run-of-the-mill politician with nothing really standing out to me, good or bad. Maybe she is very popular in FL? She is "more black" than Kamala in policy, rhetoric and appearance, so if that ends up being the deciding factor I could see that giving her the edge over all others. She's quite serious and at least on the surface looks like she would be up for the job of replacing Biden if necessary.

Lance Bottoms: I didn't know her at all before this, and the little I saw from her was not very exciting. Not nearly as charismatic as Kamala in most regards; she appears to recite memorized talking points and little else. Overall she impresses me as a young and inexperienced politician. If BLM is the deciding factor I'd give the edge to Demings over her, but I could be wrong.

Susan Rice: Honorable mention goes to her. I think she is extremely intelligent and qualified. I feel like I know her a bit better than most of the others too since she's been around for so long. Kinda sad to see her not make the top 4, but I can see why. Even for me she can be hard to listen to/follow. She'd be my second choice behind Warren.

So without any insider knowledge my money is on Kamala and my hopes are with Warren. We will know soon enough.

[DarkTZeratul]

yes I know I am saying IF they rule its unconstitutional before trump leaves office, would biden have the power to undo it?

In that case, no, but they aren't ruling on it until after that happens so it's irrelevant.

[PACOX]

Didn't Trump simply remove it via Executive Order? Or am I misremembering?

Its a lot easier to say 'well I'm not going to enforce this portion of a bill" than to add on to it without going through Congress or SCOTUS.

[DarkTZeratul]

Its a lot easier to say 'well I'm not going to enforce this portion of a bill" than to add on to it without going through Congress or SCOTUS.

But I mean, if the penalty was removed via Executive Order, it should be just as simple to restore it via Executive Order. Just as one executive can say "I'm not going to enforce this" and the next can say "I am."

Obviously if I'm wrong and the penalty was removed by some other means that I've forgotten about then that's fair, but if it's all Executive Orders then it can be countered just as easily.

[Rasulis]

which would still allow him to abolish it right before he leaves???
or god forbid.....

Next Supreme Court session would start December 7, 2020. If Biden win, he won't take office till January 2021. Not impossible, but pretty short time track especially with the holiday season in between. Also, assuming the court schedule the case for December. I have a feeling the court does not really want to touch this with a 100-foot pole.

[Zan15]

In that case, no, but they aren't ruling on it until after that happens so it's irrelevant.

I thought next session after this one closes, was first Monday of Oct 2020?


He would still have Oct-Jan would he not?

- - - Updated - - -

Next Supreme Court session would start December 7, 2020. If Biden win, he won't take office till January 2021. Not impossible, but pretty short time track especially with the holiday season in between. Also, assuming the court schedule the case for December. I have a feeling the court does not really want to touch this with a 100-foot pole.

^^ see above? Thought it was oct

[PACOX]

But I mean, if the penalty was removed via Executive Order, it should be just as simple to restore it via Executive Order. Just as one executive can say "I'm not going to enforce this" and the next can say "I am."

Obviously if I'm wrong and the penalty was removed by some other means that I've forgotten about then that's fair, but if it's all Executive Orders then it can be countered just as easily.

The tax cuts did away with the individual mandate

[Rasulis]

October. Correct. Sorry. Spaced out.

I still think they won't be heard till after the election. Not to mention the same five justices that voted to uphold ACA in 2012 & 2015 are still there.

[DarkTZeratul]

The tax cuts did away with the individual mandate

Ah, okay. Then Biden can't unilaterally restore it. Still, if the Democrats take the Senate, they could still easily do so.

Regardless, my expectation is still that even if the Supreme Court DOES determine that having a penalty of $0 is unconstitutional, they're far more likely to rule that changing the penalty to $0 was unconstitutional and revert THAT, rather than chucking out the entire ACA.

[cubby]

Ah, okay. Then Biden can't unilaterally restore it. Still, if the Democrats take the Senate, they could still easily do so.

Regardless, my expectation is still that even if the Supreme Court DOES determine that having a penalty of $0 is unconstitutional, they're far more likely to rule that changing the penalty to $0 was unconstitutional and revert THAT, rather than chucking out the entire ACA.

A Democratic Congress (House and Senate) with Biden at the wheel could restore it almost immediately. And I'm sure that's on Pelosi's legislative wish list.

[Rasulis]

Fox News moves Texas into the "Toss-up" category, with their latest poll showing Biden ahead for the first time, with a 1 point lead.

Here is the link to the actual poll results

POLITICAL IDENTIFICATION: 40% Democrats/46% Republicans/14% Independent. Can't claim oversampling Democrats anymore.

[arandomuser]

So during the 2016 the usual people were concern trolling us about how "weak hillary was" on islam because she refused to say radical islam ( even though she did actually multiplep times)
meanwhile trump has given 100 billion to saudi arabia in weapons
gave up afghanistan to the taliban
Gave up syria to russia
let the kurds be genocided by turkey
and now just todaay
allows putin to literally pay islamist as bounty hunters to murder US troops

and he'll still probably win re election because putin and china want him there