Poll of the Day > Supreme Court to lose its swing voter: Justice Anthony Kennedy to retire.

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
WastelandCowboy 06/27/18 2:31:22 PM #1:	https://www.npr.org/2018/06/27/533997482/supreme-court-to-lose-its-swing-voter-justice-anthony-kennedy-to-retire Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement Wednesday, setting the stage for what promises to be an epic political battle over his replacement. A Trump nominee is likely to be far more conservative than Kennedy, who, though appointed by President Reagan, voted with the court's liberals in some key cases. Kennedy, who will turn 82 next month, made the announcement one day after the court handed down its last pending opinion for the 2017-18 term. He said he would continue to serve through July 31 of this year. There is little doubt about Kennedy's mark on history. Quite simply, he remade the face of marriage in America. More than any other justice, he was responsible for the advancement of LGBT rights. He wrote four of the court's opinions on the subject over nearly two decades, and ultimately declared marriage between two people of the same sex a fundamental right protected by the Constitution. "No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family," Kennedy said in his opinion. "In forming a marital union two people become something greater than what they once were." On a court that has become increasingly conservative, Kennedy's role has been pivotal. In 5-to-4 decisions, his vote has usually determined the outcome on some of the hottest legal and social issues of the day not just gay rights, but abortion, campaign finance, gun rights, affirmative action, the war on terror and the death penalty. President Trump has pledged to nominate a replacement who will almost certainly vote differently on many of these issues, putting some landmark decisions in jeopardy from Roe v. Wade to the legalization of same-sex marriage. That will please and reward conservative groups that have supported him. At the same time, it will galvanize opposition among Democrats, and potentially even some moderate Republicans. The confirmation rules this time, however, will be different from the get-go. When Democrats threatened to delay Trump's first nominee, Neil Gorsuch, earlier this year, Republicans voted to exempt Supreme Court nominations from filibusters, which required a super-majority of the Senate to cut off debate. So this time, the president will make his choice knowing that he only needs to get a majority of the Republican-controlled Senate to approve his nominee. And Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has proven adept at keeping his troops in line on judicial nominations. Still, the pressure will be intense, and the stakes high. If anyone has doubts about how different the court would likely be when a centrist conservative like Kennedy is replaced by someone more hard-line, there is the example of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement in 2006. President George W. Bush chose Samuel Alito to replace O'Connor, and the effect has been profound; O'Connor has even complained privately that Alito is systematically dismantling her legacy. <cite>WastelandCowboy posted [p:904067163] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>https://www.npr.org/2018/06/27/533997482/supreme-court-to-lose-its-swing-voter-justice-anthony-kennedy-to-retire <quote>Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement Wednesday, setting the stage for what promises to be an epic political battle over his replacement. A Trump nominee is likely to be far more conservative than Kennedy, who, though appointed by President Reagan, voted with the court's liberals in some key cases. Kennedy, who will turn 82 next month, made the announcement one day after the court handed down its last pending opinion for the 2017-18 term. He said he would continue to serve through July 31 of this year. There is little doubt about Kennedy's mark on history. Quite simply, he remade the face of marriage in America. More than any other justice, he was responsible for the advancement of LGBT rights. He wrote four of the court's opinions on the subject over nearly two decades, and ultimately declared marriage between two people of the same sex a fundamental right protected by the Constitution. "No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family," Kennedy said in his opinion. "In forming a marital union two people become something greater than what they once were." On a court that has become increasingly conservative, Kennedy's role has been pivotal. In 5-to-4 decisions, his vote has usually determined the outcome on some of the hottest legal and social issues of the day not just gay rights, but abortion, campaign finance, gun rights, affirmative action, the war on terror and the death penalty. President Trump has pledged to nominate a replacement who will almost certainly vote differently on many of these issues, putting some landmark decisions in jeopardy from Roe v. Wade to the legalization of same-sex marriage. That will please and reward conservative groups that have supported him. At the same time, it will galvanize opposition among Democrats, and potentially even some moderate Republicans. The confirmation rules this time, however, will be different from the get-go. When Democrats threatened to delay Trump's first nominee, Neil Gorsuch, earlier this year, Republicans voted to exempt Supreme Court nominations from filibusters, which required a super-majority of the Senate to cut off debate. So this time, the president will make his choice knowing that he only needs to get a majority of the Republican-controlled Senate to approve his nominee. And Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has proven adept at keeping his troops in line on judicial nominations. Still, the pressure will be intense, and the stakes high. If anyone has doubts about how different the court would likely be when a centrist conservative like Kennedy is replaced by someone more hard-line, there is the example of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement in 2006. President George W. Bush chose Samuel Alito to replace O'Connor, and the effect has been profound; O'Connor has even complained privately that Alito is systematically dismantling her legacy. </quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WastelandCowboy 06/27/18 2:31:30 PM #2:	Perhaps the best example of that dismantling is in the area of campaign finance. O'Connor, onetime GOP leader of the Arizona Senate, voted to uphold landmark campaign finance legislation in 2003 only to see the court reverse that decision seven years later, after Alito replaced her. While O'Connor was on the court, a majority of justices continued to support legislation that regulated campaign fundraising. But after her retirement and the Alito appointment, Kennedy wrote the court's 5-to-4 decision in Citizens United, the 2010 case that remade the way campaigns at every level are conducted. The decision unleashed an ever-growing flood of cash into political campaigns. It reversed a century-old understanding that had sought to prevent corruption by barring corporations, and later labor unions, from spending their general treasury funds on candidate elections. For Kennedy, reversing that legal understanding from the early 1900s was the realization of a long-held view of free speech. "Political speech is indispensable to decision-making in a democracy," Kennedy wrote in the Citizens United decision, "and this is no less true because the speech comes from a corporation rather than an individual." In general, there is probably no greater example of Kennedy's approach to the law, and how it will almost certainly differ from President Trump's nominee, than the question of how to interpret the Constitution: whether the Founding Fathers intended their creation as a static document, bound by the literal meaning of its words, or whether those words represent concepts of liberty to be interpreted over time. In a 2003 decision that struck down a Texas law criminalizing private homosexual conduct, Kennedy said that the Founders understood that they were writing a document for the ages. "They knew time can blind us to certain truths," he wrote in Lawrence v. Texas, "and later generations can see that laws, once thought necessary and proper, in fact serve only to oppress." The men and women on President Trump's list of potential replacements disagree with that view, for the most part. They side with the late Justice Antonin Scalia and his successor Justice Neil Gorsuch, as well as other conservatives on the Supreme Court today, who believe the nation is bound by the original intent of the Founders. During his presidential campaign, in a bid for the support of social conservatives, Trump issued two lists totaling 21 names and pledged to pick his first Supreme Court nominee from those lists. He did just that in naming Justice Gorsuch to fill the open seat once occupied by Scalia. People involved in that selection process say that the president intends to expand that list a bit now. He might add Judge Brett Kavanaugh from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and possibly former Solicitor General Paul Clement, a highly regarded Supreme Court advocate who served in the George W. Bush administration. Clement's main drawback in the president's mind, though, is said to be that he has no judicial track record to examine. Back in consideration are some of the names on the previous list: Judge Thomas Hardiman, of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey, and Judge Raymond Kethledge, who serves on the Sixth Circuit, which covers a large part of the Midwest. Hardiman was the runner-up last time and is known as a staunch gun rights advocate. All four are in their early 50s. <cite>WastelandCowboy posted [p:904067169] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><quote>Perhaps the best example of that dismantling is in the area of campaign finance. O'Connor, onetime GOP leader of the Arizona Senate, voted to uphold landmark campaign finance legislation in 2003 only to see the court reverse that decision seven years later, after Alito replaced her. While O'Connor was on the court, a majority of justices continued to support legislation that regulated campaign fundraising. But after her retirement and the Alito appointment, Kennedy wrote the court's 5-to-4 decision in Citizens United, the 2010 case that remade the way campaigns at every level are conducted. The decision unleashed an ever-growing flood of cash into political campaigns. It reversed a century-old understanding that had sought to prevent corruption by barring corporations, and later labor unions, from spending their general treasury funds on candidate elections. For Kennedy, reversing that legal understanding from the early 1900s was the realization of a long-held view of free speech. "Political speech is indispensable to decision-making in a democracy," Kennedy wrote in the Citizens United decision, "and this is no less true because the speech comes from a corporation rather than an individual." In general, there is probably no greater example of Kennedy's approach to the law, and how it will almost certainly differ from President Trump's nominee, than the question of how to interpret the Constitution: whether the Founding Fathers intended their creation as a static document, bound by the literal meaning of its words, or whether those words represent concepts of liberty to be interpreted over time. In a 2003 decision that struck down a Texas law criminalizing private homosexual conduct, Kennedy said that the Founders understood that they were writing a document for the ages. "They knew time can blind us to certain truths," he wrote in Lawrence v. Texas, "and later generations can see that laws, once thought necessary and proper, in fact serve only to oppress." The men and women on President Trump's list of potential replacements disagree with that view, for the most part. They side with the late Justice Antonin Scalia and his successor Justice Neil Gorsuch, as well as other conservatives on the Supreme Court today, who believe the nation is bound by the original intent of the Founders. During his presidential campaign, in a bid for the support of social conservatives, Trump issued two lists totaling 21 names and pledged to pick his first Supreme Court nominee from those lists. He did just that in naming Justice Gorsuch to fill the open seat once occupied by Scalia. People involved in that selection process say that the president intends to expand that list a bit now. He might add Judge Brett Kavanaugh from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and possibly former Solicitor General Paul Clement, a highly regarded Supreme Court advocate who served in the George W. Bush administration. Clement's main drawback in the president's mind, though, is said to be that he has no judicial track record to examine. Back in consideration are some of the names on the previous list: Judge Thomas Hardiman, of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey, and Judge Raymond Kethledge, who serves on the Sixth Circuit, which covers a large part of the Midwest. Hardiman was the runner-up last time and is known as a staunch gun rights advocate. All four are in their early 50s.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Krazy_Kirby 06/27/18 2:32:00 PM #3:	it don't mean a thing if you ain't got that swing --- Kill From The Shadows. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot <cite>Krazy_Kirby posted [p:904067197] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>it don't mean a thing if you ain't got that swing</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Pro_Boner 06/27/18 2:33:24 PM #4:	I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard --- ~"You can trust me. I'm a pro." <cite>Pro_Boner posted [p:904067300] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WastelandCowboy 06/27/18 2:36:03 PM #5:	Pro_Boner posted... I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard Wont read a news article because its too long and calls someone lazy. Hmmm. <cite>WastelandCowboy posted [p:904067482] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Pro_Boner posted...</cite> <quote>I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard</quote> Wont read a news article because its too long and calls someone lazy. Hmmm.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Pro_Boner 06/27/18 2:37:03 PM #6:	WastelandCowboy posted... Pro_Boner posted... I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard Wont read a news article because its too long and calls someone lazy. Hmmm. Hey, man. Don't be a judgmental prick. --- ~"You can trust me. I'm a pro." <cite>Pro_Boner posted [p:904067551] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>WastelandCowboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Pro_Boner posted...</cite> <quote>I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard</quote> Wont read a news article because its too long and calls someone lazy. Hmmm.</quote> Hey, man. Don't be a judgmental prick.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WastelandCowboy 06/27/18 2:39:11 PM #7:	Pro_Boner posted... WastelandCowboy posted... Pro_Boner posted... I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard Wont read a news article because its too long and calls someone lazy. Hmmm. Hey, man. Don't be a judgmental prick. You opened the door when you posted. Not my fault the shoe fits. <cite>WastelandCowboy posted [p:904067690] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Pro_Boner posted...</cite> <quote><cite>WastelandCowboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Pro_Boner posted...</cite> <quote>I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard</quote> Wont read a news article because its too long and calls someone lazy. Hmmm.</quote> Hey, man. Don't be a judgmental prick.</quote> You opened the door when you posted. Not my fault the shoe fits.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus 06/27/18 2:40:00 PM #8:	Well, all the Democrats have to do is somehow block the nomination process for the next two years or so then, if Trump gets re-elected, continue blocking it for the four years after that. >_> I suspect we're in for a lot of 4-4 decisions for a while. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:904067751] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>Well, all the Democrats have to do is somehow block the nomination process for the next two years or so then, if Trump gets re-elected, continue blocking it for the four years after that. >_> I suspect we're in for a lot of 4-4 decisions for a while.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 06/27/18 2:47:57 PM #9:	Pro_Boner posted... WastelandCowboy posted... Pro_Boner posted... I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard Wont read a news article because its too long and calls someone lazy. Hmmm. Hey, man. Don't be a judgmental prick. Irony. --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:904068303] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Pro_Boner posted...</cite> <quote><cite>WastelandCowboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Pro_Boner posted...</cite> <quote>I'm not reading all that shit. Still, what a lazy bastard</quote> Wont read a news article because its too long and calls someone lazy. Hmmm.</quote> Hey, man. Don't be a judgmental prick.</quote> Irony.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ernieforss 06/27/18 2:55:37 PM #10:	awe man, if we get Ted Cruz as a Supreme Court Judge....... But Trump doesn't know what a Judge is so he'll probably search the barber shop first before looking at a law firm or council memeber. https://www.mediaite.com/.../trump-goes-on-loony-rant-about-immigration- judges-go-to-the-barber-shop-grab-somebody-make-him-a-judge/Cached "How do you choose 5,000 judges? Can you imagine the corruption, just from a normal standpoint? Just common sense. Can you imagine the corruption? Go to the barber shop, grab somebody. Make them a judge. Everybody's being made a judge. They want 5,000 judges more. It's crazy" --- I'm always 50% right all the time <cite>ernieforss posted [p:904068806] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>awe man, if we get Ted Cruz as a Supreme Court Judge....... But Trump doesn't know what a Judge is so he'll probably search the barber shop first before looking at a law firm or council memeber. https://www.mediaite.com/.../trump-goes-on-loony-rant-about-immigration- judges-go-to-the-barber-shop-grab-somebody-make-him-a-judge/Cached "How do you choose 5,000 judges? Can you imagine the corruption, just from a normal standpoint? Just common sense. Can you imagine the corruption? Go to the barber shop, grab somebody. Make them a judge. Everybody's being made a judge. They want 5,000 judges more. It's crazy"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metal_Mario99 06/27/18 3:07:51 PM #11:	Good. Now Trump can appoint a new judge who won't be such a squish. --- The GameFAQs mods are terrible at their job. <cite>Metal_Mario99 posted [p:904069605] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>Good. Now Trump can appoint a new judge who won't be such a squish.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 06/27/18 3:09:42 PM #12:	Well according to Trump assigning any new judge is a bad idea because its possible they might be corrupt(not loyal) --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:904069734] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>Well according to Trump assigning any new judge is a bad idea because its possible they might be corrupt(not loyal)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ParanoidObsessive 06/27/18 3:16:59 PM #13:	Mead posted... Well according to Trump assigning any new judge is a bad idea because its possible they might be corrupt(not loyal) He can always try to completely bypass the Court the way FDR wanted to. --- "Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76 "POwned again." --- blight family <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted [p:904070178] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mead posted...</cite> <quote>Well according to Trump assigning any new judge is a bad idea because its possible they might be corrupt(not loyal)</quote> He can always try to completely bypass the Court the way FDR wanted to. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SushiSquid 06/27/18 3:42:02 PM #14:	Zeus posted... Well, all the Democrats have to do is somehow block the nomination process for the next two years or so then, if Trump gets re-elected, continue blocking it for the four years after that. Can't. Current rules no longer allow filibusters on nominations. <cite>SushiSquid posted [p:904071791] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>Well, all the Democrats have to do is somehow block the nomination process for the next two years or so then, if Trump gets re-elected, continue blocking it for the four years after that.</quote> Can't. Current rules no longer allow filibusters on nominations.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus 06/27/18 3:46:29 PM #15:	ernieforss posted... awe man, if we get Ted Cruz as a Supreme Court Judge....... Literally never going to happen. His name isn't even being considered. ernieforss posted... But Trump doesn't know what a Judge is so he'll probably search the barber shop first before looking at a law firm or council memeber. He says forgetting that Trump already went through this process once. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:904072097] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>ernieforss posted...</cite> <quote>awe man, if we get Ted Cruz as a Supreme Court Judge.......</quote> Literally never going to happen. His name isn't even being considered. <cite>ernieforss posted...</cite> <quote>But Trump doesn't know what a Judge is so he'll probably search the barber shop first before looking at a law firm or council memeber. </quote> He says forgetting that Trump already went through this process once.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ernieforss 06/27/18 4:39:07 PM #16:	Oh i remember. when he made two judges to come to DC to announce who will be the supreme judge, because of better ratings. --- I'm always 50% right all the time <cite>ernieforss posted [p:904075520] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>Oh i remember. when he made two judges to come to DC to announce who will be the supreme judge, because of better ratings.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
streamofthesky 06/27/18 5:46:13 PM #17:	Well, this country is fucked No way Ruth is holding out another 2 years, either. <cite>streamofthesky posted [p:904079753] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>Well, this country is fucked No way Ruth is holding out another 2 years, either.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
PuddingBoy 06/27/18 5:50:30 PM #18:	I foresee Trump choosing someone totally awful that even the Senate republicans can't back and then they run out of time and approve no one. Then the democrats earn the senate majority in November and just block every nominee for two years. --- 3DS Friend Code: 3308-5843-0863 Town: Virginia <cite>PuddingBoy posted [p:904080061] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>I foresee Trump choosing someone totally awful that even the Senate republicans can't back and then they run out of time and approve no one. Then the democrats earn the senate majority in November and just block every nominee for two years.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BlackScythe0 06/27/18 5:51:22 PM #19:	Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms. <cite>BlackScythe0 posted [p:904080115] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
streamofthesky 06/27/18 5:53:49 PM #20:	PuddingBoy posted... I foresee Trump choosing someone totally awful that even the Senate republicans can't back and then they run out of time and approve no one. Then the democrats earn the senate majority in November and just block every nominee for two years. You're SERIOUSLY overestimating the decency and humanity of Senate Republicans. Gorsuch is only on the bench right now b/c Mitch McConnell gleefully stole the nomination from the sitting president. They're literally creaming themselves right now. Pro tip: Trump's list of court appointees is put together by conservative think tanks. He doesn't choose 'em. Unfortunately. <cite>streamofthesky posted [p:904080269] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>PuddingBoy posted...</cite> <quote>I foresee Trump choosing someone totally awful that even the Senate republicans can't back and then they run out of time and approve no one. Then the democrats earn the senate majority in November and just block every nominee for two years.</quote> You're SERIOUSLY overestimating the decency and humanity of Senate Republicans. Gorsuch is only on the bench right now b/c Mitch McConnell gleefully stole the nomination from the sitting president. They're literally creaming themselves right now. Pro tip: Trump's list of court appointees is put together by conservative think tanks. He doesn't choose 'em. Unfortunately.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 06/27/18 6:10:12 PM #21:	SushiSquid posted... Zeus posted... Well, all the Democrats have to do is somehow block the nomination process for the next two years or so then, if Trump gets re-elected, continue blocking it for the four years after that. Can't. Current rules no longer allow filibusters on nominations. What's interesting is that all the power rests with the moderate senators in both parties right now. If one Republican flips to a no vote and McCain's health precludes him from voting, the Republicans lose the nomination. The Republicans will be under tremendous pressure to get this done before the midterm elections, given there's a decent chance they'll be losing the senate. The moderates could, in theory, form a bloc and refuse to support any nomination that doesn't fit the centrist mould, which would help their re-election bids (moderate democrats could tell Trump voters that they are willing to support reasonable requests from the president, while moderate Republicans could tell never-Trumpers that they're acting as a check on his more erratic impulses). Special mention to Jeff Flake, who has pledged to hold up Trump's nominations until he fixes the mess with tariffs - if he follows through on that pledge, he alone would be enough to sink any nomination. Senators could extract a lot of concessions from the administration if they were so inclined; it will be interesting to see if any of them, particularly on the Republican side, go for it. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:904081363] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>SushiSquid posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>Well, all the Democrats have to do is somehow block the nomination process for the next two years or so then, if Trump gets re-elected, continue blocking it for the four years after that.</quote> Can't. Current rules no longer allow filibusters on nominations.</quote> What's interesting is that all the power rests with the moderate senators in both parties right now. If one Republican flips to a no vote and McCain's health precludes him from voting, the Republicans lose the nomination. The Republicans will be under tremendous pressure to get this done before the midterm elections, given there's a decent chance they'll be losing the senate. The moderates could, in theory, form a bloc and refuse to support any nomination that doesn't fit the centrist mould, which would help their re-election bids (moderate democrats could tell Trump voters that they are willing to support reasonable requests from the president, while moderate Republicans could tell never-Trumpers that they're acting as a check on his more erratic impulses). Special mention to Jeff Flake, who has pledged to hold up Trump's nominations until he fixes the mess with tariffs - if he follows through on that pledge, he alone would be enough to sink any nomination. Senators could extract a lot of concessions from the administration if they were so inclined; it will be interesting to see if any of them, particularly on the Republican side, go for it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Muscles 06/27/18 6:26:28 PM #22:	I didn't know you can just retire from this, I thought it would be impossible, or at least a much bigger process than just being like, yeah I'm gonna retire, fuck you --- Muscles Chicago Bears \| Chicago Blackhawks \| Chicago Bulls \| Chicago Cubs \| NIU Huskies <cite>Muscles posted [p:904082344] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>I didn't know you can just retire from this, I thought it would be impossible, or at least a much bigger process than just being like, yeah I'm gonna retire, fuck you</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RedPixel 06/27/18 6:27:19 PM #23:	Every voter should be a "swing" voter --- Working in a team is great! It always helps to have someone else to blame. <cite>RedPixel posted [p:904082397] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>Every voter should be a "swing" voter</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BlackScythe0 06/27/18 6:32:36 PM #24:	RedPixel posted... Every voter should be a "swing" voter No every justice should be concerned with the constitution. But they aren't. It's a political stage which wields disproportionate power in relation to the time they hold the seats. <cite>BlackScythe0 posted [p:904082704] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>RedPixel posted...</cite> <quote>Every voter should be a "swing" voter</quote> No every justice should be concerned with the constitution. But they aren't. It's a political stage which wields disproportionate power in relation to the time they hold the seats.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metal_Mario99 06/27/18 6:36:47 PM #25:	BlackScythe0 posted... Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms. STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself. --- The GameFAQs mods are terrible at their job. <cite>Metal_Mario99 posted [p:904082949] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms.</quote> STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RedPixel 06/27/18 6:47:43 PM #26:	BlackScythe0 posted... It's a political stage which wields disproportionate power in relation to the time they hold the seats. Applause You figured it out. Bravo. --- Working in a team is great! It always helps to have someone else to blame. <cite>RedPixel posted [p:904083572] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>It's a political stage which wields disproportionate power in relation to the time they hold the seats.</quote> Applause You figured it out. Bravo.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WastelandCowboy 06/27/18 7:52:02 PM #27:	Metal_Mario99 posted... BlackScythe0 posted... Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms. STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself. Why would someone shit themself over finding out the definition of fascism, which literally anyone can Google. You need to chill and stop overreacting anytime anyone insults or throws shade onto Trump. Hes just the president. Hes not god, if there is one. <cite>WastelandCowboy posted [p:904087427] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms.</quote> STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself.</quote> Why would someone shit themself over finding out the definition of fascism, which literally anyone can Google. You need to chill and stop overreacting anytime anyone insults or throws shade onto Trump. Hes just the president. Hes not god, if there is one.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metal_Mario99 06/27/18 7:53:18 PM #28:	WastelandCowboy posted... Metal_Mario99 posted... BlackScythe0 posted... Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms. STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself. Why would someone shit themself over finding out the definition of fascism, which literally anyone can Google. You need to chill and stop overreacting anytime anyone insults or throws shade onto Trump. Hes just the president. Hes not god, if there is one. He's not a fascist, a dictator, or a Nazi either, but people in the real world are losing their shit for real because they think he is. --- The GameFAQs mods are terrible at their job. <cite>Metal_Mario99 posted [p:904087516] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>WastelandCowboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms.</quote> STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself.</quote> Why would someone shit themself over finding out the definition of fascism, which literally anyone can Google. You need to chill and stop overreacting anytime anyone insults or throws shade onto Trump. Hes just the president. Hes not god, if there is one.</quote> He's not a fascist, a dictator, or a Nazi either, but people in the real world are losing their shit for real because they think he is.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BlackScythe0 06/27/18 7:55:50 PM #29:	Metal_Mario99 posted... BlackScythe0 posted... Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms. STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself. Man you're so clever. Just telling me to shut up and calling me ignorant. Totally a strong argument. <cite>BlackScythe0 posted [p:904087689] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms.</quote> STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself.</quote> Man you're so clever. Just telling me to shut up and calling me ignorant. Totally a strong argument.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WastelandCowboy 06/27/18 7:57:11 PM #30:	Metal_Mario99 posted... WastelandCowboy posted... Metal_Mario99 posted... BlackScythe0 posted... Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms. STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself. Why would someone shit themself over finding out the definition of fascism, which literally anyone can Google. You need to chill and stop overreacting anytime anyone insults or throws shade onto Trump. Hes just the president. Hes not god, if there is one. He's not a fascist, a dictator, or a Nazi either, but people in the real world are losing their shit for real because they think he is. By people, you mean largely democrats. The exact same thing happened when Obama was president. A large chunk of Conservatives lost their damn mind because they thought he was a terrorist, a dictator, the devil, etc. <cite>WastelandCowboy posted [p:904087779] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>WastelandCowboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms.</quote> STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself.</quote> Why would someone shit themself over finding out the definition of fascism, which literally anyone can Google. You need to chill and stop overreacting anytime anyone insults or throws shade onto Trump. Hes just the president. Hes not god, if there is one.</quote> He's not a fascist, a dictator, or a Nazi either, but people in the real world are losing their shit for real because they think he is.</quote> By people, you mean largely democrats. The exact same thing happened when Obama was president. A large chunk of Conservatives lost their damn mind because they thought he was a terrorist, a dictator, the devil, etc.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BlackScythe0 06/27/18 7:58:22 PM #31:	WastelandCowboy posted... Metal_Mario99 posted... WastelandCowboy posted... Metal_Mario99 posted... BlackScythe0 posted... Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms. STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself. Why would someone shit themself over finding out the definition of fascism, which literally anyone can Google. You need to chill and stop overreacting anytime anyone insults or throws shade onto Trump. Hes just the president. Hes not god, if there is one. He's not a fascist, a dictator, or a Nazi either, but people in the real world are losing their shit for real because they think he is. By people, you mean largely democrats. The exact same thing happened when Obama was president. A large chunk of Conservatives lost their damn mind because they thought he was a terrorist, a dictator, the devil, etc. Well that was just people being absurd. They literally called him the anti-christ. Trump actually does push for fascist policies. He is a fascist politician, so a fair comment while calling Obama an imaginary boogy man was just silly. <cite>BlackScythe0 posted [p:904087850] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>WastelandCowboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>WastelandCowboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>Gotta get the fascist in chief to appoint another shit bag to tear up the constitution before the midterms.</quote> STFU. You don't know what "fascism" is, and if you ever found out, you'd shit yourself.</quote> Why would someone shit themself over finding out the definition of fascism, which literally anyone can Google. You need to chill and stop overreacting anytime anyone insults or throws shade onto Trump. Hes just the president. Hes not god, if there is one.</quote> He's not a fascist, a dictator, or a Nazi either, but people in the real world are losing their shit for real because they think he is.</quote> By people, you mean largely democrats. The exact same thing happened when Obama was president. A large chunk of Conservatives lost their damn mind because they thought he was a terrorist, a dictator, the devil, etc.</quote> Well that was just people being absurd. They literally called him the anti-christ. Trump actually does push for fascist policies. He is a fascist politician, so a fair comment while calling Obama an imaginary boogy man was just silly.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metal_Mario99 06/27/18 8:01:00 PM #32:	Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron. --- The GameFAQs mods are terrible at their job. <cite>Metal_Mario99 posted [p:904088013] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rasmoh 06/27/18 9:52:14 PM #33:	Metal_Mario99 posted... Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron. Enforcing our immigration laws to avoid turning us into Mexico 2.0 is pretty fascist tbh fampai --- Miami Dolphins \| Portland Trailblazers \| San Francisco Giants I won't say a thing, because the one who knows best is you. <cite>Rasmoh posted [p:904093928] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote>Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron.</quote> Enforcing our immigration laws to avoid turning us into Mexico 2.0 is pretty fascist tbh fampai</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
McSame_as_Bush 06/27/18 9:53:24 PM #34:	All of y'all better vote in November. --- Womps & Prayers <cite>McSame_as_Bush posted [p:904093998] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>All of y'all better vote in November.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
McSame_as_Bush 06/27/18 9:54:11 PM #35:	Metal_Mario99 posted... Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron. He has fascist tendencies. That's not really debatable. --- Womps & Prayers <cite>McSame_as_Bush posted [p:904094042] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote>Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron.</quote> He has fascist tendencies. That's not really debatable.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rasmoh 06/27/18 9:57:01 PM #36:	McSame_as_Bush posted... He has fascist tendencies. That's not really debatable. Yes, all the best fascists let the media openly shit on them while doing things by protocol within the purview of the system they are a part of. He's the most benevolent fascist there ever was. --- Miami Dolphins \| Portland Trailblazers \| San Francisco Giants I won't say a thing, because the one who knows best is you. <cite>Rasmoh posted [p:904094205] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>McSame_as_Bush posted...</cite> <quote>He has fascist tendencies. That's not really debatable.</quote> Yes, all the best fascists let the media openly shit on them while doing things by protocol within the purview of the system they are a part of. He's the most benevolent fascist there ever was.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ClarkDuke 06/27/18 9:59:24 PM #37:	Metal_Mario99 posted... Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron. Remember when you said Obama was a fascist, I do, ok? --- https://imgur.com/qL0DHFI https://imgur.com/JL9rRLt https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ <cite>ClarkDuke posted [p:904094337] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote>Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron.</quote> Remember when you said Obama was a fascist, I do, ok?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 06/27/18 10:04:57 PM #38:	I nominate Sylvester Stallone --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:904094657] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote>I nominate Sylvester Stallone</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
McSame_as_Bush 06/27/18 10:25:38 PM #39:	Rasmoh posted... McSame_as_Bush posted... He has fascist tendencies. That's not really debatable. Yes, all the best fascists let the media openly shit on them while doing things by protocol within the purview of the system they are a part of. He's the most benevolent fascist there ever was. Read the fucking constitution. He can't stop the press from reporting on him because of the first amendment -- but he does everything he can to delegitimize them ("enemy of the people") and has said he wants to jail journalists. And he admires dictators who have banned the free press. --- Womps & Prayers <cite>McSame_as_Bush posted [p:904095899] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Rasmoh posted...</cite> <quote><cite>McSame_as_Bush posted...</cite> <quote>He has fascist tendencies. That's not really debatable.</quote> Yes, all the best fascists let the media openly shit on them while doing things by protocol within the purview of the system they are a part of. He's the most benevolent fascist there ever was.</quote> Read the fucking constitution. He can't stop the press from reporting on him because of the first amendment -- but he does everything he can to delegitimize them ("enemy of the people") and has said he wants to jail journalists. And he admires dictators who have banned the free press.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ParanoidObsessive 06/28/18 12:01:02 AM #40:	Muscles posted... I didn't know you can just retire from this, I thought it would be impossible, or at least a much bigger process than just being like, yeah I'm gonna retire, fuck you Would you prefer if they were forced to/expected to remain in office until death, even if dementia starts kicking in and they start issuing deranged verdicts? Or if they really don't want to be there, but you don't let them retire, so all of their verdicts are basically just tinged with bitterness and a fuck you attitude? They pretty much have to be able to retire when they want to in order to help prevent that sort of thing. Especially since it's designed to be extremely difficult to impeach them out of office, to prevent abuse of power situations. --- "Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76 "POwned again." --- blight family <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted [p:904100876] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Muscles posted...</cite> <quote>I didn't know you can just retire from this, I thought it would be impossible, or at least a much bigger process than just being like, yeah I'm gonna retire, fuck you</quote> Would you prefer if they were forced to/expected to remain in office until death, even if dementia starts kicking in and they start issuing deranged verdicts? Or if they really don't want to be there, but you don't let them retire, so all of their verdicts are basically just tinged with bitterness and a fuck you attitude? They pretty much have to be able to retire when they want to in order to help prevent that sort of thing. Especially since it's designed to be extremely difficult to impeach them out of office, to prevent abuse of power situations. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rasmoh 06/28/18 12:40:24 AM #41:	McSame_as_Bush posted... He can't stop the press from reporting on him because of the first amendment The fact alone that he heeds the first amendment is enough to show anyone with a half-functional brain that he's not a fascist. Decrying dishonest news sources for publishing intentionally misleading bullshit isn't really a fascist sentiment either. Nor is wanting people jailed for libel. --- Miami Dolphins \| Portland Trailblazers \| San Francisco Giants I won't say a thing, because the one who knows best is you. <cite>Rasmoh posted [p:904102642] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>McSame_as_Bush posted...</cite> <quote>He can't stop the press from reporting on him because of the first amendment</quote> The fact alone that he heeds the first amendment is enough to show anyone with a half-functional brain that he's not a fascist. Decrying dishonest news sources for publishing intentionally misleading bullshit isn't really a fascist sentiment either. Nor is wanting people jailed for libel.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
McSame_as_Bush 06/28/18 12:55:17 AM #42:	Rasmoh posted... McSame_as_Bush posted... He can't stop the press from reporting on him because of the first amendment The fact alone that he heeds the first amendment is enough to show anyone with a half-functional brain that he's not a fascist. Decrying dishonest news sources for publishing intentionally misleading bullshit isn't really a fascist sentiment either. Nor is wanting people jailed for libel. I didn't say he was a fascist. Reading comprehension much? He decries every story he dislikes as fake, never with any evidence. --- Womps & Prayers <cite>McSame_as_Bush posted [p:904103271] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Rasmoh posted...</cite> <quote><cite>McSame_as_Bush posted...</cite> <quote>He can't stop the press from reporting on him because of the first amendment</quote> The fact alone that he heeds the first amendment is enough to show anyone with a half-functional brain that he's not a fascist. Decrying dishonest news sources for publishing intentionally misleading bullshit isn't really a fascist sentiment either. Nor is wanting people jailed for libel.</quote> I didn't say he was a fascist. Reading comprehension much? He decries every story he dislikes as fake, never with any evidence.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ClarkDuke 06/28/18 1:15:30 AM #43:	McSame_as_Bush posted... I didn't say he was a fascist. Reading comprehension much? Rasmoh is a fascist, ok? --- https://imgur.com/qL0DHFI https://imgur.com/JL9rRLt https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ <cite>ClarkDuke posted [p:904104028] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>McSame_as_Bush posted...</cite> <quote>I didn't say he was a fascist. Reading comprehension much?</quote> Rasmoh is a fascist, ok?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
WastelandCowboy 06/28/18 1:15:47 AM #44:	Rasmoh posted... Decrying dishonest news sources for publishing intentionally misleading bullshit isn't really a fascist sentiment either. If that's the case, he should hate Fox News as well, since it's equally, if not 100% more dishonest. <cite>WastelandCowboy posted [p:904104042] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Rasmoh posted...</cite> <quote>Decrying dishonest news sources for publishing intentionally misleading bullshit isn't really a fascist sentiment either.</quote> If that's the case, he should hate Fox News as well, since it's equally, if not 100% more dishonest.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BlackScythe0 06/28/18 5:46:56 PM #45:	Metal_Mario99 posted... Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron. Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here. <cite>BlackScythe0 posted [p:904144080] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote>Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron.</quote> Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mead 06/28/18 5:53:29 PM #46:	BlackScythe0 posted... Metal_Mario99 posted... Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron. Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here. Pretty much all he does --- If they drag you through the mud, it doesnt change whats in your blood <cite>Mead posted [p:904144484] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote>Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron.</quote> Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here.</quote> Pretty much all he does</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metal_Mario99 06/28/18 6:11:48 PM #47:	BlackScythe0 posted... Metal_Mario99 posted... Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron. Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here. No, he isn't. --- The GameFAQs mods are terrible at their job. <cite>Metal_Mario99 posted [p:904145540] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote>Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron.</quote> Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here.</quote> No, he isn't.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109 06/28/18 7:22:53 PM #48:	BlackScythe0 posted... Metal_Mario99 posted... Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron. Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here. Please stop this. Calling Trump a fascist is like calling Obama a communist - it is meaningless noise that serves only to drown out legitimate discussion. You will change precisely zero minds with that language and only serve to make your own talking points seem less credible by dint of the fact that they're being uttered by someone who is putting Trump (an odious, but legitimately governing democratic leader) on the same level as some of the most evil men in history. There's ample reason to hate Trump and there's plenty of perfectly valid criticisms you can level at him without veering into hyperbole. Seriously, you're in a target-rich environment - he provides new material pretty much daily. Don't validate him and his supporters by making yourself seem just as prone to wild exaggerations and mischaracterizations as he is. You know that phrase about not arguing with an idiot because they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience? Name calling and wild exaggeration is Trump's level. Don't fight the battle there, because he's already won if that's where political discourse is steered. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:904149278] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote>Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron.</quote> Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here.</quote> Please stop this. Calling Trump a fascist is like calling Obama a communist - it is meaningless noise that serves only to drown out legitimate discussion. You will change precisely zero minds with that language and only serve to make your own talking points seem less credible by dint of the fact that they're being uttered by someone who is putting Trump (an odious, but legitimately governing democratic leader) on the same level as some of the most evil men in history. There's ample reason to hate Trump and there's plenty of perfectly valid criticisms you can level at him without veering into hyperbole. Seriously, you're in a target-rich environment - he provides new material pretty much daily. Don't validate him and his supporters by making yourself seem just as prone to wild exaggerations and mischaracterizations as he is. You know that phrase about not arguing with an idiot because they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience? Name calling and wild exaggeration is Trump's level. Don't fight the battle there, because he's already won if that's where political discourse is steered.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
BlackScythe0 06/28/18 7:31:46 PM #49:	darkknight109 posted... BlackScythe0 posted... Metal_Mario99 posted... Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron. Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here. Please stop this. Calling Trump a fascist is like calling Obama a communist - it is meaningless noise that serves only to drown out legitimate discussion. You will change precisely zero minds with that language and only serve to make your own talking points seem less credible by dint of the fact that they're being uttered by someone who is putting Trump (an odious, but legitimately governing democratic leader) on the same level as some of the most evil men in history. There's ample reason to hate Trump and there's plenty of perfectly valid criticisms you can level at him without veering into hyperbole. Seriously, you're in a target-rich environment - he provides new material pretty much daily. Don't validate him and his supporters by making yourself seem just as prone to wild exaggerations and mischaracterizations as he is. You know that phrase about not arguing with an idiot because they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience? Name calling and wild exaggeration is Trump's level. Don't fight the battle there, because he's already won if that's where political discourse is steered. How is making a factual statement the same as making an absurd assertion? <cite>BlackScythe0 posted [p:904149757] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Metal_Mario99 posted...</cite> <quote>Anyone who thinks any American president is a fascist is a fucking moron.</quote> Trump IS fascist. So I'm not sure what to make of your flaming here.</quote> Please stop this. Calling Trump a fascist is like calling Obama a communist - it is meaningless noise that serves only to drown out legitimate discussion. You will change precisely zero minds with that language and only serve to make your own talking points seem less credible by dint of the fact that they're being uttered by someone who is putting Trump (an odious, but legitimately governing democratic leader) on the same level as some of the most evil men in history. There's ample reason to hate Trump and there's plenty of perfectly valid criticisms you can level at him without veering into hyperbole. Seriously, you're in a target-rich environment - he provides new material pretty much daily. Don't validate him and his supporters by making yourself seem just as prone to wild exaggerations and mischaracterizations as he is. You know that phrase about not arguing with an idiot because they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience? Name calling and wild exaggeration is Trump's level. Don't fight the battle there, because he's already won if that's where political discourse is steered.</quote> How is making a factual statement the same as making an absurd assertion?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus 06/28/18 7:43:11 PM #50:	BlackScythe0 posted... Well that was just people being absurd. They literally called him the anti-christ. https://www.endtime.com/podcast/is-president-trump-the-antichrist/ http://www.newsweek.com/trump-will-bring-about-end-worldevangelicals-end-times-779643 Basically same shit, different president. Only thing that changes is the leftists who ridiculed hyperbolic claims are the ones either making or supporting hyperbolic claims (and if you specifically want to see self-avowed leftists calling Trump the anti-Christ, just go on social media). And that's really how the system works and perpetuates itself -- culturing animosity gets people to vote the way you want. BlackScythe0 posted... How is making a factual statement the same as making an absurd assertion? The fact you consider it a factual statement makes you seem absurd. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:904150373] in Supreme Co... [t:76755649]...</cite> <quote><cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>Well that was just people being absurd. They literally called him the anti-christ.</quote> https://www.endtime.com/podcast/is-president-trump-the-antichrist/ http://www.newsweek.com/trump-will-bring-about-end-worldevangelicals-end-times-779643 Basically same shit, different president. Only thing that changes is the leftists who ridiculed hyperbolic claims are the ones either making or supporting hyperbolic claims (and if you specifically want to see self-avowed leftists calling Trump the anti-Christ, just go on social media). And that's really how the system works and perpetuates itself -- culturing animosity gets people to vote the way you want. <cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>How is making a factual statement the same as making an absurd assertion?</quote> The fact you consider it a factual statement makes you seem absurd.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Poll of the Day > Supreme Court to lose its swing voter: Justice Anthony Kennedy to retire. (+) Yeah! (+)

Poll of the Day > Supreme Court to lose its swing voter: Justice Anthony Kennedy to retire.