Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 315: Defund the Po...

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/ericbradner/status/1295538948308180993?s=21

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Well I was using "shred" figuratively. If he actually went through with this it seems far more likely that he'd just run again despite the blatant unconstitutionality and count on it to somehow sort out to being a purely partisan issue like everything else these past four years.

it's not really a political issue though, it's a legal issue. Few nations in human history have been as legalistic as the United States. I think the last US President to ignore an order of the US Supreme Court was Andrew Jackson, and that wasn't a case where a President's actions would be void from inception. When Inauguration Day 2025 passes, absent a constitutional amendment or possibly some way around the 22nd Amendment like Trump getting elected as Speaker of the House while two dummy candidates for President and VP both resign immediately upon taking office, Trump would cease to be President by operation of law. Any orders he issued from then on would have no authority.

The Roman Republic had 93 people occupy the office of dictator before it lost its republican nature, and that was because it did not depend on any dictator setting down his power. Instead, the term of the dictator was fixed by law from the outset, and nothing the dictator could do could extend it. His term ended at the appointed time, by the automatic operation of law.

---

red sox 777 posted...

it's not really a political issue though, it's a legal issue. Few nations in human history have been as legalistic as the United States. I think the last US President to ignore an order of the US Supreme Court was Andrew Jackson, and that wasn't a case where a President's actions would be void from inception. When Inauguration Day 2025 passes, absent a constitutional amendment or possibly some way around the 22nd Amendment like Trump getting elected as Speaker of the House while two dummy candidates for President and VP both resign immediately upon taking office, Trump would cease to be President by operation of law. Any orders he issued from then on would have no authority.

The Roman Republic had 93 people occupy the office of dictator before it lost its republican nature, and that was because it did not depend on any dictator setting down his power. Instead, the term of the dictator was fixed by law from the outset, and nothing the dictator could do could extend it. His term ended at the appointed time, by the automatic operation of law.

Well obviously this would be hugely different in scale, but Trump has broken the law with regards to his acting appointments in several instances, and some of those people are still there. I believe there are some ongoing legal battles about whether the actions those illegally installed officials enacted are nullified, but at minimum they've been able to do some damage in the meantime.

---

Corrik7 posted...

The new republican bill they are gonna offer is terrible. Go figure.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republicans-plan-scaled-back-proposal-for-virus-relief-bill/ar-BB184xr3

Well, rather than attempt to negotiate with Democrats(They told Democrats to negotiate with the President), they attempted to negotiate with the people that wanted a $0 stimulus bill.

So...

---

red13n posted...

Well, rather than attempt to negotiate with Democrats(They told Democrats to negotiate with the President), they attempted to negotiate with the people that wanted a $0 stimulus bill.

So...

And to add to this, they still can't pass their garbage bill without Democratic support because they will have holdouts that will reject anything above $0.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Well obviously this would be hugely different in scale, but Trump has broken the law with regards to his acting appointments in several instances, and some of those people are still there. I believe there are some ongoing legal battles about whether the actions those illegally installed officials enacted are nullified, but at minimum they've been able to do some damage in the meantime.

The courts are working through that, as you say. I don't think that's a clear cut issue. The way the constitution is structured, the executive power is vested in the President alone, and then flows from him to his servants. That's because no one in the executive branch is elected besides the President. They cannot have power independent of him because he is their only link to the sovereign (the People).

So, can the President delegate power to whomever he likes? Let's say the President wants to listen to advice from Rasputin, but the Senate thinks he's a fraud and refuses to confirm him as Secretary of State. Obviously the President can still listen to Rasputin and can still follow his advice. Does he have to personally approve Rasputin's directives though or can he just give a blanket order authorizing Rasputin to do whatever he wants (within the law) that the President has the authority to do?

Now, you could argue that this would destroy the meaning of having a confirmed cabinet at all. But that's sort of like saying the Roman Senate was superfluous because technically they didn't pass laws, only gave "advice" to magistrates. Custom and convention matters.

---

https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1295554892619186177

alright i did lol

---

When they go low, you go lower!

---

Ugh

---

https://i.imgur.com/AvpF8OZ.jpg

---

https://apnews.com/212ccd87924b6906053703a00514647f

This came up after Cuomo's speech tonight. That Cuomo may be praising his states work on covid-19 when he might have himself been the main cause of deaths and be obscuring that from the public.

---

For anyone who didn't watch Michelle Obama's speech, this was the line of the night:

https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/1295555228293566464

---

That is the line of the night? Yikes.

LOTM usually has an almost opposite feeling for which lines are powerful to that of most people. But if that's their line of the night, they're so screwed.

I highly suspect my opinion is more representative than yours here!

Anyway, an interview with the former senior Trump official who endorsed Biden yesterday, further detailing the dumpster fire that is Trump's governing process (in particular in regards to family separations and CA wildfire relief):

https://twitter.com/GMA/status/1295687236856492032

---

I thought "His only preexisting condition was trusting Donald Trump, and for that, he paid with his life." from that woman about her dad dying of Covid-19 was the line of the night, at least for me.

---

KamikazePotato posted...

https://i.imgur.com/AvpF8OZ.jpg

that's a really stupid reason to not vote for biden.

biden: *constantly talks about how much he hates socialism, whether it's relevant to the topic at hand or not*
republicans and independents: OMG JOE MAY TURN SHARP LEFT

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I highly suspect my opinion is more representative than yours here!

debatable. at least red sox likes bernie!

---

RaidenGarai posted...

I thought "His only preexisting condition was trusting Donald Trump, and for that, he paid with his life." from that woman about her dad dying of Covid-19 was the line of the night, at least for me.

Yeah, that one was also very good.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

debatable. at least red sox likes bernie!

By here I meant with regards to the quote I posted

But I do think people here generally agree with me at least a bit more than red sox too...!

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

But I do think people here generally agree with me at least a bit more than red sox too...!

You and redsox are probably closer to each other, than people here generally.

---

Also, can we stop pretending like Red Sox's Bernie support is legitimate? Given the rest of his propaganda posting, it's clear that he's only bolstering the whole "Democrats screwed a GOOD candidate in BERNIE" narrative. Like if the DNC nominated Bernie, he wouldn't immediately turn around and say "Well, Bernie and Trump both offer the same things, so I'm gonna stick with the Republican".

---

Dancedreamer posted...

You and redsox are probably closer to each other, than people here generally.

I think he disagrees with me on basically everything besides some very core tenets of liberalism, so that seems pretty unlikely!

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

For anyone who didn't watch Michelle Obama's speech, this was the line of the night:

https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/1295555228293566464

This is only line of the night if your definition of a good line is taking an easy shot at Donald Trump. And even then, I agree "His only preexisting condition was trusting Donald Trump, and for that, he paid with his life." is a better shot.

Inviso posted...

Also, can we stop pretending like Red Sox's Bernie support is legitimate? Given the rest of his propaganda posting, it's clear that he's only bolstering the whole "Democrats screwed a GOOD candidate in BERNIE" narrative. Like if the DNC nominated Bernie, he wouldn't immediately turn around and say "Well, Bernie and Trump both offer the same things, so I'm gonna stick with the Republican".

You have no idea how happy I am to see someone else reference this, because that's what I've been thinking since I started lurking around this topic and thought I might just be crazy.

---

RaidenGarai posted...

You have no idea how happy I am to see someone else reference this, because that's what I've been thinking since I started lurking around this topic and thought I might just be crazy.

A large chunk of this topic has Red Sox blocked/ignored, and for quite good reason tbh. Dude wouldn't know "good faith discussion" if it smacked him in the face.

Consequentially, his shit tends to go undiscussed.

Inviso posted...

Also, can we stop pretending like Red Sox's Bernie support is legitimate? Given the rest of his propaganda posting, it's clear that he's only bolstering the whole "Democrats screwed a GOOD candidate in BERNIE" narrative. Like if the DNC nominated Bernie, he wouldn't immediately turn around and say "Well, Bernie and Trump both offer the same things, so I'm gonna stick with the Republican".

he's consistently praised bernie's policies for years and i'm pretty sure he wrote in bernie in the last election.

sure, you can argue that it's all bullshit but i see no reason to disbelieve him on this. if you think i'm being too soft on red sox while you're attacking me for being too mean to corrik of all people, you should probably reconsider what kind of battles you're picking >_>

---

Reg posted...

A large chunk of this topic has Red Sox blocked/ignored, and for quite good reason tbh. Dude wouldn't know "good faith discussion" if it smacked him in the face.

Consequentially, his shit tends to go undiscussed.

That would explain it, thank you!

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I think he disagrees with me on basically everything besides some very core tenets of liberalism, so that seems pretty unlikely!

he agreed with you on tom steyer being terrible!

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

he's consistently praised bernie's policies for years and i'm pretty sure he wrote in bernie in the last election.

sure, you can argue that it's all bullshit but i see no reason to disbelieve him on this. if you think i'm being too soft on red sox while you're attacking me for being too mean to corrik of all people, you should probably reconsider what kind of battles you're picking >_>

Lasa, there's a reason why people tell you to ignore Red Sox. It's BECAUSE he comes across as genuine ENOUGH to pass as legitimate (up until he starts openly trolling, then he goes silent until enough discussion has occurred that he can pretend to be arguing in good faith again). The fact is that none of his primary arguments make sense if he legitimately supports Bernie, but they DO make sense if his primary goal is to sandbag the Democratic Party as a whole.

---

Redsox argues in a purposefully obtuse manner, it reminds me of wannabe edgy dudes playing devil's advocate and "just saying".

My gfax life has been immeasurably improved since I ignored him.

---

RedSox isn't real, arguing with him is embarrassing.

---

red sox has outright said he makes up a lot of what he says that he doesn't actually believe so yeah

arguing red sox isn't arguing a real person

---

Inviso posted...

Also, can we stop pretending like Red Sox's Bernie support is legitimate? Given the rest of his propaganda posting, it's clear that he's only bolstering the whole "Democrats screwed a GOOD candidate in BERNIE" narrative. Like if the DNC nominated Bernie, he wouldn't immediately turn around and say "Well, Bernie and Trump both offer the same things, so I'm gonna stick with the Republican".

I am always shocked that people do not get this.

---

Inviso posted...

Lasa, there's a reason why people tell you to ignore Red Sox. It's BECAUSE he comes across as genuine ENOUGH to pass as legitimate (up until he starts openly trolling, then he goes silent until enough discussion has occurred that he can pretend to be arguing in good faith again). The fact is that none of his primary arguments make sense if he legitimately supports Bernie, but they DO make sense if his primary goal is to sandbag the Democratic Party as a whole.

But will you call out those on the left who act this way?

---

Corrik7 posted...

But will you call out those on the left who act this way?

I call out progressives for sandbagging their own goals (to the point where I legitimately question if they really care about progressive goals) all the time.

---

I don't believe anyone on the left does that in this topic. (Or anyone else on the right, for that matter)

Edit: Responding to Corrik
---

Its one thing to argue with red sox for fun or just to keep conversation going, but to defend his views as legitimate is weird lol.

---

Inviso posted...

I call out progressives for sandbagging their own goals (to the point where I legitimately question if they really care about progressive goals) all the time.

Fair enough, but I wonder if you would explain why they should be blocked or so on. Or does this not pertain when they fight for your own cause.

I can't see anyone seeing Kamikaze's posts on racism and lynchings made repeatedly even after already disproven as anything but trying to incite racial tensions and the subsequent of ignoring every time called out about being wrong about it as any different than what redsox was accused of here.

Isn't that "acting like arguing in good faith" then "goes silent long enough until enough discussion has happened" to act like it again?

Enough people in this topic tried to argue it could be lynchings to try and support Kamikaze than called out kamikaze after proven incorrect in very dangerous assumptions.

That was directly after people were dogpiling redsox for making an assumption on another topic.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

that's a really stupid reason to not vote for biden.

biden: *constantly talks about how much he hates socialism, whether it's relevant to the topic at hand or not*
republicans and independents: OMG JOE MAY TURN SHARP LEFT

You arent seeing the campaign ads conservatives are putting out. That is the common theme, that Biden is going to be a puppet of the extreme left.

---

I would like to see more updated polling in Minnesota. I still think Trump is dead in the water. And PA is locked in for Biden (though the killing fracking comment is going to hurt that campaign). However, Trump being viable in Minnesota would open up the map some for Trump also.

---

I will forever be more concerned with Wisconsin than Minnesota. I know the polling says it is "safe" for now, but I just do not trust that state to not swing to Trump hard knowing what I know from having family live there.

That being said I would agree I would put Minnesota over Michigan and Pennsylvania for now. Polling has been weird in Minnesota lately. It is worth polling more for sure.

---

The Democratic Party is the chief obstacle to good things happening for this country, so of course I oppose them. If the nominated Bernie, they would have to undergo a very painful transformation to do so, in which they jettison the whole wing of the party that opposes Bernie's core ideas. That's the kind of change and repentance I'm looking for from them.

Suprak the Stud posted...

I will forever be more concerned with Wisconsin than Minnesota. I know the polling says it is "safe" for now, but I just do not trust that state to not swing to Trump hard knowing what I know from having family live there.

That being said I would agree I would put Minnesota over Michigan and Pennsylvania for now. Polling has been weird in Minnesota lately. It is worth polling more for sure.

Did you read my reply to you before? You said the polling beforehand looked better for Biden, but I showed you there was really no non-partisan polling prior to the Emerson for over a month or more.

---

pyresword posted...

I don't believe anyone on the left does that in this topic. (Or anyone else on the right, for that matter)

Edit: Responding to Corrik

it'd be intuitively clear if you quoted corrik here, which also comes with bonus perks!

---

HeroicCrono posted...

The Republican Party is the chief obstacle to good things happening for this country

Fixed.

---

i agree with both of you.

the republicans and democrats are both awful!

---

Suprak the Stud posted...

I will forever be more concerned with Wisconsin than Minnesota. I know the polling says it is "safe" for now, but I just do not trust that state to not swing to Trump hard knowing what I know from having family live there.

That being said I would agree I would put Minnesota over Michigan and Pennsylvania for now. Polling has been weird in Minnesota lately. It is worth polling more for sure.

I live here, and share your concerns.

My mother in law went from saying she was going to vote democrat for the first time in her life, to getting into a shouting match over the phone with my wife because she started watching Fox News excessively while in quarantine. She told my wife to stop watching the "fake news" and watch a reliable network like Fox. She rarely fights with her mom, but now they're barely talking.

---

Fortunately I don't particularly care if other people don't want to see discussions involving Corrik.
---

Rude

---