Majority of Americans, including many Republicans, say wait for election to replace Ginsburg - Reuters poll

[pegman]

On 9/20/2020 at 8:33 PM, shdmn said:

It's time for Democrats to be Ruthless.

Zero chance of that while the dem Party is lead by geriatrics beholden to their masters in the bankster class. Don't expect much before progressives wrestle control away from that bunch.

[RJRS1301]

9 hours ago, bunnydrops said:

If the Trump folks are so sure he is going to win, whats the rush?

They want the appointment in case the results end up before the SC to guarantee an favourable outcome 

[checkered flag]

12 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

I don't think people on either side (except you and I) want it to be balanced, they want it tipped to their side. 

 

You're making things up. I know the court is political, I just don't think it should be. It seems to me Presidents used to nominate and the Senate pretty much just confirmed. Those days are gone. 

For years it's been tilting left (progressive), hopefully now it will focus on the constitution and laws.

[Yellowtail]

12 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I wasn't 'making things up'. You, on the other hand, misrepresented my views.

 

The issue of balance can not be fully addressed given how the nomination system and the SC are set up. Given this, balance is realistically best served in the form of a 4-5 roster, tipping as it may. This allows for certain upsets of the balance on certain issues. A 6-3 ratio would make these less likely.

 

I don't know when you start your 'used to' count, so not sure it's relevant. My point in previous posts was that having a bad enough state of things, doesn't mean there's need to aggravate them further. I have no illusions that this view will prevail.

 

 

 

You claimed I denied the court was political, I did no such thing. How am I misrepresenting your views by saying you made it up? 

 

So if I say pre 1987 would it be relevant?

 

 

[shdmn]

20 minutes ago, checkered flag said:

For years it's been tilting left (progressive), hopefully now it will focus on the constitution and laws.

Why are you posting stuff that any 10yo knows is not true?  Is someone paying you?  Have you not learned yet to be less obvious when you troll?  Didn't they teach you that in troll school?

Edited September 24, 2020 by shdmn

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

I'll take that as a none.

 

So what makes him a centrist? Most every leftist claims to be a centrist. 

 

Every news credible news report at the time described him as a centrist. 

 

What makes you think he wasn't?  What motivation did Barrack Obama have to nominate anyone other than a centrist?  Why would McConnell be so resistant to putting the nomination to a vote other than fear that the nomination would be confirmed?

[checkered flag]

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I'll take that as a none.

 

So what makes him a centrist? Most every leftist claims to be a centrist. 

 

It's more like the center of the ultra far left in my opinion. He can't see it because where he sits there are only far lefties on his right and ultra far lefties left. Or maybe he's at the far left of the ultras. At least he's consistent.

Reuters is not without their own political bias, but not as bad as CNN or MSNBC.

Edited September 24, 2020 by checkered flag

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, checkered flag said:

It's more like the center of the ultra far left in my opinion. He can't see it because where he sits there are only far lefties on his right and ultra far lefties left. Or maybe he's at the far left of the ultras. At least he's consistent.

Reuters is not without their own political bias, but not as bad as CNN or MSNBC.

Or it could be that what was once considered far right is now considered normal in the United States.  Your average "liberal" in the US would be considered conservative in most of Europe, the average Trump supporter would be considered a member of a far right fringe.

 

I believe in a strong military because I think the community of nations behaves like an unsupervised children's playground where the weak are bullied.

 

I believe in strong alliances and a capable State Department so the strong military will only be used when necessary.

 

I believe in socialized medicine, universal healthcare, or whatever you choose to call it because where it exists in first world countries it provides better healthcare at a lower cost.

 

I believe deficits are necessary when the economy is in trouble but should be reduced when the economy is doing well (Republicans seem to think deficits are great when a Republican is in the White House and the end of the world when a Democrat is there).

 

I believe that a free press is essential for maintaining democracy.

 

I believe that conspiracy theorists who are impervious to facts are idiots.

 

I believe a President with a history of bankruptcies and legal issues who violates established norms of transparency should be regarded with great suspicion.

 

I believe evolutionary change is better than revolutionary change, because revolutions have unpredictable outcomes and a lot of collateral damage.

 

This is only a partial list, but I think it is a list that describes a moderate.  I assume you think otherwise.

 

To any readers from other democracies, do you think these views are far left, far right, or more towards the center?

Edited September 24, 2020 by heybruce

[Morch]

13 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

It’s funny though, as bad as you guys think Trump is, and as bad as you guys imply people like me are, republicans kept hold of the congress better than Obama did, and look at Republicans now. About to appoint another judge. 
 

Also, in case you lack the self awareness to see it, you are posting just as personally, insultingly, and deflective as I am. 
 

Only difference is I’m not moaning about it. 
 

Oh and excuse me if I’m not caring about the “birther” deflection. Years of “nazi” “put y’all back in chains” “racist” “stormtroopers” ad nauseum will do that to a person. 

 

Your opening bit is just a reaffirmation that you've nothing else in mind other than hyper-partisan views and 'winning' - not as a nation, but over those who do not agree with you. This is made manifestly clear when even non-extreme views are rejected by your narrative.

 

I am responding to your insults, I do comment on the way you debate, and I do insist on questioning your statements when they are offered without obvious support. So personal, sure. Insulting? Do tell. One thing I haven't done is deflect - mostly because you do not even offer something that needs to be deflected, even.

 

As for not 'moaning' about it - you just did.

 

While it's cute you try and play the victim card (does that count as extra 'moaning'?), it is not surprising that you do not care about the Birther thing - after all, Trump was a main pusher of this nonsense and that just doesn't fit the agenda anymore. And no, the Birther thing was directly aiming at POTUS - while the labels you claim were mostly used in reference for extreme views among the right, rather the right or the Republicans in general.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

You claimed I denied the court was political, I did no such thing. How am I misrepresenting your views by saying you made it up? 

 

So if I say pre 1987 would it be relevant?

 

 

 

That's not quite what I claimed, at least not as understood from your words.

The part where you misrepresented my views refers to something else.

I doubt you're not aware of either, just trolling for trolling sake.

Edited September 24, 2020 by Morch

[Morch]

1 hour ago, checkered flag said:

It's more like the center of the ultra far left in my opinion. He can't see it because where he sits there are only far lefties on his right and ultra far lefties left. Or maybe he's at the far left of the ultras. At least he's consistent.

Reuters is not without their own political bias, but not as bad as CNN or MSNBC.

 

It would be 'center of the ultra far left' only if you were firmly entrenched in the far reaches of the right. I get it that some of Trump supporters on here cannot accept the notion that there are centrist, or even just plain left wingers. Everything not falling in line with their views is far-left and beyond.

[Yellowtail]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

That's not quite what I claimed, at least not as understood from your words.

The part where you misrepresented my views refers to something else.

I doubt you're not aware of either, just trolling for trolling sake.

 

I went back and read it, and I'll concede I think you were framing it more as a question, rather than as statement, sorry.

 

In any event, I think the wheels fell off the conformation process in '87.

[Morch]

15 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Sorry, I'll rephrase. Most every leftist I converse with claims to be a centrist.

 

They most all claim the US has been moving right for decades as well and any number of other things that aren't true as well.

 

 

It's a personal anecdote, and as such, not a whole lot can be made of it. Maybe it applies to right wingers too (other way around), who knows. 

[Rambo69]

 

[Scott]

Off-topic, troll, baiting and bickering posts along with replies removed.  

 

Try to stay on topic.  

[PhonThong]

On 9/20/2020 at 6:35 PM, Tug said:

Imo it would be the correct thing to do because of what they did to the last administration but it’s trump he is what he is

The Constitution says that he should appoint a new Justice.  Don't try and tell me the Dem's would wait if the shoe was on the other foot.

[PhonThong]

On 9/20/2020 at 7:30 PM, scorecard said:

Not true, the great lady actually suggested, in her last days, that in the circumstances the appointment wait until after the election. Who's cherry picking?

What's the proof she actually said, it. Because her granddaughter said so?

[shdmn]

3 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

The Constitution says that he should appoint a new Justice.  Don't try and tell me the Dem's would wait if the shoe was on the other foot.

And when Republicans said that the next Pres needs to pick the next Judge instead of Obama when Scalia died several months before the next election? 

 

And when several went on the record saying they would do the same thing the next time it happens and now that it's only a few weeks before the next election they changed their mind?

Edited September 24, 2020 by shdmn

[PhonThong]

1 minute ago, shdmn said:

And when Republicans said that the next Pres needs to pick the next Judge instead of Obama when Scalia died several months before the next election?

They didn't need to say anything.  They were in full control of the Senate and just didn't hold a vote.  They had all the power, just like now. 

[nattaya09]

Ruth wouldn't retire before the 2016 election as the Democrats wanted and she wouldn't die after the 2020 election as the Democrats wanted. The GOP should give her a special recognition award for that. That might be her biggest legacy.

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, PhonThong said:

They didn't need to say anything.  They were in full control of the Senate and just didn't hold a vote.  They had all the power, just like now. 

Yes, McConnell could have been honest and admitted in 2016 he was playing pure partisan politics.  But he didn't, and now he's breaking his own rule.

[scorecard]

38 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Yes, McConnell could have been honest and admitted in 2016 he was playing pure partisan politics.  But he didn't, and now he's breaking his own rule.

As scaly as they come...

[Damual Travesty]

On 9/22/2020 at 10:15 PM, Morch said:

 

That's great, now try and read my post in context - instead of making a totally unrelated point. Hint, this was about the poll you labeled 'nonsense', and about a nonsense complaint regarding how many Republicans were polled. If you wish to explain how what you've posted applies, by all means...

Despite what you may think, I do not believe in polls one way or the other. At best, they are snapshots in time of opinion before an election, in that moment. That moment rapidly changes simply on a news story.

 

At worst, they are hopelessly skewed by a public that no longer views the pollsters as non-partisan organizations that exist outside of the fray. Instead the public views them with increasing distrust. Therefore, while it was sort of an honour in the past to be called and give an opinion, now the respondent will perhaps lie through their teeth in the hopes of doing their part to skew the poll into hopeless error. 

 

There is no way for the pollster to determine how many liars they are dealing with. It doesn't appear in the accuracy. They are attempting to call registered Democrats or Republicans, but do you know for example that people will register as independent purposefully when they are not? Or claim to be "undecided" when they are not?

 

Polls are meaningless - one way or the other, except perhaps as tool to energize the voting base that the race is not in the bag, its neck to neck and you had better get out and vote! Yes, that may have an effect.

 

The endless argument over who is going to win or on a particular political question like in this case, are all meaningless as far as I am concerned. And in this case the poll is over a meaningless question. Meaningless, because even if the sentiment expressed by the poll result were to be true, the empty seat is not decided by a national referendum.

 

Obviously one party here is attempting to generate a national hysteria over this empty seat. The seat of RBG is going to be filled. It will be filled by a conservative justice picked by the President of the United States and confirmed by a Republican Senate. That is the truth of this matter. The simple - very simple - truth.

 

All of the arguments about why that should not happen are meaningless as the supreme authority in this case - the Constitution of the United States demands that the President and Senate act. That action of the Senate by the way, is to consent or not to consent. My money would be on their consent. Why this has devolved into an argument about polls, or what is the best form of Government for the USA etc is all simply ridiculous noise.

[Sundown]

Manipulated polls and last wishes do not matter, though. Sorry Reuters. Try again.

[Sujo]

6 hours ago, PhonThong said:

What's the proof she actually said, it. Because her granddaughter said so?

There were others there also.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Damual Travesty said:

Despite what you may think, I do not believe in polls one way or the other. At best, they are snapshots in time of opinion before an election, in that moment. That moment rapidly changes simply on a news story.

 

At worst, they are hopelessly skewed by a public that no longer views the pollsters as non-partisan organizations that exist outside of the fray. Instead the public views them with increasing distrust. Therefore, while it was sort of an honour in the past to be called and give an opinion, now the respondent will perhaps lie through their teeth in the hopes of doing their part to skew the poll into hopeless error. 

 

There is no way for the pollster to determine how many liars they are dealing with. It doesn't appear in the accuracy. They are attempting to call registered Democrats or Republicans, but do you know for example that people will register as independent purposefully when they are not? Or claim to be "undecided" when they are not?

 

Polls are meaningless - one way or the other, except perhaps as tool to energize the voting base that the race is not in the bag, its neck to neck and you had better get out and vote! Yes, that may have an effect.

 

The endless argument over who is going to win or on a particular political question like in this case, are all meaningless as far as I am concerned. And in this case the poll is over a meaningless question. Meaningless, because even if the sentiment expressed by the poll result were to be true, the empty seat is not decided by a national referendum.

 

Obviously one party here is attempting to generate a national hysteria over this empty seat. The seat of RBG is going to be filled. It will be filled by a conservative justice picked by the President of the United States and confirmed by a Republican Senate. That is the truth of this matter. The simple - very simple - truth.

 

All of the arguments about why that should not happen are meaningless as the supreme authority in this case - the Constitution of the United States demands that the President and Senate act. That action of the Senate by the way, is to consent or not to consent. My money would be on their consent. Why this has devolved into an argument about polls, or what is the best form of Government for the USA etc is all simply ridiculous noise.

 

To some your long post - you do not care for polls not favoring your point of view, and you rationalize this by posting a mountain of speculation as to how polls works, and regarding polled populations' sentiments.

Don't recall you going on about similar issues, and in great length, when results were more favorable for your cause.

 

The other part is simply this - our side have the power, therefore nothing matters.

[shdmn]

The fact there are so many right wing trolls around here with increasingly detached from reality claims (ie. "trump in a landslide argle bargle") is as sure a sign as any even they see the writing on the wall.

 

I have zero respect for anyone who continues to support a president that literally thinks they are "disgusting" "losers" and "suckers".  I'm pretty sure they have zero respect for themselves as well.  That's the only kind of person that would continue to support him imo.

[RoadWarrior371]

58 minutes ago, shdmn said:

The fact there are so many right wing trolls around here with increasingly detached from reality claims (ie. "trump in a landslide argle bargle") is as sure a sign as any even they see the writing on the wall.

 

I have zero respect for anyone who continues to support a president that literally thinks they are "disgusting" "losers" and "suckers".  I'm pretty sure they have zero respect for themselves as well.  That's the only kind of person that would continue to support him imo.

Let those tears flow.  LOL

Judge Amy Coney Barrett and her large family left their Indiana home this afternoon dressed up for a special occasion. Our @GaryGrumbach on the scene for us. Announcement at 5pm at WH for Supreme Court nomination.

[candide]

1 hour ago, RoadWarrior371 said:

Let those tears flow.  LOL

Judge Amy Coney Barrett and her large family left their Indiana home this afternoon dressed up for a special occasion. Our @GaryGrumbach on the scene for us. Announcement at 5pm at WH for Supreme Court nomination.

A pale consolation to losing elections.....

https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls/fox-news-poll-tight-race-in-ohio-biden-tops-trump-in-nevada-and-pennsylvania

Edited September 26, 2020 by candide

[Scott]

A video from an unapproved source has been removed.