Trump says he will name Supreme Court replacement for Ginsburg by Saturday

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Nadia6 said:

The 3 largest states are all LIBERAL and the most populated thank god there is the electoral college or they would be pushing their liberal agenda on very conservative states who  live the exact opposite of their lives.

The fact remains it is the States that decide the President not the majority of the majority of the population and it has worked perfectly for 200 odd years for the USA 

And it will work PERFECTLY again in November when whoever wins will win the Electoral College because nothing else counts.

You better tell trump because he doesnt agree with the electoral college voting

[Sujo]

24 minutes ago, Mick501 said:

You know a normal person?  Source please.

Problem with english? He didnt say he listened to a normal person. Look for the comma which gives it a different meaning.

[utalkin2me]

2 hours ago, Nadia6 said:

Are you American ?? If so you need to brush up on your history and why the electoral college was put in place 

It works perfectly and was not designed to be that the Majority takes it and rightly so, you cannot have the 3 most populous states dictating to the majority of less populated States.

The forefathers had foresight beyond their time.

The EC is far from "working perfectly". Everyone agrees on this. It was the best system they could compromise on, all sides knew it was far from "perfect". 

 

Many of the forefathers wanted the popular vote to dictate elections, but they used the electoral college as a safeguard. I think if you asked them, in these elections where the popular vote winner was not victorious, they would admit failure in the system. How could you argue anything but in a "democracy". The ones who wanted congress to choose the president were out of their gourd and we all know that would have been disastrous. 

 

Some small states are purposefully overly weighted importance in the primaries. Early primaries are arguably much more important even than the election. 

 

Are you American? Either way I think Americans have no clue about why their own EC system is set up the way it is.

Edited September 22, 2020 by utalkin2me

[Baerboxer]

7 hours ago, Somtamnication said:

RBG's body not even cold and buried yet. If comparing morals doesn't kick this dude out of the office, nothing will.

 

Dems don't make up conspiracies, republicans do.

 

It seems it's the current POTUS job to nominate a replacement; and the senates to vote on approval or rejection.

 

Is there anywhere that says that must not happen close to an election?

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

Question. If POTUS can't unite the country and stop the civil unrest under his watch, what chance next 4 years. 

 

Good point. Why would anyone think that Biden Harris could unite the country any better? Given their propensity for supporting and encouraging those instigating and carrying out some of the civil unrest? They seem to be dividing the country just as much as Trump. 

 

If Biden Harris are elected, the conservative right just might decide to accept it as well as the radical left accepted Tump.

 

Just when the world needs a strong, united leader!

[watthong]

30 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

Question. If POTUS can't unite the country and stop the civil unrest under his watch, what chance next 4 years. 

 

Good point. Why would anyone think that Biden Harris could unite the country any better? Given their propensity for supporting and encouraging those instigating and carrying out some of the civil unrest? They seem to be dividing the country just as much as Trump. 

 

If Biden Harris are elected, the conservative right just might decide to accept it as well as the radical left accepted Tump.

 

Just when the world needs a strong, united leader!

 

The United States are not, never have been nor will ever be, united as says its namesake. Accept this as the nature of the beast, or rather its aspirations. 
On the other hand, the night security guard in my building, whom I have gotten to known somewhat on a friendly basis, despite his complete lack of English and experience in administrative matters, not to mention not having an iota knowledge of world politics, would still be doing a better job as POTUS (President of the United States) if he were elected today into the White House than its current cretin occupant also known as the orange dotard, simply because the former has integrity, dignity, human compassion and a whole host of other moral values which are totally alien concept to the latter. To start with, uneducated as he is, he doesn't believe let alone suggest ingesting bleach as a means to fight covid.

Biden-Harris would certainly fare much better than that.

[Eric Loh]

32 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Good point. Why would anyone think that Biden Harris could unite the country any better? Given their propensity for supporting and encouraging those instigating and carrying out some of the civil unrest? They seem to be dividing the country just as much as Trump. 

 

If Biden Harris are elected, the conservative right just might decide to accept it as well as the radical left accepted Tump.

 

Just when the world needs a strong, united leader!

I think you know who is the divider and who is the unifier. 

 

Just examine the demeanor and behavior of Trump and Biden. 
 

The one who divide is always creating mutual enemies and fool people by leading a crusade to conquer them. Make lies, conspiracy theories and turn that into life or death situation and urged unleashing of unconditional support from his supporters. Conquering and winning at any cost for himself, is all that matters even if it breaks the law and obscene obstruction of justice. 
 

Biden has a better shared ambition, empathy and inspiration for the people to build with him. He is more a unifier. 

 

[Sujo]

55 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

It seems it's the current POTUS job to nominate a replacement; and the senates to vote on approval or rejection.

 

Is there anywhere that says that must not happen close to an election?

Yes, obama tried and senate refused saying the people must have a say at an election. So thats the precedent.

 

btw its not close to an election, its already started, people have already voted.

[Sujo]

52 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Good point. Why would anyone think that Biden Harris could unite the country any better? Given their propensity for supporting and encouraging those instigating and carrying out some of the civil unrest? They seem to be dividing the country just as much as Trump. 

 

If Biden Harris are elected, the conservative right just might decide to accept it as well as the radical left accepted Tump.

 

Just when the world needs a strong, united leader!

Can you provide a link to show biden and harris encouraging the civil unrest?

[riclag]

8 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

Rumblings on the internet say this is the likely person. 

 

Gonna be interesting to see what kind of smear campaign Pelosi and the Dems can dream up. 

I like Lagoa, she has Hispanic ties!  

[Sujo]

1 minute ago, riclag said:

I like Lagoa, she has Hispanic ties!  

Whats that got to do with it. Its her legal mind that is relevant.

[Xavnel]

4 hours ago, polpott said:

Even Trump is betting on Biden. He knows he's out, hence the rush for a compliant Supreme Court judge. Hence the repeated efforts to besmirch the electoral system. "fake result" will be the cry from the Oval Office as he chains himself to the Resolute desk.

 

He knows that, come January, he will either be a resident in the White House or Sing Sing. The man's desperate, really desperate.

No,  you are absolutely incorrect. 
The reason a SCOTUS ....  MUST ....  be nominated is because of the Democrats plan to drag out the election, contest every place they can to delay.  The Democrats have hired 703 Lawyers to prepare for exactly that.  They are hoping to create confusion and delay the election.  When this happens, it will go to the Supreme Court,  and if the Judges are locked at 4 - 4 ,  then Nancy Pelosi becomes President and then she can move her people into place  to "find" the vote counts Biden needs to win.   THIS is the Democrats' plan for the election.  They KNOW JOe Biden cannot beat Trump straight up,  so they must play dirty and cheat to win, then cover it up.

[riclag]

10 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Whats that got to do with it. Its her legal mind that is relevant.

 She obviously didn't get  to her position in life by her looks!

Her parents I think  were cuban exiles ! 

The other thing I like about her, is her possible stance against socilism/communism!

Politically its a better choice imop

 

Edited September 22, 2020 by riclag

[Xavnel]

4 hours ago, Tagged said:

Who could in their wildest fantasy believe Usa would wote him in at all! Amazing United States of America, the land of free,,,,

I watched his announcement live and I said that I liked it and  , yes he can win.
 1 or 2 weeks before the Election, I told a buddy of mine that Trump will get 290 Electoral Votes.  He did even better than that. 
This time.... Trump will receive ....  318

[polpott]

4 minutes ago, Xavnel said:

No,  you are absolutely incorrect. 
The reason a SCOTUS ....  MUST ....  be nominated is because of the Democrats plan to drag out the election, contest every place they can to delay.  The Democrats have hired 703 Lawyers to prepare for exactly that.  They are hoping to create confusion and delay the election.  When this happens, it will go to the Supreme Court,  and if the Judges are locked at 4 - 4 ,  then Nancy Pelosi becomes President and then she can move her people into place  to "find" the vote counts Biden needs to win.   THIS is the Democrats' plan for the election.  They KNOW JOe Biden cannot beat Trump straight up,  so they must play dirty and cheat to win, then cover it up.

Any links to this nonsense?

 

If no new SCOTUS were elected, The Supreme Court would not be locked at 4-4 it would be, as it is at present, 5-3 in favour of the Republicans. Biden has a 12 point lead. Stop your rhetorical deflection based on zero facts, Trump is dumped.

[polpott]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

It seems it's the current POTUS job to nominate a replacement; and the senates to vote on approval or rejection.

 

Is there anywhere that says that must not happen close to an election?

Yes in 2016 the senate vetoed Obama's choice for SCOTUS for exactly that reason even though it was much further from the election than at present. The senate then laid down a convention that it would not be allowed to happen again prior to future elections.

 

The irony is that it was Mitch McConnell who laid down the convention, the very person that is now pushing hardest for that convention to be broken.

[AgMech Cowboy]

8 hours ago, Somtamnication said:

Dems don't make up conspiracies, republicans do.

Nothing like the Steele dossier to throw this statement in the trash. How many millions did Mueller and his hit team spend trying to prove the collusion hoax, etc.

[Xavnel]

4 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

He lost but the electoral college gave him the win. In short, most people didn't want him. 

2016 US Presidential Election Map By County & Vote Share

Looks to me like a lot more Red all over. 
Also, if you remove the Illegal Votes, then Trump would have also won the Popular Vote.

 

[polpott]

Just now, Xavnel said:

2016 US Presidential Election Map By County & Vote Share

Looks to me like a lot more Red all over. 
Also, if you remove the Illegal Votes, then Trump would have also won the Popular Vote.

 

Another fantasy from the rhetorical deflection workshop. Very few illegal votes in 2016.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38744612

 

"The team behind the research used data collected by the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), which is a national survey taken before and after elections. The CCES published a newsletter that disputed the findings and said "the likely percent of non-citizen voters in recent US elections is 0".

Just more deflection by your leader.

[Thingamabob]

The Republicans control the Senate, and In the White House the president is Donald Trump. He has every right, under the constitution, to proceed with a nomination to the Supreme Court at whatever speed he chooses.

[polpott]

Just now, Thingamabob said:

The Republicans control the Senate, and In the White House the president is Donald Trump. He has every right, under the constitution, to proceed with a nomination to the Supreme Court at whatever speed he chooses.

Legal right but certainly not moral right. But hey, he has no morals so that's OK then.

[Xavnel]

7 minutes ago, polpott said:

Another fantasy from the rhetorical deflection workshop. Very few illegal votes in 2016.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38744612

 

"The team behind the research used data collected by the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), which is a national survey taken before and after elections. The CCES published a newsletter that disputed the findings and said "the likely percent of non-citizen voters in recent US elections is 0".

Just more deflection by your leader.

That article was from January, just barely after the election,  here is one from July 
https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/new-report-exposes-thousands-illegal-votes-2016-election

The Government Accountability Institute was able to obtain voter registration and voter history data from only 21 states
(wonder what states would not share any information?.... could it possible be some that do not require ID?)

The probability of 45,000 illegal duplicate votes is the low end of the spectrum, and it does not even account for other types of fraud such as ineligible voting by noncitizens and felons and absentee ballot fraud.
 

The Institute also found more than 15,000 voters registered at prohibited addresses “such as post office boxes, UPS stores, federal post offices, and public buildings.” In some cases, more than 100 voters “were registered to the same UPS store locations.”

They also found voters whose registered addresses were “gas stations, vacant lots, abandoned mill buildings, basketball courts, parks, warehouses, and office buildings.”

The Institute found 45,880 votes cast by individuals whose dates of birth were more than 115 years before the election.

All of this is just the latest evidence that we have serious, substantive problems in our voter registration system across the country and that voter fraud is, without a doubt, real.

 

[Xavnel]

17 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

The Republicans control the Senate, and In the White House the president is Donald Trump. He has every right, under the constitution, to proceed with a nomination to the Supreme Court at whatever speed he chooses.

Trump does not have the "right" to nominate a Justice to the SCOTUS .....   he has an OBLIGATION to nominate someone.   It says so in the Constitution,....  it does not say, "if he feels like it" .... 
Trump if fulfilling his obligation as President of the United States

[Isaan sailor]

RBG: "The President is elected for four years, not three years, so the powers that he has in year three continue into year four.  Maybe some members of the Senate will wake up and appreciate that that's how it should be."

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, AgMech Cowboy said:

Nothing like the Steele dossier to throw this statement in the trash. How many millions did Mueller and his hit team spend trying to prove the collusion hoax, etc.

Steele dossier was started by a repub.

 

Muellers spent nothing, it actually made money out of it, plus a few convictions.

 

And to finish the nonsense, collusion is not a crime and he made no comment on it.

 

Next

 

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

It seems it's the current POTUS job to nominate a replacement; and the senates to vote on approval or rejection.

 

Is there anywhere that says that must not happen close to an election?

Well there's the McConnell rule that says there will be no Supreme Court Justice confirmations during an election year, the Biden rule that says there should be no Supreme Court Justice confirmation during election campaigns, the historical precedent going back over 100 years of not confirming Supreme Court Justices within nine months of an election, and common sense that says it shouldn't be done six weeks before the Presidential election.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Xavnel said:

2016 US Presidential Election Map By County & Vote Share

Looks to me like a lot more Red all over. 
Also, if you remove the Illegal Votes, then Trump would have also won the Popular Vote.

 

The largely empty areas are red.

 

Trump told the same illegal votes lie as you.  Even with the power of the Federal government behind him, he couldn't invent proof to support it.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Xavnel said:

That article was from January, just barely after the election,  here is one from July 
https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/new-report-exposes-thousands-illegal-votes-2016-election

The Government Accountability Institute was able to obtain voter registration and voter history data from only 21 states
(wonder what states would not share any information?.... could it possible be some that do not require ID?)

The probability of 45,000 illegal duplicate votes is the low end of the spectrum, and it does not even account for other types of fraud such as ineligible voting by noncitizens and felons and absentee ballot fraud.
 

The Institute also found more than 15,000 voters registered at prohibited addresses “such as post office boxes, UPS stores, federal post offices, and public buildings.” In some cases, more than 100 voters “were registered to the same UPS store locations.”

They also found voters whose registered addresses were “gas stations, vacant lots, abandoned mill buildings, basketball courts, parks, warehouses, and office buildings.”

The Institute found 45,880 votes cast by individuals whose dates of birth were more than 115 years before the election.

All of this is just the latest evidence that we have serious, substantive problems in our voter registration system across the country and that voter fraud is, without a doubt, real.

 

What numbers that are provided represent votes worth further examination.  Interesting that further examination didn't come up with anything of significance. 

 

I'm surprised that the 45,000 duplicate votes didn't turn up anything.  It seems that would be easy to prove; did it turn out the suspected duplicate votes weren't really duplicates?  Or were a large number of duplicate votes cast by well off people with more than one residence who could easily register at each address?  Well off people with multiple addresses are largely conservative retirees--wouldn't want to keep them from voting multiple times.

 

Both Democratic and Republican states refused to turn over voter information that violated the states' laws protecting voter information. 

 

Bottom line; Trump's investigation didn't find anything of significance.

Edited September 22, 2020 by heybruce

[candide]

1 hour ago, Xavnel said:

That article was from January, just barely after the election,  here is one from July 
https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/new-report-exposes-thousands-illegal-votes-2016-election

The Government Accountability Institute was able to obtain voter registration and voter history data from only 21 states
(wonder what states would not share any information?.... could it possible be some that do not require ID?)

The probability of 45,000 illegal duplicate votes is the low end of the spectrum, and it does not even account for other types of fraud such as ineligible voting by noncitizens and felons and absentee ballot fraud.
 

The Institute also found more than 15,000 voters registered at prohibited addresses “such as post office boxes, UPS stores, federal post offices, and public buildings.” In some cases, more than 100 voters “were registered to the same UPS store locations.”

They also found voters whose registered addresses were “gas stations, vacant lots, abandoned mill buildings, basketball courts, parks, warehouses, and office buildings.”

The Institute found 45,880 votes cast by individuals whose dates of birth were more than 115 years before the election.

All of this is just the latest evidence that we have serious, substantive problems in our voter registration system across the country and that voter fraud is, without a doubt, real.

 

The heritage foundation citing a report from the Breitbart linked GAI! Lol!

 

Even if numbers are accurate, it only shows that there are inaccuracies in voter lists, not that fraud occured.

Additionally, the number (45,000) is peanuts compared to the number of voters (Clinton got 2.87 million more votes than Trump).

So your claim that "Also, if you remove the Illegal Votes, then Trump would have also won the Popular Vote " is what it is: B.S.!

Edited September 22, 2020 by candide

[Mick501]

4 hours ago, Sujo said:

Problem with english? He didnt say he listened to a normal person. Look for the comma which gives it a different meaning.

Gonna take a guess that CNN doesn't have a chat show that teaches humour to their viewers.   Maybe you can run the original comment by a friend and have them explain it to you.