Swastika Flags Flown During Donald Trump Boat Parade in Florida

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Yes there is - you obviously have no idea how Constitutional Law works. The 2022 challenge resulted in the ruling that there is no provision for any particular Health services in the USA Constitution.  In order to change that back, it would require a legal issue that challenges that interpretation of the Constitution. Do you know that Dobbs was a Govt employee that refused to allow an abortion under that State's Laws and was taken to Court by the Planned Parenthood abortionists - it sure did not turn out the way they wanted. The SCOTUS ruled that it was a State right to control Health issues, as per the Constitution. 

 

Everyone got 2016 wrong - a bookie in UK paid out before the election date. This time around they have learned not to read the tea leaves with such 'certainty' which also means Trump is actually well in front. A lot of people voted for Hillary as a means of supporting her to win, because they thought it was a 'good bet' - they have also learned their lesson too.

 

What is irrelevent to some is value to another - Pigs and Pearls - One man's meat........ etc etc etc..

 

So much falsehood packed into so little space. Let's start with your original claim:

 

"But the truth is that the intelligent females on both sides know the POTUS cannot change the SCOTUS decision, and that it can only be overturned if it is challenged under the Constitution, and that all the SCOTUS did was to return the issue to the States where it belongs because it is a Health issue, not a 'rights' issue. But the stupid ones? They are voting Harris anyway."

 

Actually Potus, acting in concert with Congress can sign into law legislation that aligns with the provisions of Roe. In effect, that would overturn the consequnences of the Supreme court ruling.   Potus can also veto such legislation. So who wins the Presidency is obviously relevant. And of course, the fact is that under the Biden administration mifeprestone has been approved by the FDA to be prescribed and sent by mail without a woman actually seeing a physician. A Trump appointee could change that. Intelligent women and men know that. 

 

And if the next President gets the opportunity to appoint 2 news justices and that person is Kamala Harris, does it seem unlikely to you that they wouldn't vote to reinstate Roe. And if Trump gets to be President, isn't it likely that the opposite would be the case.  And yet, you claim that it's unimportant which candidate wins the Presidency. 

 

And your comment that  "A lot of people voted for Hillary as a means of supporting her to win, because they thought it was a 'good bet' - they have also learned their lesson too." is simply bizarre. What kind of evidence do you have to support such a weird claim?

 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

So much falsehood packed into so little space. Let's start with your original claim:

 

"But the truth is that the intelligent females on both sides know the POTUS cannot change the SCOTUS decision, and that it can only be overturned if it is challenged under the Constitution, and that all the SCOTUS did was to return the issue to the States where it belongs because it is a Health issue, not a 'rights' issue. But the stupid ones? They are voting Harris anyway."

 

Actually Potus, acting in concert with Congress can sign into law legislation that aligns with the provisions of Roe. In effect, that would overturn the consequnences of the Supreme court ruling.   Potus can also veto such legislation. So who wins the Presidency is obviously relevant. And of course, the fact is that under the Biden administration mifeprestone has been approved by the FDA to be prescribed and sent by mail without a woman actually seeing a physician. A Trump appointee could change that. Intelligent women and men know that. 

 

And if the next President gets the opportunity to appoint 2 news justices and that person is Kamala Harris, does it seem unlikely to you that they wouldn't vote to reinstate Roe. And if Trump gets to be President, isn't it likely that the opposite would be the case.  And yet, you claim that it's unimportant which candidate wins the Presidency. 

 

And your comment that  "A lot of people voted for Hillary as a means of supporting her to win, because they thought it was a 'good bet' - they have also learned their lesson too." is simply bizarre. What kind of evidence do you have to support such a weird claim?

 

Wow - you remind me of Kamala - that was one big word salad. I am sure you believe it - but it aint right - none of it.

And no I am not going to 'prove' my opinion with a Harvard sanctioned research study - they are too busy planning protests after Trump wins.

[metisdead]

Posts with videos from unapproved social media sources have been removed as per the Political Soapbox forum header:

 

General approach and policy.

We maintain a strict policy of accepting links or content only from mainstream and recognized media sources to ensure that information posted by members is both verifiable and trustworthy. We strive to remain impartial, prioritizing content that meets these standards and removing content that, in our opinion, does not.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Wow - you remind me of Kamala - that was one big word salad. I am sure you believe it - but it aint right - none of it.

And no I am not going to 'prove' my opinion with a Harvard sanctioned research study - they are too busy planning protests after Trump wins.

In other words, you've got nothing.