What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.....United States Supreme Court is given additional information from which it can make a final and decisive decision on this very critical matter. Can anyone really believe that as a great Country, we are not able the ask whether or not someone is a Citizen. Only in America!</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1144298734311878657?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 27, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

Rover said:
Lets take a more dispassionate look at gerrymandering now that the Feds are going to have a hands off approach (aside from blatant racism).

Gooper gerrymanders: MI,WI,OH,TX,GA,NC

Dem gerrymanders: IL, MD

Michigan (citizens initiative) and North Carolina (Dems now control state supreme court) should take care of themselves. Yes I expect the GOP to try to hang on like grim death, but in both places the state courts aren't friendly to their position.

Ohio - Passed some half measure to head off a citizens initiative. Basically it shortens the amount of time the new lines are in place if not a bipartisan agreement to 4 years. Total GOP control of Gov, legislature, courts.

WI, TX, GA - not good. Dems p issed away chance at winning state supreme court this year in Wisconsin. Dispute between legislature and Gov goes to them (basically a reverse of Pennsylvania). Moderate chance at winning state House in Texas next year but again presumably dispute would go to GOP state supreme court. Same with Georgia.

Potential Dem gerrymanders. On the bright side if you like fighting fire with fire, Dems now have total control of New York and after courts redrew racial gerrymander in state house are in a good spot for the same trifecta in Virginia. If the SCOTUS has now ruled that anything goes, lots of opportunity in these two states.

So you could have a situation after 2020 where the GOP has gerrymandered TX, OH, GA and WI while Dems have done the same to NY, IL, VA and MD. That's a lot better than where we were after the last round of redistricting.
Click to expand...

I'm with you here. If the courts rule that partisan gerrymandering is ok, then it's time for the Democrats to become experts in using it and do so ruthlessly.
 
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

Kepler said:
You gave us your real reason and that's unconstitutional so come back with a lie and we'll buy it.
Click to expand...

"You didn't conceal your real reasons well enough, which are prejudicial and unconstitutional, so we had to rule that way. Come back with a better excuse next time".

More accurate.
 
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

ScoobyDoo said:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.....United States Supreme Court is given additional information from which it can make a final and decisive decision on this very critical matter. Can anyone really believe that as a great Country, we are not able the ask whether or not someone is a Citizen. Only in America!</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1144298734311878657?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 27, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

This is where the Chump administration being full of grifters and fuk ups comes in handy. A more slick operation never allows evidence of the real reason behind this census question to see the light of day. Manufacturing a new reason to get through several courts that doesn't pass the laugh test is going to be pretty hard to do in time for sending out the census forms which is why Chump is tweeting out blatantly unconstitutional remedies to the situation. :D
 
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

Kepler said:
Gerrymandering is about the GOP cheating in some states now. Census is about the GOP cheating in all states in the future. The consequences of the latter are far more devastating. Combined with their Gestapo raids on Latino homes they're on their way to their white nationalist homeland.

It's really noteworthy how no conservative will stand up against them. What a bunch of cowards.
Click to expand...

Conservatives are afraid of the dark, funny-talking people too.
 
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

rufus said:
"You didn't conceal your real reasons well enough, which are prejudicial and unconstitutional, so we had to rule that way. Come back with a better excuse next time".

More accurate.
Click to expand...

You have to ask me nicely.
 
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

joecct said:
Should be:
Fired for your actions (or lack of) not who you are.

Reality:
Never mind facts, we'll find some way to boot your arse to the curb.
Click to expand...

We actually have ways of changing this. They are called laws.

Funny how the Republican party always tries to stop laws which force employers to prove work deficiencies, meanwhile striking down laws which would make it illegal to fire somebody based on their sexuality. Hmm. It's almost as if that party is virtue signalling to its supporters who want to continue having their hate not just unpunished but tacitly approved of. In this case the "virtue" is bigotry, but it comes from an old Jewish fairytale so it's sacred.
 
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

Kepler said:
We actually have ways of changing this. They are called laws.

Funny how the Republican party always tries to stop laws which force employers to prove work deficiencies, meanwhile striking down laws which would make it illegal to fire somebody based on their sexuality. Hmm. It's almost as if that party is virtue signalling to its supporters who want to continue having their hate not just unpunished but tacitly approved of. In this case the "virtue" is bigotry, but it comes from an old Jewish fairytale so it's sacred.
Click to expand...

Didn’t you say anyone who uses the term “virtue signaling” shouldn’t be taken seriously? ;)
 
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

Kepler said:
We actually have ways of changing this. They are called laws.

Funny how the Republican party always tries to stop laws which force employers to prove work deficiencies, meanwhile striking down laws which would make it illegal to fire somebody based on their sexuality. Hmm. It's almost as if that party is virtue signalling to its supporters who want to continue having their hate not just unpunished but tacitly approved of. In this case the "virtue" is bigotry, but it comes from an old Jewish fairytale so it's sacred.
Click to expand...

Let's set aside issues relating to whether there should be protected classes of people (there should) based upon race, sex, national origin, gender identity, etc.., and let me ask you this about the first part of your statement.

I assume you believe employees should have unfettered right to simply quit their job and go elsewhere if they choose? But employers should not have that same right? They should not have the right to decide they can do better in terms of who they have working for them?
 
SJHovey said:
Let's set aside issues relating to whether there should be protected classes of people (there should) based upon race, sex, national origin, gender identity, etc.., and let me ask you this about the first part of your statement.

I assume you believe employees should have unfettered right to simply quit their job and go elsewhere if they choose? But employers should not have that same right? They should not have the right to decide they can do better in terms of who they have working for them?
Click to expand...
I've seen people get fired at my job for the following

Excessive absence
Doing something stupid like violate Lock Out Tag Out
Or for gross incompetence, like it's clear they can't handle the job.

What Kepler and I are saying is fire me for those reasons, not because I'm trans.
 
Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

MissThundercat said:
I've seen people get fired at my job for the following

Excessive absence
Doing something stupid like violate Lock Out Tag Out
Or for gross incompetence, like it's clear they can't handle the job.

What Kepler and I are saying is fire me for those reasons, not because I'm trans.
Click to expand...

I don't think employers should be allowed to fire people based upon their gender identity. I've never said to the contrary.

My question for Kep was specifically related to the first part of his statement in which he at least implied that employers should have to "prove work deficiencies" before they be allowed to fire someone. I disagree with this. I think that just as an employee should be entitled to better his or her job situation by finding new employment, the employer should be able to do the same, to better his or her business by replacing current employees with better and more talented employees.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top