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.

The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

Rover said:
None of this makes sense. Of the people who actually ran (Hillary, Sanders, O'Malley, Chaffee, and that other guy) she was by far the best chance to win. Furthermore, I'm not sure anybody else out there, including Warren, would have beaten him this go around because its tough to counter nonsense with reason if voters want to hear nonsense.

The problem with Dems isn't this nominee or that nominee, be it for President or down ballot. The problem is Dem voters are lazy. They were lazy in 2010, they were lazy in 2014 (lowest mid-term turnout since 1942 - the middle of a world war), and they were lazy in 2016. She was only on the ballot one of those years.

Dems/liberals/whatever are lazy voters. Not every candidate for every race is going to be JFK like inspirational. You still need to support those people if they're on the right side of the issues, even if they're a little dull (Gore for example). Don't do that and you hand over all levers of power to the Republicans. Which, in case you didn't notice, just happened. How is Clinton or Obama responsible for the 24 House seats that they won but are represented by Republican reps???
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that they are lazy so much as lulled into a false sense of security. A lot of people were saying the election was over. That the early voting numbers and the Democratic "ground game", coupled with a complete lack of a ground game by the Trump campaign, made the vote in November a foregone conclusion.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

SJHovey said:
I'm not sure that they are lazy so much as lulled into a false sense of security. A lot of people were saying the election was over. That the early voting numbers and the Democratic "ground game", coupled with a complete lack of a ground game by the Trump campaign, made the vote in November a foregone conclusion.
Click to expand...

Did Dems really not turn out? Is there empirical evidence of this?

My impression is minorities dropped because no Obama, and then the race shifted because the Dems lost the rest of the angry rust belt whites they had somehow not managed to lose before this (and to be honest I was surprised there were any left).

Rover thinks if the product launch for Turd Flavored Coke fails, that's the consumers' fault.

No. It's the product. Turd Flavored Hillary lost.

Now add that Hillary lost to an actual sack of rotting vermin tied off with a cinnamon beret. That makes her a really big loser.
 
Kepler said:
Did Dems really not turn out? Is there empirical evidence of this?

My impression is minorities dropped because no Obama, and then the race shifted because the Dems lost the rest of the angry rust belt whites they had somehow not managed to lose before this (and to be honest I was surprised there were any left).

Rover thinks if the product launch for Turd Flavored Coke fails, that's the consumers' fault.

No. It's the product. Turd Flavored Hillary lost.

Now add that Hillary lost to an actual sack of rotting vermin tied off with a cinnamon beret. That makes her a really big loser.
Click to expand...

There's a fivethirtyeight article today that says more registered dems and independents failed to show up than registered republicans, and if they had merely equaled the GOP turnout Hillary would've won since it would've boosted her another 1-2%, carrying the swing states she lost.

That's based on a single post election poll, but it had a huge sample size.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

unofan said:
There's a fivethirtyeight article today that says more registered dems and independents failed to show up than registered republicans, and if they had merely equaled the GOP turnout Hillary would've won since it would've boosted her another 1-2%, carrying the swing states she lost.

That's based on a single post election poll, but it had a huge sample size.
Click to expand...

Figures. Well, they got what they voted for by staying home. I hope there is a recession, I hope they lose their jobs, I hope they lose their medical insurance.
 
Rover said:
None of this makes sense. Of the people who actually ran (Hillary, Sanders, O'Malley, Chaffee, and that other guy) she was by far the best chance to win. Furthermore, I'm not sure anybody else out there, including Warren, would have beaten him this go around because its tough to counter nonsense with reason if voters want to hear
Click to expand...

So because the candidate with historically high disapproval ratings and baggage up the wazoo couldn't win, that means nobody could.

Makes sense to me.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

Guys, you seem to be forgetting recent trends for Dems. Hillary Clinton wasn't on the ballot in 2010 or 2014. Dems didn't show up to vote. She was in 2016 and Dems didn't show up to vote. Dems aren't voting in elections. From President all the way down to dogcatcher. It has little to do with Clinton, Sanders or anybody else.

Hovey perhaps you're right on '16, but the stakes were well known in 2010 and 2014 and Dems didn't turn out then either.

People need to get past the knee jerk reaction. Lefties are lazy when it comes to voting, this year and in recent years.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

You know, I find it funny... Some left-winger created the thread with such a spin on the title that it wasn't OK to have a certain number of judges. Now all of a sudden that powers change, it's OK to block it.
 
FlagDUDE08 said:
You know, I find it funny... Some left-winger created the thread with such a spin on the title that it wasn't OK to have a certain number of judges. Now all of a sudden that powers change, it's OK to block it.
Click to expand...

It is "OK" to block any nomination. It can be for good reasons (raving lunatic) or petty (the nominee's kid stole your kid's lunch money). The idea behind the super majority was to get someone nominated who had some broad appeal.

Now it's dictatorship of the majority. It's a hell of a way to run a country, but nobody is going to return to what was.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

joecct said:
It is "OK" to block any nomination. It can be for good reasons (raving lunatic) or petty (the nominee's kid stole your kid's lunch money). The idea behind the super majority was to get someone nominated who had some broad appeal.

Now it's dictatorship of the majority. It's a hell of a way to run a country, but nobody is going to return to what was.
Click to expand...

Yup, and it's how we're going to get nothing but extremists on the court for the rest of time.

You think Ginsburg or Scalia are/were lunatics? Just wait 30 years.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

joecct said:
The Geek Squad as FBI Informants?

The doc appears to be dirty. However, is this a reasonable search?
Click to expand...

I have assumed for years that all computer forensics is a gateway to LEO. It's wrong, but law enforcement doesn't give a rat's a-s about privacy rights or indeed any civil rights. They're a machine we use to fight crime. It's up to us to fence them in and give them shock collars, and nobody has been doing that since 2001 so of course they are off the chain.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

joecct said:
It is "OK" to block any nomination. It can be for good reasons (raving lunatic) or petty (the nominee's kid stole your kid's lunch money). The idea behind the super majority was to get someone nominated who had some broad appeal.

Now it's dictatorship of the majority. It's a hell of a way to run a country, but nobody is going to return to what was.
Click to expand...

Considering Scalia was murdered by the globalists, I'm not surprised.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

St. Clown said:
Now the FBI justifies the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States?
Click to expand...

Perhaps. The point being made, however, is that because the government agencies aren't able to do it themselves because of constitutional barriers, they coerce private entities to do it on their behalf. They are then able to say that it isn't them doing it (at least directly). Conspiracy is more difficult to prove than a direct implication, although most of the time, all you have to do is follow the money.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

FlagDUDE08 said:
Perhaps. The point being made, however, is that because the government agencies aren't able to do it themselves because of constitutional barriers, they coerce private entities to do it on their behalf. They are then able to say that it isn't them doing it (at least directly). Conspiracy is more difficult to prove than a direct implication, although most of the time, all you have to do is follow the money.
Click to expand...

So when Alexander Hamilton was busy creating the First Bank of the United States, he was doing it on behalf of the FBI?

The FBI didn't exist when any of the three incarnations of the US central banking systems were created. The Fed can be used as such a tool, as I can see first hand, but none of it is hidden. Follow the legislation written, know a few of the tens of thousands of employees working in banking operations, and it's impossible to keep any of it secret. Your conspiracy theory is dead in the water, probably killed by a globalist.
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

St. Clown said:
So when Alexander Hamilton was busy creating the First Bank of the United States, he was doing it on behalf of the FBI?

The FBI didn't exist when any of the three incarnations of the US central banking systems were created. The Fed can be used as such a tool, as I can see first hand, but none of it is hidden. Follow the legislation written, know a few of the tens of thousands of employees working in banking operations, and it's impossible to keep any of it secret. Your conspiracy theory is dead in the water, probably killed by a globalist.
Click to expand...

You're the one who came up with the whole FBI and Central Bank thing. They may not have been involved with its creation, but why do you think Kennedy was murdered?
 
Re: The Power of SCOTUS VIII redux: IX is being blocked by the Senate.

FlagDUDE08 said:
You're the one who came up with the whole FBI and Central Bank thing. They may not have been involved with its creation, but why do you think Kennedy was murdered?
Click to expand...

I came up with the FBI and Central Bank thing? Uh, no, I was replying directly to what you wrote. Would you like to see the text again?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top