2020 US Elections

Status
Not open for further replies.
FogBlueInSanFran said:
It appears those who used the debate as their first opportunity to give this election a real think (which I suspect was a lot more folks than I originally assumed) have weighed in . . .

Click to expand...

Let’s fucking hope that’s accurate. All the twatting about in the world from GoP lawyers and troll farms couldn’t up end 14 points.
 
SWP's back said:
Let’s fucking hope that’s accurate. All the twatting about in the world from GoP lawyers and troll farms couldn’t up end 14 points.
Click to expand...

I said before I thought that debate was pretty meaningful in showcasing Trump in all his "glory". For all the "sacrifices" we've had to make for the "war effort" against COVID, I can't imagine the picture of unmasked rich and powerful people on the White House lawn sits well with neutrals either. His cult and its ass-gobbling eunuch acolyte enabler/courtiers are trying to portray Trump as the Messiah now, taking the "bullet" of COVID for all of us. His administration lies and lies and lies and lies and obviously was monstrously -- I mean unimaginably -- irresponsible if he really knew he had COVID before the debate but showed up late on purpose to avoid the test. The doctors covering up his condition and the fake "work" he was doing (which we've seen before) only point to both the Trump camp's rampant stupidity and their desperation. I think the VP debate obviously takes on substantially greater importance now. If Harris can rinse Pence (I've no idea if she can) or simply display that she'll make a solid President, it's hard for me to figure a way Trump can get back in this if the absentee ballot counts (hugely blue by a 2-1 margin in many major battleground states, and even leaning blue in some safe red states) and the polls are accurate.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
I said before I thought that debate was pretty meaningful in showcasing Trump in all his "glory". For all the "sacrifices" we've had to make for the "war effort" against COVID, I can't imagine the picture of unmasked rich and powerful people on the White House lawn sits well with neutrals either. His cult and its ass-gobbling eunuch acolyte enabler/courtiers are trying to portray Trump as the Messiah now, taking the "bullet" of COVID for all of us. His administration lies and lies and lies and lies and obviously was monstrously -- I mean unimaginably -- irresponsible if he really knew he had COVID before the debate but showed up late on purpose to avoid the test. The doctors covering up his condition and the fake "work" he was doing (which we've seen before) only point to both the Trump camp's rampant stupidity and their desperation. I think the VP debate obviously takes on substantially greater importance now. If Harris can rinse Pence (I've no idea if she can) or simply display that she'll make a solid President, it's hard for me to figure a way Trump can get back in this if the absentee ballot counts (hugely blue by a 2-1 margin in many major battleground states, and even leaning blue in some safe red states) and the polls are accurate.
Click to expand...
Agree with all of that. Just a shame we won’t get to see Trump “debate” again as it’s the best campaign boost Biden has enjoyed.

 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
I said before I thought that debate was pretty meaningful in showcasing Trump in all his "glory". For all the "sacrifices" we've had to make for the "war effort" against COVID, I can't imagine the picture of unmasked rich and powerful people on the White House lawn sits well with neutrals either. His cult and its ass-gobbling eunuch acolyte enabler/courtiers are trying to portray Trump as the Messiah now, taking the "bullet" of COVID for all of us. His administration lies and lies and lies and lies and obviously was monstrously -- I mean unimaginably -- irresponsible if he really knew he had COVID before the debate but showed up late on purpose to avoid the test. The doctors covering up his condition and the fake "work" he was doing (which we've seen before) only point to both the Trump camp's rampant stupidity and their desperation. I think the VP debate obviously takes on substantially greater importance now. If Harris can rinse Pence (I've no idea if she can) or simply display that she'll make a solid President, it's hard for me to figure a way Trump can get back in this if the absentee ballot counts (hugely blue by a 2-1 margin in many major battleground states, and even leaning blue in some safe red states) and the polls are accurate.
Click to expand...
Having seen both Pence and Harris speak, there is little chance that the VP will come out winning that encounter. Pence’s only expertise is in obsequiousness, and without Trump there to have his arse licked and a sympathetic audience of cult members he’ll be fully shown up as the useless lapdog that he is.
 
west didsblue said:
Having seen both Pence and Harris speak, there is little chance that the VP will come out winning that encounter. Pence’s only expertise is in obsequiousness, and without Trump there to have his arse licked and a sympathetic audience of cult members he’ll be fully shown up as the useless lapdog that he is.
Click to expand...

I am so afraid of jinxing it . . . but I hope you’re right and I think you’re spot on.
 
Excellent SNL skit of the first debate for those into that sort of thing ;-)
 
MillionMilesAway said:
I was just reading CNN on this. If I read it right, they suggest the judges view that it should be legislated on rather than being First Amendment stuff.

That presumably then makes it state by state which is where it gets partisan.
Click to expand...
Yes, it means they’d be looking to do away with same sex marriage in red states. This is in twenty fucking twenty.

Fuck them, fuck hiding behind their religion.
 
SWP's back said:
Yes, it means they’d be looking to do away with same sex marriage in red states. This is in twenty fucking twenty.

Fuck them, fuck hiding behind their religion.
Click to expand...

I would suspect Roberts changes his vote in Obergefell. His opinion was based on no precedent for redefining marriage, but now there is one: Obergefell itself, plus a few other cases since. Scalia is gone; Alito and Thomas will obviously still read "Due Process" almost insanely restrictively, so it really comes down to Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and Barrett if she's confirmed (which she may not be now). Never understood this case. If marriage was not a legally recognizable state with attendant benefits and restrictions granted by LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS THEMSELVES as TAXING ENTITIES I could see a case for there being no need for re-definition of it (i.e. if marriage were solely a RELIGIOUS institution, then maybe one would have a case that states can make up their own minds whether to "allow" the practice, meaning grant certificate of marriage). But that's NOT the way it is. No question conservatives ruled the way they did because of the "slippery slope" issue in expanding privacy and individual rights not granted in the original Constitution (in their minds), and their argument is that a legislative solution is what's needed to amend the definition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top