Author Topic: The President Trump Thread  (Read 42560 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #15 on: February 01, 2017, 11:56:18 AM »

Offline MBunge

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4527
  • Tommy Points: 461
I hope the Democrats protest the shameful and possibly unlawful display of obstructionism by the Republicans with respect to the nomination of Judge Garland by holding timely hearings and votes as required by the Constitution. The high road will show the opposition for what they are.

Yeah, that'll teach em.  ;)

In all seriousness it looks like they're going to filibuster the nomination. I'm not a fan for both moral and practical reasons, but I can't blame them for being mad about obstruction so unprecedented that the Rs had to invent a hypothetical alternate reality around an out-of-context 25 year old Biden quote to play the "both sides do it!" card. And there's considerable pressure from the left to categorically oppose Trump.

With the lack of political consequences for obstruction it's not surprising they'd try it, but I think it's going to fall flat and maybe backfire.
From a practical standpoint, voters rewarded republicans for being obstructionist by giving them control of both houses and the presidency.

The Democrats need to look at how the republicans came to have all the power in government and learn from the republicans successes. Democrats have compromised with republicans for a long time now and it has shown that not giving an inch is actually a better strategy. For all their questionable practices, the tea party started a grass roots movement that lead to republicans running things, if the democrats don't do something similar during the midterms I think we will get 8 years of Trump with Republicans controlling all 3 branches of government.

Garland was a moderate choice meant to appease republicans and they wouldn't even vote on him, the republicans refused and ended up with someone as right wing as Scalia.

An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind.  Yes, Republicans and conservatives have been behaving in deranged and outrageous ways, but if Democrats and liberals start acting the same way then our entire system will just stop implode.

I'd also point out that Barack Obama managed to be a fairly successful President despite never really following the GOP example and that the reward Republicans have received for all their efforts is being chained to Donald Trump for the next four years.

Mike

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2017, 11:59:47 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15094
  • Tommy Points: 1043
The Democrats need to look at how the republicans came to have all the power in government and learn from the republicans successes. Democrats have compromised with republicans for a long time now and it has shown that not giving an inch is actually a better strategy. For all their questionable practices, the tea party started a grass roots movement that lead to republicans running things, if the democrats don't do something similar during the midterms I think we will get 8 years of Trump with Republicans controlling all 3 branches of government.

It's notoriously more difficult to get the left to come out and vote, especially in midterms, but the movement against Trump is already several times larger than the early Tea Party. I've never seen the left so energized and active in my 30+ years of following politics. It's probably the biggest popular uprising on that side since Nixon/Vietnam. But it means almost nothing if it doesn't translate into elections.
The problem with any movement against Trump is that it's not "horizontal" enough. It really doesn't matter whether the Democrats will get "more win" in blue states, and so far I see no evidence that they'll be able to gain support in places where they need to win seats from Rs.
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #17 on: February 01, 2017, 12:02:20 PM »

Offline Evantime34

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11541
  • Tommy Points: 715
  • Eagerly Awaiting the Next Fantasy Draft
I hope the Democrats protest the shameful and possibly unlawful display of obstructionism by the Republicans with respect to the nomination of Judge Garland by holding timely hearings and votes as required by the Constitution. The high road will show the opposition for what they are.

Yeah, that'll teach em.  ;)

In all seriousness it looks like they're going to filibuster the nomination. I'm not a fan for both moral and practical reasons, but I can't blame them for being mad about obstruction so unprecedented that the Rs had to invent a hypothetical alternate reality around an out-of-context 25 year old Biden quote to play the "both sides do it!" card. And there's considerable pressure from the left to categorically oppose Trump.

With the lack of political consequences for obstruction it's not surprising they'd try it, but I think it's going to fall flat and maybe backfire.
From a practical standpoint, voters rewarded republicans for being obstructionist by giving them control of both houses and the presidency.

The Democrats need to look at how the republicans came to have all the power in government and learn from the republicans successes. Democrats have compromised with republicans for a long time now and it has shown that not giving an inch is actually a better strategy. For all their questionable practices, the tea party started a grass roots movement that lead to republicans running things, if the democrats don't do something similar during the midterms I think we will get 8 years of Trump with Republicans controlling all 3 branches of government.

Garland was a moderate choice meant to appease republicans and they wouldn't even vote on him, the republicans refused and ended up with someone as right wing as Scalia.

An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind.  Yes, Republicans and conservatives have been behaving in deranged and outrageous ways, but if Democrats and liberals start acting the same way then our entire system will just stop implode.

I'd also point out that Barack Obama managed to be a fairly successful President despite never really following the GOP example and that the reward Republicans have received for all their efforts is being chained to Donald Trump for the next four years.

Mike
Trump is going to get all his cabinet members approved. The house is republican, the senate is republican, if one more supreme court justice dies or steps down the supreme court will be republican. If the deomocrats do not offer any opposition there will be no checks and balances and the system won't work anyway.

I'd rather have the dems obstruct and stand up for what they believe in than watch as the republicans control everything entirely. In principal what you are saying makes sense, but in practice it would be the death of the democratic party.
DKC:  Rockets
CB Draft: Memphis Grizz
Players: Klay Thompson, Jabari Parker, Aaron Gordon
Next 3 picks: 4.14, 4.15, 4.19

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #18 on: February 01, 2017, 12:09:18 PM »

Online fairweatherfan

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17106
  • Tommy Points: 2215
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
The Democrats need to look at how the republicans came to have all the power in government and learn from the republicans successes. Democrats have compromised with republicans for a long time now and it has shown that not giving an inch is actually a better strategy. For all their questionable practices, the tea party started a grass roots movement that lead to republicans running things, if the democrats don't do something similar during the midterms I think we will get 8 years of Trump with Republicans controlling all 3 branches of government.

It's notoriously more difficult to get the left to come out and vote, especially in midterms, but the movement against Trump is already several times larger than the early Tea Party. I've never seen the left so energized and active in my 30+ years of following politics. It's probably the biggest popular uprising on that side since Nixon/Vietnam. But it means almost nothing if it doesn't translate into elections.
The problem with any movement against Trump is that it's not "horizontal" enough. It really doesn't matter whether the Democrats will get "more win" in blue states, and so far I see no evidence that they'll be able to gain support in places where they need to win seats from Rs.

The numbers have been impressive in red states too - I live in one of them. And the Dems are struggling at the state level in most "blue states", so there's room for growth almost everywhere. But the Senate map is lousy for them in 2018, and gerrymandering+concentrating in urban areas means the Dems need to win the House popular vote by 6-7 pts to take the House, which is very unlikely. It's a bad situation for sure.


Personally I think the Dems should use the Gorsuch hearings to get him on record about things like executive overreach and the application of the Emoluments clause - topics where an originalist should be on their side. Use it to gather rhetorical ammunition against Trump rather than a futile effort to stop the nomination.

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #19 on: February 01, 2017, 12:17:22 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15094
  • Tommy Points: 1043
Personally I think the Dems should use the Gorsuch hearings to get him on record about things like executive overreach and the application of the Emoluments clause - topics where an originalist should be on their side. Use it to gather rhetorical ammunition against Trump rather than a futile effort to stop the nomination.
Does that even mean anything anymore? Hatch was on record waxing poetic about Garland, but that did nothing for his case.
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #20 on: February 01, 2017, 12:18:26 PM »

Offline FatKidsDad

  • Jae Crowder
  • Posts: 333
  • Tommy Points: 36
The Democrats need to look at how the republicans came to have all the power in government and learn from the republicans successes. Democrats have compromised with republicans for a long time now and it has shown that not giving an inch is actually a better strategy. For all their questionable practices, the tea party started a grass roots movement that lead to republicans running things, if the democrats don't do something similar during the midterms I think we will get 8 years of Trump with Republicans controlling all 3 branches of government.

It's notoriously more difficult to get the left to come out and vote, especially in midterms, but the movement against Trump is already several times larger than the early Tea Party. I've never seen the left so energized and active in my 30+ years of following politics. It's probably the biggest popular uprising on that side since Nixon/Vietnam. But it means almost nothing if it doesn't translate into elections.
The problem with any movement against Trump is that it's not "horizontal" enough. It really doesn't matter whether the Democrats will get "more win" in blue states, and so far I see no evidence that they'll be able to gain support in places where they need to win seats from Rs.

The numbers have been impressive in red states too - I live in one of them. And the Dems are struggling at the state level in most "blue states", so there's room for growth almost everywhere. But the Senate map is lousy for them in 2018, and gerrymandering+concentrating in urban areas means the Dems need to win the House popular vote by 6-7 pts to take the House, which is very unlikely. It's a bad situation for sure.


Personally I think the Dems should use the Gorsuch hearings to get him on record about things like executive overreach and the application of the Emoluments clause - topics where an originalist should be on their side. Use it to gather rhetorical ammunition against Trump rather than a futile effort to stop the nomination.

This. Timely hearings with the loyal opposition raising valid questions and challenges to establish the record without offering a rubber stamp.
"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking." - George S. Patton
   
"Live so that when your children think of fairness and integrity,they think of you." -   H. Jackson Brown, Jr.

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #21 on: February 01, 2017, 12:49:32 PM »

Offline MBunge

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4527
  • Tommy Points: 461
I hope the Democrats protest the shameful and possibly unlawful display of obstructionism by the Republicans with respect to the nomination of Judge Garland by holding timely hearings and votes as required by the Constitution. The high road will show the opposition for what they are.

Yeah, that'll teach em.  ;)

In all seriousness it looks like they're going to filibuster the nomination. I'm not a fan for both moral and practical reasons, but I can't blame them for being mad about obstruction so unprecedented that the Rs had to invent a hypothetical alternate reality around an out-of-context 25 year old Biden quote to play the "both sides do it!" card. And there's considerable pressure from the left to categorically oppose Trump.

With the lack of political consequences for obstruction it's not surprising they'd try it, but I think it's going to fall flat and maybe backfire.
From a practical standpoint, voters rewarded republicans for being obstructionist by giving them control of both houses and the presidency.

The Democrats need to look at how the republicans came to have all the power in government and learn from the republicans successes. Democrats have compromised with republicans for a long time now and it has shown that not giving an inch is actually a better strategy. For all their questionable practices, the tea party started a grass roots movement that lead to republicans running things, if the democrats don't do something similar during the midterms I think we will get 8 years of Trump with Republicans controlling all 3 branches of government.

Garland was a moderate choice meant to appease republicans and they wouldn't even vote on him, the republicans refused and ended up with someone as right wing as Scalia.

An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind.  Yes, Republicans and conservatives have been behaving in deranged and outrageous ways, but if Democrats and liberals start acting the same way then our entire system will just stop implode.

I'd also point out that Barack Obama managed to be a fairly successful President despite never really following the GOP example and that the reward Republicans have received for all their efforts is being chained to Donald Trump for the next four years.

Mike
Trump is going to get all his cabinet members approved. The house is republican, the senate is republican, if one more supreme court justice dies or steps down the supreme court will be republican. If the deomocrats do not offer any opposition there will be no checks and balances and the system won't work anyway.

I'd rather have the dems obstruct and stand up for what they believe in than watch as the republicans control everything entirely. In principal what you are saying makes sense, but in practice it would be the death of the democratic party.

The problem isn't opposition.  It's mindless obstruction.

For example, Gorsuch is replacing Scalia so this nomination will basically just return the Court to the status quo.  If, say, Ruth Bader Ginsberg dies or retires and Trump nominates a replacement, that pick will almost certainly change the Court from a 5-4 split where one Justice can change the outcome to a 6-3 split that could last another 15 years at least.  But if liberals have already gone bonkers opposing Gorsuch, what's going to be left for the next and potentially more critical Supreme Court opening?

If you're going to have a showdown over filibustering Supreme Court picks, do you want to do it when you can argue that you are trying to prevent conservatives from overwhelming the court half a generation or do you want to do it when you're just being spiteful?

Mike

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #22 on: February 01, 2017, 12:52:40 PM »

Offline footey

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • Tommy Points: 702
I'm going to say this once, and then stop looking at the political threads.

I go on Celtics Blog to get away from the bickering in politics.  It never ends. I am personally disgusted with the state of affairs, and Celtics Blog is one of my sanctuaries from this insanity.

Wish the mods would block all political threads. Diminishes the value of this site for me.
You can ask a moderator to be removed from the Current Events forum.

Thanks. I will.

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2017, 04:38:20 PM »

Offline greece666

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5670
  • Tommy Points: 885
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
Spent time in the UK studying at Univ.
That's an awfully circumvent way to say that he's got a Ph.D. in Jurisprudence from Oxford. :P

By comparison to the other likely nominees (Hardiman and Pryor), he is the one who nomination is likely to cause less uproar, esp. by comparison to Pryor.
He's several years younger than both of these, which is somewhat relevant given that the appointment is for life. However, the difference is small enough to be largely immaterial.

Not sure what to make of this nomination. It seems Gorusch just hasn't ruled on enough cases to get a full picture of what he's like (e.g. he has never been assigned to abortion cases).

You are wrong on that Kozlodoev.

That's the short name of his Oxford college. That's pretty common. I studied in St. Antony's, Oxford, but most people there call it St. Ants.


Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #24 on: February 01, 2017, 04:47:20 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15094
  • Tommy Points: 1043
Spent time in the UK studying at Univ.
That's an awfully circumvent way to say that he's got a Ph.D. in Jurisprudence from Oxford. :P

By comparison to the other likely nominees (Hardiman and Pryor), he is the one who nomination is likely to cause less uproar, esp. by comparison to Pryor.
He's several years younger than both of these, which is somewhat relevant given that the appointment is for life. However, the difference is small enough to be largely immaterial.

Not sure what to make of this nomination. It seems Gorusch just hasn't ruled on enough cases to get a full picture of what he's like (e.g. he has never been assigned to abortion cases).

You are wrong on that Kozlodoev.

That's the short name of his Oxford college. That's pretty common. I studied in St. Antony's, Oxford, but most people there call it St. Ants.


His bio said he went to Oxford University, so the Oxford.

Also, for what it's worth, here's a glowing endorsement from a former Obama Solicitor General:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #25 on: February 01, 2017, 05:01:46 PM »

Offline greece666

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5670
  • Tommy Points: 885
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
Spent time in the UK studying at Univ.
That's an awfully circumvent way to say that he's got a Ph.D. in Jurisprudence from Oxford. :P

By comparison to the other likely nominees (Hardiman and Pryor), he is the one who nomination is likely to cause less uproar, esp. by comparison to Pryor.
He's several years younger than both of these, which is somewhat relevant given that the appointment is for life. However, the difference is small enough to be largely immaterial.

Not sure what to make of this nomination. It seems Gorusch just hasn't ruled on enough cases to get a full picture of what he's like (e.g. he has never been assigned to abortion cases).

You are wrong on that Kozlodoev.

That's the short name of his Oxford college. That's pretty common. I studied in St. Antony's, Oxford, but most people there call it St. Ants.


His bio said he went to Oxford University, so the Oxford.

Also, for what it's worth, here's a glowing endorsement from a former Obama Solicitor General:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html

University College Oxford is part of the Oxford.

I was there too, so trust me, I kind of know what I am talking about.

Last but not least, in my original post, I wrote Univ (=a college in the Oxford) not uni (=university).

You probably confuse what an Oxford college is with the American meaning of the word college.

minor edit: typo
« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 05:10:47 PM by greece666 »

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #26 on: February 01, 2017, 05:10:57 PM »

Online jpotter33

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20750
  • Tommy Points: 2655
As a conservative libertarian, so far from what I've read I like the Gorsuch pick, though he's not perfect.

From what I've seen he seems to be pretty good with state's rights, personal privacy and the Fourth Amendment, and gun rights, along with religious liberty, and he certainly leans toward the more libertarian side of the conservative spectrum.

However, his pro-life views have skewed his other views and affected his philosophy on the similar, but separate, issues of PAS (Assisted Suicide) measures and even the organ trade, which I'm specifically interested in due to it being my dissertation topic. These are issues that are sure to be hot-button issues during his tenure, and with as contentious as these issues already are in government circles, though not necessarily in the general population itself, I hope his presence doesn't prevent any progress in these areas.

Overall, I do like the pick, because it provides a good balance on the Court, which is what we should all want.
Quote from:  Robert Frost
I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his own way.

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #27 on: February 01, 2017, 05:17:24 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15094
  • Tommy Points: 1043
Spent time in the UK studying at Univ.
That's an awfully circumvent way to say that he's got a Ph.D. in Jurisprudence from Oxford. :P

By comparison to the other likely nominees (Hardiman and Pryor), he is the one who nomination is likely to cause less uproar, esp. by comparison to Pryor.
He's several years younger than both of these, which is somewhat relevant given that the appointment is for life. However, the difference is small enough to be largely immaterial.

Not sure what to make of this nomination. It seems Gorusch just hasn't ruled on enough cases to get a full picture of what he's like (e.g. he has never been assigned to abortion cases).

You are wrong on that Kozlodoev.

That's the short name of his Oxford college. That's pretty common. I studied in St. Antony's, Oxford, but most people there call it St. Ants.


His bio said he went to Oxford University, so the Oxford.

Also, for what it's worth, here's a glowing endorsement from a former Obama Solicitor General:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html

University College Oxford is part of the Oxford.

I was there too, so trust me, I kind of know what I am talking about.

Last but not least, in my original post, I wrote Univ. (=a college in the Oxford) not uni (=university).

You probably confuse what an Oxford college is with the American meaning of the word college.
Sorry, I think the British colloquialisms were a bit confusing (also, it's late-ish on a work day). All I meant to stress is that he has a doctorate from the Oxford University system. I don't think many Americans will recognize "Univ" as a shorthand for a school at the University of Oxford.
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #28 on: February 01, 2017, 05:27:49 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15094
  • Tommy Points: 1043
As a conservative libertarian, so far from what I've read I like the Gorsuch pick, though he's not perfect.

From what I've seen he seems to be pretty good with state's rights, personal privacy and the Fourth Amendment, and gun rights, along with religious liberty, and he certainly leans toward the more libertarian side of the conservative spectrum.

However, his pro-life views have skewed his other views and affected his philosophy on the similar, but separate, issues of PAS (Assisted Suicide) measures and even the organ trade, which I'm specifically interested in due to it being my dissertation topic. These are issues that are sure to be hot-button issues during his tenure, and with as contentious as these issues already are in government circles, though not necessarily in the general population itself, I hope his presence doesn't prevent any progress in these areas.

Overall, I do like the pick, because it provides a good balance on the Court, which is what we should all want.
I just realized he wrote the concurring opinion on the Hobby Lobby case. I know this held in SCOTUS, but I haven't been overly impressed with this ruling.
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: The President Trump Thread
« Reply #29 on: February 01, 2017, 05:56:51 PM »

Offline greece666

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5670
  • Tommy Points: 885
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville


Quote
Meryem Yildirim, 7, left, sitting on the shoulders of her dad, Fatih, of Schaumburg, and Adin Bendat-Appell, 9, on the shoulders of his dad, Rabbi Jordan Bendat-Apell, of Deerfield, during a protest at O'Hare International Airport on Jan 30, 2017. (Nuccio DiNuzzo / Chicago Tribune)

Full story

reddit post

PS @kozlodoev My bad, I should have explained in more detail