Jump to content

U.S. Politics: Great Men Master trends


Jace, Extat

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

The poll results are not that surprising. What is a bit surprising is that it was done by FOX news.

Fox News Poll: Voters favor gun limits over arming citizens to reduce gun violence (msn.com)

 

After a series of mass shootings this spring, including the killing of several students at a private Christian school in Tennessee, voters would prefer focusing on specific gun control measures rather than arming citizens to reduce gun violence.

A new Fox News Poll finds most voters favor the following proposals:

-- Requiring criminal background checks on all gun buyers (87%)

-- Improving enforcement of existing gun laws (81%)

-- Raising the legal age to buy a gun to 21 (81%)

-- Requiring mental health checks on gun buyers (80%)

-- Allowing police to take guns from those considered a danger to themselves or others (80%)

-- Requiring a 30-day waiting period for all gun purchases (77%)

And the GoP in Tennessee will quickly work to kill all these measures. What a time to be alive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

The poll results are not that surprising. What is a bit surprising is that it was done by FOX news.

Fox News Poll: Voters favor gun limits over arming citizens to reduce gun violence (msn.com)

 

It is not surprising to me that Fox did this poll, because isn't it true that polling has been the one thing at Fox that has generally been fair and accurate?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ormond said:

It is not surprising to me that Fox did this poll, because isn't it true that polling has been the one thing at Fox that has generally been fair and accurate?  

Yes, Fox's polls are legit.  Also their decision desk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ormond said:

isn't it true that polling has been the one thing at Fox that has generally been fair and accurate?  

Yeah, FNC uses the joint efforts of Beacon Research (a Democratic-leaning firm), and Shaw and Co. Research (a Republican-leaning firm).  They are elite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Report us "unsurprised."  Feh.

'Serious omissions' found in Senate probe of sexual misconduct allegation against Brett Kavanaugh: report

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/serious-omissions-found-in-senate-probe-of-sexual-misconduct-allegation-against-brett-kavanaugh-report/ar-AA1atG5D

Quote

 

.... Now, in late April 2023, the allegations against Kavanaugh are being scrutinized once again. The Guardian's Stephanie Kirchgaessner, in an article published on April 28, reports that a Senate investigation of those allegations "contained serious omissions."

That 28-page report from September 2018 was released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who headed the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time. The report, Kirchgaessner notes, "prominently included an unfounded and unverified claim" that Ramirez "was 'likely' mistaken when she alleged that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a dormitory party because another Yale student was allegedly known for such acts."

"The suggestion that Kavanaugh was the victim of mistaken identity was sent to the (Senate) Judiciary Committee by a Colorado-based attorney named Joseph C. Smith. Jr., according to a non-redacted copy of a 2018 e-mail obtained by the Guardian," Kirchgaessner explains. "Smith was a friend and former colleague of the Judiciary Committee's then-lead counsel Mike Davis.… Smith wrote to Davis in the 29 September, 2018 e-mail that he was in a class behind Kavanaugh and Ramirez, who graduated in the class of 1987, and believed Ramirez was likely mistaken in identifying Kavanaugh."

Kirchgaessner continues, "Instead, Smith said it was a fellow classmate named Jack Maxey, who was a member of Kavanaugh's fraternity, who allegedly had a 'reputation' for exposing himself, and had once done so at a party. To back his claim, Smith also attached a photograph of Maxey exposing himself in his fraternity's 1988 yearbook picture. The allegation that Ramirez was likely mistaken was included in the Senate (Judiciary) Committee's final report even though Maxey — who was described but not named — was not attending Yale at the time of the alleged incident."

READ MORE: 'The stink of corruption': AOC ignites a firestorm after criticizing the Supreme Court’s lack of ethics

GOP activist Maxey, according to Kirchgaessner, "confirmed" to The Guardian that he was still in high school — not a student at Yale — at the time of the alleged incident.

Maxey told The Guardian, "I was not at Yale. I was a senior in high school at the time. I was not in New Haven…. These people can say what they want, and there are no consequences ever."

 

Full report here:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/28/brett-kavanaugh-investigation-omissions-senate-sexual-assault-claims
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

That guy is thankfully not as magnetic a personality as Trump, but he is just as absurd, and just as dangerous with any sort of power.

 

Magnetic O-face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GOP-controlled North Carolina Supreme Court reverses rulings that struck down partisan gerrymanders by Republican lawmakers

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/28/politics/north-carolina-gerrymandering-supreme-court/index.html

Quote

 

The Republican-controlled North Carolina Supreme Court – reversing previous rulings that were handed down when the state Supreme Court leaned Democratic – said Friday that North Carolina’s constitution gave state courts no role to play in policing partisan gerrymanders.

The ruling is a victory for the GOP state legislature, which brought the case back to the state Supreme Court after Republicans flipped seats on the court in the midterms, giving them the majority. The GOP legislature had also taken the case to the US Supreme Court – where Republicans were pushing an aggressive theory that would limit the role state courts can play in election disputes – and it is unclear whether Friday’s ruling prompts the US Supreme Court to dismiss the case that is before it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how gerrymandering can be legal. In my province, for the provincial elections, the districts go by county, and then the cities have districts by population count that chunks areas together. Essentially by neighbourhood, so West End, South End, etc. 

Federal is similar, but fewer districts as some get grouped together. 

Also similar for municipal elections. It always cracked me up that we live in District 9. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

If you are not enthused about the next GE in the US, this cartoon will fire you up.

I have been highly skeptical of Biden 2024 AND Trump 2024 for a long while now. I used to think DeSantis 2024 was a possibility, but he has gone out of his way to alienate the swing voters he needs to win (as has Trump.) Been wondering more and more if the governor of California might jump into the ring...not senile, some progressive creds, big state governor...but he does have other issues.

 

That said...a possibility I have been contemplating these past few weeks is:

 

Biden vs Trump. Biden wins, catches a cold while taking the oath of office, dies three weeks later, and we are left with President Harris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ThinkerX said:

I have been highly skeptical of Biden 2024 AND Trump 2024 for a long while now. I used to think DeSantis 2024 was a possibility, but he has gone out of his way to alienate the swing voters he needs to win (as has Trump.) Been wondering more and more if the governor of California might jump into the ring...not senile, some progressive creds, big state governor...but he does have other issues.

 

That said...a possibility I have been contemplating these past few weeks is:

 

Biden vs Trump. Biden wins, catches a cold while taking the oath of office, dies three weeks later, and we are left with President Harris.

And that prospect is scary because?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, the whine of the powerful conservative through the ages: 'shut up and show proper deference while I fuck you over'.

ETA:

https://www.businessinsider.com/jane-roberts-chief-justice-wife-10-million-commissions-2023-4?r=US&IR=T

 

Weird how people are accusing the justices of unethical conduct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She might have gave the game up quicker. From a young age I always thought it was a sad joke that anyone would believe these fuckers were above politics, improprieties and unethical behavior. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point is Senate Dems and Arlen Specter - the Republican Judiciary Chair at the time - were looking at a comparative gift horse in the mouth and whined about her written answers to questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

Point is Senate Dems and Arlen Specter - the Republican Judiciary Chair at the time - were looking at a comparative gift horse in the mouth and whined about her written answers to questions.

8 warning points? Those are rookie numbers, you gotta pump those way up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...