US Politics the Biden's age a nothing burger edition

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Serena Joy would be my pick on joining the majority.

Gorsuch and Beerpong can go either way.

Edited December 12, 2023 by A Horse Named Stranger

[kissdbyfire]

Just now, Kalbear said:

Why would they care? They can always rule against it then. 

Y'all keep thinking that precedence matters as far as the SCOTUS goes. We've already shown that it doesn't matter in the least. Nor does consistency. All that matters is power. 

Yeah, I suppose, but it is kind of depressing. 

[Bironic]

7 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

What about if Biden or any generic dem wins? I mean, wouldn’t this very conservative SCOTUS worry about enabling not only trump or another republican, but all future presidents?

I hope they do! and I think there’s a chance that two out of roberts, gorsuch, kavanagh will join the liberal judges in that case. But I am no expert on SCOTUS so I have no way of knowing for sure…

[kissdbyfire]

8 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

IF SCOTUS does rule that Trump is not immune, at least one Trump appointed judge will have to join the majority opinion, since I don't expect Alito or Thomas to do anything but declare that Trump is the God Emperor, above all laws. 

Assuming we come to such a point, how will Trump respond to that? Will Gorsuch/Kavanaugh/Barrett have been a liberal mole all along? Captured by the woke media? Be branded betrayers of MAGA who have gone over to the Deep State?

He’s already said things along those lines, sorta? Iirc, back when he was contesting the 2020 election and the Supreme Court ruled on… something(s)? Sorry, I really can’t remember the details, only that he made some snarky comments about justices he had appointed or something like that. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Gorsuch and Beerpong can go either way.

Don't hate on beerpong. I mean yes it's a disgusting game when you think about it, but it's not as bad as him. 

[Kalbear]

Anyway, on this specific case I think that SCOTUS will rule against Trump and allow charges to be brought. Mostly because they want to reserve the right to exercise power over Trump if they choose to (just like they did in 2021). 

But it won't be because they're worried about a future dem president - assuming that that can even happen post second Trump presidency. 

[TheKitttenGuard]

37 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Not people as we know people-- they are about their eternal multi-national, off shore power.  The Middle East is of enormous account to them.  Abortion, the state of the average woman's health, is absolutely not.

So many of you continue unfathomably are thinking as though the voting system and system of the courts, justice, police, is what it was 50 years ago.  They Big Donors have corrupted them immeasurably.

They know very well that the average voter -- and particularly the average female voter -- is against Their policies 100%, which is why They are now working relentlessly to make voting and elections irrelevant -- and have been doing so for decades.  They cannot win with the vote, so elections and voting must be eliminated. Numerous of Them have said so, in public, numerous times.  Numerous times, when They have lost, They just ignore the election: see, o, you know Missouri, WI, and by golly January 6 2020.

If you are going to scree on how it is hopeless due to the Facist are going to prevent voting than I do not why you think being Pro-Palestinian will have more of an effect than abortion in forming some resistance. 

More people are directly impacted by Abortion policy than what is what is going on in Israel/Palestine. I am making a campaign decision, I focus what I think impact people most direct and personal, and that will be Abortion.

[Ormond]

20 hours ago, Kalbear said:

She's likely to be killed now, or at least be hounded for the rest of her life by extremists. 

Oh come on. There is always a very small chance of such violence, but to say it's "likely" is just unsupportable. In fact, do you have ANY example of a woman who has been killed by an "extremist" for having an abortion? I can only remember physicians who perform abortions being the targets of that. And I doubt if she will be "hounded for the rest of her life", because there will be many other women who will be in the news for the same thing over the next few years, which will make her particular story forgotten even by most extremists. 

Edited December 12, 2023 by Ormond

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

@Ran

Quote

Polling shows most Latin American countries have very favorable views of the United States. Took a hit in the Trump era, has recovered under Biden.

Interesting considering how Latinos are moving to the right in the US. I always assumed there was more of a left lean in Central and South America. 

Edited December 12, 2023 by Tywin et al.

[Zorral]

57 minutes ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

it is hopeless

I didn't say that or type that. You did.

It means the struggle and the fight are going to be long, difficult and dangerous.

(white, middleclass) USians just don't get the comprehension that achieving civil right and decent human rights at all is a fight and people get hurt.

But go ahead and keep being you.

[TheKitttenGuard]

16 minutes ago, Zorral said:

I didn't say that or type that. You did.

It means the struggle and the fight are going to be long, difficult and dangerous.

(white, middleclass) USians just don't get the comprehension that achieving civil right and decent human rights at all is a fight and people get hurt.

But go ahead and keep being you.

Regardless, in the end, between Abortion and Israel/Palestine, Abortion will be your best focus for it effect more people persoally.

Yes, I will keep on being me, for there is no one else.

[Zorral]

So much for donors and abortion --

Pharmacies share medical data with police without a warrant, inquiry finds
The revelation could shape the debate over Americans’ health privacy as states move to criminalize abortion and drugs related to reproductive health

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/12/12/pharmacy-records-police-privacy-abortion/

CVS is a major poltical donor.

[Kalbear]

28 minutes ago, Ormond said:

Oh come on. There is always a very small chance of such violence, but to say it's "likely" is just unsupportable. In fact, do you have ANY example of a woman who has been killed by an "extremist" for having an abortion?

Literally, here's an example of a woman killed by her boyfriend after having an abortion.

In Texas.

This year.

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/13/1176007305/texas-abortion-woman-killed-boyfriend

And that wasn't a high-profile story, where her name was spread across the nation as an example of how horrible a person she might be. She didn't have Fox news and breitbart targeting her. 

28 minutes ago, Ormond said:

I can only remember physicians who perform abortions being the targets of that.

Maybe that's on you, then?

The other point is that history doesn't tell us what is going to happen post-Dobbs, in an increasingly violent, truth-optional and partisan environment. 

28 minutes ago, Ormond said:

And I doubt if she will be "hounded for the rest of her life", because there will be many other women who will be in the news for the same thing over the next few years, which will make her particular story forgotten even by most extremists. 

Now that's fair. She may only be driven out of her state and harassed for a couple years. 

[Bironic]

30 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

@Ran

Interesting considering how Latinos are moving to the right in the US. I always assumed there was more of a left lean in Central and South America. 

There was a funny segment by Trevor Noah some years ago where he basically said Trump is the US first African President. I think he would also make a reasonably good Latin American Caudillo…

There’s a significant part of Latinos that are evangelicals or conservative Catholics, a significant part that have suffered at the hands of communists… look at abortion rights in Latin America: generally they align more with the position of Mississippi than Massachusetts… (there’s a shift there though with Uruguay and Argentina having legalized it recently and so did Mexico City)

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

33 minutes ago, Bironic said:

There was a funny segment by Trevor Noah some years ago where he basically said Trump is the US first African President. I think he would also make a reasonably good Latin American Caudillo…

Lol, I know which one:
 

This is crazy to watch again.
 

[DireWolfSpirit]

18 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Anyone claiming they are going to vote for RFKjr is fucking with the pollsters.

I wont be surprised at all if he catches over 10% of the votes cast. Ignoring that this many do not want either of the bloated, octogenarian, show horses they will be forced to pick from come November, is a recipe for disappointment.

[Maithanet]

RFK jr is not going to get 10% of the electorate, what you are describing is a staggering amount of votes.  It's just not gonna happen.  3rd parties always poll worse and worse as the election approaches, and given the apocalytpic stakes of 2024, the idea that fully 10% of people are going to show up to the polls only to throw thier vote away just because his name is Kennedy is ridiculous.

 

In more important news, the New York Supreme Court has ruled that NY should get new congressional districts for 2024.  That means that the Democrats have a chance to draw the lines to their advantage, something they abjectly failed to do in 2022, and it cost them 3-4 seats.  Assuming the NY Dems don't drop the ball (always a possibility, they are shockingly incompetent), this means that the 2024 maps on the whole will be slightly more Dem favorable than the 2022 maps. 

[Kalbear]

7 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

RFK jr is not going to get 10% of the electorate, what you are describing is a staggering amount of votes.  It's just not gonna happen.  3rd parties always poll worse and worse as the election approaches, and given the apocalytpic stakes of 2024, the idea that fully 10% of people are going to show up to the polls only to throw thier vote away just because his name is Kennedy is ridiculous.

Ross Perot would beg to differ. 

It does happen. Whether it has a major impact on the election has a lot of potential variance, but it is not that insane that people would vote that highly for someone, especially when the other two candidates are so unpalatable. 

In other polling notes, Reuters' poll gave Biden a 4-point lead in battleground states and a 2% deficit overall, with a staggering 26% saying that they weren't sure or were thinking of voting for someone else:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-vs-trump-would-be-close-rematch-with-rfk-jr-threat-biden-reutersipsos-poll-2023-12-12/

ETA: note that that 4% lead goes to a 5% deficit if RFK is in the mix. 

Edited December 12, 2023 by Kalbear

[Phylum of Alexandria]

3 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

RFK jr is not going to get 10% of the electorate, what you are describing is a staggering amount of votes.  It's just not gonna happen.  3rd parties always poll worse and worse as the election approaches, and given the apocalytpic stakes of 2024, the idea that fully 10% of people are going to show up to the polls only to throw thier vote away just because his name is Kennedy is ridiculous.

This is true, but even a smaller vote share could spell doom for Biden. Jill Stein won about 1% of the national vote share, but ate away at enough of Clinton's support in key states that she lost to Trump. Biden thankfully didn't have this issue to deal with in 2020, but 2024 could look more like 2016...

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

6 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Ross Perot would beg to differ. 

It does happen. Whether it has a major impact on the election has a lot of potential variance, but it is not that insane that people would vote that highly for someone, especially when the other two candidates are so unpalatable. 

In other polling notes, Reuters' poll gave Biden a 4-point lead in battleground states and a 2% deficit overall, with a staggering 26% saying that they weren't sure or were thinking of voting for someone else:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-vs-trump-would-be-close-rematch-with-rfk-jr-threat-biden-reutersipsos-poll-2023-12-12/

ETA: note that that 4% lead goes to a 5% deficit if RFK is in the mix. 

Given how inaccurate polls have been recently (“red wave anyone”) why are we obessing about polls?