1
1ke
Guest
That’s not how the Supreme Court works, regardless of the number of justices (which has varied throughout US history).
- Status
P
Pattylt
Guest
The polls and tactics used are as old as the country itself. Both sides have tactics they use to keep the other side from showing up in large numbers and both sides alway think they’ll win. Are you still young? After many elections get under ones belt, you learn the games they all play. Anytime you see tactics being used to influence the voters, always ask, who benefits? I’ve watched district redistribution battles that aren’t for the weak at heart! I’ve listed to pollsters questions that are so overly trying to get someone to change their minds by the way they ask the questions. The whole voter ID plan is to disenfranchise the poor, handicapped and low information voters. It’s all good old American politics!
Last edited:
O
otjm
Guest
It is perhaps even more egregious; the packing will be to see that even if the president is not a Democrat, that the court will take a liberal “reading”. which it has been wont to do of recent - giving us gay marriage and booting issues which are essentially religious freedom from government to 'artistic work" rather than confronting the fact that the cases were based on religious belief strongly held.
O
otjm
Guest
Apparently you did not read the report from the commission on voting standards headed up by President Carter. The report said that voter ID was important to voting sevcurity, and President Carter strongly endorsed it.
The mantra from the liberals has about as much truth in it as the mantra from BLM to defund the police.
F
Freddy
Guest
You described it as a government hearing. I watched the oan episode. That’s the impression they tried to put over. It was no more a government hearing than was that charade outside someobodies landscaping business a couple of weeks back. It was all for show. It was about as official as two guys from the government having a barbie.Freddy:
Well it was a panel of elected govt officials hearing testimony…
And you think oan can be trusted?
P
Pattylt
Guest
Everyone is in favor of voter ID until we start talking about paying for it and assuring that hard to reach citizens are given a way to get them. There’s where the issues are. Republicans want to require the ID but not pay to transport the backwoods people or the handicapped people nor are they willing to cover the costs to do so.
L
LilyM
Guest
I thought you were serious when you spoke about giving up journalism when you discovered newspapers and other media have their own agendas … which made me wonder what rock you had crawled out from under not to know that already.LilyM:
I sincerely don’t understand this response… my interpretation is that you think I was serious when I said it was me…I don’t even know what to say about that.
I am laughing so hard right now.
Forgive me but if you were being sarcastic or something you were doing a really bad job of showing it. Tone does not always translate in the written word.
Last edited:
O
otjm
Guest
While I agree that it is not a ruibber stamp for the President, The Democrats have been taking up the mantra of court packing by adding judges because with recent appointments, there is a 5 to 4 majority which leans towards strict construction of the Constitution, with the swing vote on occasion making it a 6 to majority.
And it was Ruth Bader Ginsberg who publicly said she felt the Constitution needed to be rewritten. The Democrats have a fairly clear idea that 5 of the justices are not going to be reaching into the penumbra to try to justify something.
O
otjm
Guest
Given the move to mail in voting, the backwoods people don’t need to be transported anywhere. But given the number of community organizers, I am sure any transportation coud be arranged.
P
Pattylt
Guest
It could! Would this also cover the cost of the ID as well?Pattylt:
Given the move to mail in voting, the backwoods people don’t need to be transported anywhere. But given the number of community organizers, I am sure any transportation coud be arranged.
F
Freddy
Guest
I need some info here to clear this up.Pattylt:
Given the move to mail in voting, the backwoods people don’t need to be transported anywhere. But given the number of community organizers, I am sure any transportation coud be arranged.
The way it works in Australia is that you register to vote and your name goes on the list of registered voters for your area. Come voting day, I roll up to the polling station and give my name. I’d then be directed to a desk where someone has a list of all the voters with names beginning with E-F. They look me up, check my name against my address, cross it out and give me the voting paper. No ID required.
So somebody could turn up before me, give my name and address and vote in my place. But when I turned up there’d be some commotion as it would be obvious that either the guy earlier was cheating the system or I was. It simply doesn’t happen.
What happens in the US?
1
1ke
Guest
Well, who is “they”?
Re: “court packing”, or really any nomination, it boils down to differences in judicial philosophy via-a-vis interpreting the constitution. However, how people think a justice may rule on cases is not necessarily how they actually end up ruling.
It is not to “rubber stamp” positions of the president. The court rules on the constitutionality of laws passed by the Congress or states. It has nothing to do with the President’s position on things.
1
1ke
Guest
N
Nononony
Guest
Oh! Yea, I was serious about that. Completely serious. And to answer your question, I had crawled out from under the rock of being a sheltered teenager who was raised by painfully idealistic parents.
What of it?Don’t worry… I’m middle aged now and have overcome the hardships of my raising.
Based off of my interpretation of your response, it seems we’re both lacking the ability to clearly articulate our thoughts. I agree to blame the written word! Have a good one.
A
AlNg
Guest
Kamala D. Harris. Why do you suppose that Kamala D. Harris said she was absolutely open to the idea of packing the Supreme Court? Does this not have something to do with getting a Supreme Court to rubber stamp her positions. Why else would she be absolutely open to packing the Supreme Court?
1
1ke
Guest
She hasn’t said that. Someone said that she said it a few years ago.
No.
You, again, don’t see me to understand the relationship between the branches of government and what the SCOTUS does.
“Packing” is a pejorative term. Changing the number or justices, up or down, is with the powers of Congress. It’s not something the executive branch can do.
P
pnewton
Guest
The vice president does not nominate for the Supreme Court. President-elect Biden has already spoken against it. Such moves are out of character for him. Besides, the SCOTUS is independent and there is no way to make it a rubber stamp, as our current president has found to his chagrin.
A
AlNg
Guest
That is . . . not true.
Read this interview with the NY Times and her answer to the question are you open to expanding the size of the Supreme Court.
Last edited:
J
JimG
Guest
Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that court packing by adding more justices was a bad idea. And Democrat Joe Manchin has said he would vote against it if proposed in Congress.
- Status