Jump to content

The Joe Biden Presidency Thread


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Mr. Hoopah! said:

 

IF SCOUTS were to kill the ACA I have a feeling the Senate races in Ga will take on new significance. A vast majority of people support the ACA and if they kill it that's going to motivate people in an entirely different way.

The better results for the GOP in the long game is for the ACA to stay in place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 78.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mr. Hoopah!

    10046

  • AF89

    7025

  • WhenFalconsWin

    4543

  • Jdrizzle

    4139

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Seems like rescuing dogs during lockdown is a thing around here. It happened to us this past week. This guy wandered up dirty and skinny, playing with my daughter in the front yard. After a few days o

Heartless *******   

Posted Images

15 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Would it make you feel better that I haven't seen one who does?

I don't speak in absolutes because surely there is one lunatic out there who is a supporter and loves them some Qanon.  But I know a lot more Republicans in the 14th District than anyone else here, and none of them talk about what Q said.

No, it doesn’t. 

Flip the situation.  Suppose that a Democratic House candidate openly supported ISIS and called for the beheading of Trump and Republican leaders.  Suppose that person won office and was going to Congress.  Suppose that Joe Biden openly supported that person during the campaign and that Schumer/Pelosi and the vast majority of Democratic leaders welcomed that person and supported that person as a Democrat.

Would you say, “no big deal...don’t worry because most voters in that district don’t support ISIS”?

I sure as f*** wouldn’t be comforted by that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, papachaz said:

go for it, but that would mean I'd have to sit home because I asbolutely will not vote for a party that not only condones killing babies, but celebrates it. and that's not going to happen. I said it last week, I just can't reconcile abortion. Now get this, I don't hate anyone who believes it's ok, I just think you're wrong, cause it's not my place to judge anyone for anything. Well unless I get jury duty or something, but you know what I mean

Just wanted to revisit this. I know there are extremists in every movement, but I'm wondering what exactly you mean by a party that "celebrates" killing babies. I know that Democrats tend to be pro-choice, but the vast majority I've spoke to don't "like" abortion - they just understand that it's a necessary evil in the context of our healthcare system.

Personally? I'm all for fairly strict restrictions on abortion as soon as there is ubiquitous support for care after birth and universal access to birth control. I think without those two things, it's making out an extremely complex and intersectional issue to be a simple one. Right now, I feel like the GOP treats life as starting at conception and ending at birth. That bothers me more than the idea of abortion itself, which is admittedly grotesque, but also sometimes necessary, and I believe doing it quickly and safely is better than the alternative presented by restricting access, which realistically just means the rich will find ways around the restrictions while the poor and middle class resort to less safe measures to achieve the same result.

Anyways - not expecting to convince you to change your mind. Just trying to add a little nuance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Sort of an odd benefit to having a Court whose majority respects the will of Congress to **** **** up, isn't it?

This is why I think the left's collective case of the vapors on judicial appointments is mostly silly.  It's not that they never do results-based jurisprudence, but it is that they are less likely to twist themselves into pretzels to do it.  I literally never thought the ACA would be struck down by the Supreme Court, and I will honestly be surprised if all 3 of Trump's appointees don't refuse to do it.

The cynic in me looks at all of the corporations that filed Amicus briefs and wonder how much effect that has on the Roberts' Court besides the constitutional arguments. https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/california-v-texas/

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Gritzblitz 2.0 said:

Trump cried fraud and called investigations in an election that he won four years ago because his ego couldn't handle the fact that more people voted for Hillary than himself. 

Maybe our democracy will be toppled at some point, but I doubt it will be by a 74 year old man baby along with Rudy Giuliani and their band of incompetents booking press conferences at Four Seasons Landscaping. 

I agree with JDaveG that multiple judges telling him that he has no case will go further in settling this down than anything the media does. 

Who can tell me with a straight face that this country doesn't deserve this ending to a carnival barker's presidency after electing him in the first place? It's not going to end with China parachuting in Red Dawn-style, life will go on and we'll call each other racists over other things moving forward.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mr. Hoopah! said:

The cynic in me looks at all of the corporations that filed Amicus briefs and wonder how much effect that has on the Roberts' Court besides the constitutional arguments. https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/california-v-texas/

 

This ^. All I'm saying is that when I talk about results based jurisprudence, it doesn't mean republican appointees will do what republican voters want every single time, or that they will act the way the loudest republican pundits would like. And it doesn't mean that they would never rule in a way that seems counterintuitive to what we would expect. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Leon Troutsky said:

No, it doesn’t. 

Flip the situation.  Suppose that a Democratic House candidate openly supported ISIS and called for the beheading of Trump and Republican leaders.  Suppose that person won office and was going to Congress.  Suppose that Joe Biden openly supported that person during the campaign and that Schumer/Pelosi and the vast majority of Democratic leaders welcomed that person and supported that person as a Democrat.

Would you say, “no big deal...don’t worry because most voters in that district don’t support ISIS”?

I sure as f*** wouldn’t be comforted by that.

I think we can have a reasonable discussion and leave Ilhan Omar out of it.

 

(I kid, I kid).

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, papachaz said:

go for it, but that would mean I'd have to sit home because I asbolutely will not vote for a party that not only condones killing babies, but celebrates it. and that's not going to happen. I said it last week, I just can't reconcile abortion. Now get this, I don't hate anyone who believes it's ok, I just think you're wrong, cause it's not my place to judge anyone for anything. Well unless I get jury duty or something, but you know what I mean

 

but I would like for someone to give me some pointers on something. When Trump first came in, the big push to fulfill the 'repeal and replace' campaign promise failed. other than his executive order or telling whatever dept head not to enforce the mandate, or for what ever reason that went away (temporarily) which Joe will put back in, what efforts have there been to outright do away with the ACA? I ask this because I saw Mr Warnocks ad, and it's entertaining, but what specifically has SHE done to try to take away anyone's healthcare? From what I've seen, and this goes back to that 'failure to repeal/replace' is that even the GOP side realizes the protections for pre existing conditions needs to be alive

Okay I want to put a question/thought to you on the abortion issue. It’s not some attempt at a gotcha, I promise, I just want to hear your thoughts since you’ve been very rational and willing to discuss things. If you’ll bear with me :)

Personally I am against abortion and I can understand the objection to it. I think it’s an absolutely horrible practice and we should try to minimize its occurrence. I could never support it in a personal situation but I do support choice and believe a woman should be able to make decisions pertaining to her own body. This of course gets into moral questions about what constitutes a life, when is acceptable to terminate and what termination means (ie, is it murder or something else?). Ideologically, banning abortion seems antithetical to liberty and smaller government to me. Studies show that abortions happen more often and are more dangerous when illegal; it very often leads to oppression and abuses of women, to include incest, rape, child marriage, etc. So the conclusion I have come to is that the best way to prevent abortions from happening is to address the economic reasons for why people feel it necessary, protect lives by allowing legal and regulated procedures, assist with preventing unwanted pregnancies. Studies have shown abortion rates actually go down substantially when it is legal.

I don’t want to get into any heated debate here. I think most people who are anti abortion, are for noble reasons. I think most people who are pro choice, are for noble reasons. Mostly I think religious leaders and GOP politicians use it as motivating issue to trap people into voting on a single issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mr. Hoopah! said:

The cynic in me looks at all of the corporations that filed Amicus briefs and wonder how much effect that has on the Roberts' Court besides the constitutional arguments. https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/california-v-texas/

I think Roberts is more concerned about his legacy at this point than anything, and to be honest, that's precisely why he's tarnishing it.

But I think going along with a 7-2 or even 8-1, much less a unanimous decision, will be his style.  He'd take a plurality, but my money at this point is on punting it on standing as the most likely option, upholding it in its entirety based on congressional authority being the 2nd most likely, and severing out the individual mandate being the least likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Leon Troutsky said:

No, it doesn’t. 

Flip the situation.  Suppose that a Democratic House candidate openly supported ISIS and called for the beheading of Trump and Republican leaders.  Suppose that person won office and was going to Congress.  Suppose that Joe Biden openly supported that person during the campaign and that Schumer/Pelosi and the vast majority of Democratic leaders welcomed that person and supported that person as a Democrat.

Would you say, “no big deal...don’t worry because most voters in that district don’t support ISIS”?

I sure as f*** wouldn’t be comforted by that.

Being serious, I'm not at all saying Greene is an innocent candidate.  She is dangerous, and crazy.  I think much of that is simply her grifting, but it is what it is -- she says things that are outlandish and dangerous.

But the idea that she's a Qanon flame for all the 14th District moths to flock to is something I have not seen.  Folks out here just aren't on board with that, at least in my observation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Would it make you feel better that I haven't seen one who does?

I don't speak in absolutes because surely there is one lunatic out there who is a supporter and loves them some Qanon.  But I know a lot more Republicans in the 14th District than anyone else here, and none of them talk about what Q said.

I know quite a few of them from North North north ga and they are just tired of the whole thing, like you are alluding to. 

Sure there is a hint of Conspiracy theory in what they believe but overall they just want it all over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Andrews_31 said:

**** NO to Amy!  Doug Jones for the win!

Can you even fathom the optics of picking the former DA who failed to prosecute Derek Chauvin in 2006 vs the former US Attorney who successfully prosecuted the KKK members that murdered little black girls in the 1963 Birmingham Church bombing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...