General RBG has died
- Thread starter MMAHAWK
- Start date
haha wut
wrong thread
did you do that lol...might be a glitch...happened to dick niaz twice before me
RIP
Last edited:
M
member 1013
Guest
She's not kaine tbh
she seemed like a real nice cunt.
It is a sh!t show, isn’t it? I can’t stand intellectual dishonesty on any debate. It saddens me that both sides are so partisan that they put their narrative ahead of what should be a zero tolerance commitment to the principles they are responsible to uphold as elected mouthpieces of the constituency. It really makes me sick. Both major parties have had this situation and both have tried to justify their dirty selfish position. If they aren’t going to have a firm agreement on guardrails of precedent, why not just own it and say “politics is dirty and we are simply trying to get ahead while we can?” I personally don’t think the POTUS should place a SCOTUS within 6m of an election, but I also can’t fault Trump for doing so because I believe with 100% of my being that the Dems would be doing the same thing in this scenario.
I can’t tell if you’re serious or not, but can you clarify what Trump has done over the last 4 years?
I can’t tell if you’re serious or not, but love or hate him, the dude had an impressive first three years pre-COVID doing what he pledged. I’m not a fan of his personally, but I’m not going to let a biased media or political adversaries lead me to believe he didn’t do great things for our nation’s economy, minority employment/social economic status, international reputation, or international diplomacy (especially with North Korea).
View: https://www.scribd.com/document/441370872/ACFrOgAUTMl8Xt31z9R-Bha0n5a-c1S2g31eEYqYd9r9EG1r7I6PoFo9orDZoay8eaEN1BNbXyne01QqUo19M2cM60XJO4QgQ2RtpPLz-4-uo9-KQ6EE7HLrMsLpIEs
This is a campaign document. Don't you think it's possible that its statements are more biased than the media?
Yes that’s possible. Just like it it possible the media’s positions are more biased than the campaign document. That is politics! It sucks! We all have to deal with it, the key is recognizing what is propaganda, what is fact, what is debatable. I am very skeptical at what I read regardless of the source at this point, but one thing I’m sure of is that I will reserve judgement and make my own assessment on issues rather than allowing the news, the Republicans, or the Democrats count me as one of their sheep like so many others are so eager to do.
Garland's appointment in 2016 was 8 months prior to the election. This one is under 50 days out.. I think at the end of the day the goal of politics is to win so I don't really fault anyone for trying to tilt a lifetime appointment branch of government in their favor.
How is it possible for media positions to be more biased than a campaign document?
So tell me what the appropriate time frame is that we can all get behind to determine too early vs too late. There are quotes from RGB, Biden, and Obama in 2016 that go against the left’s position today, so what is the specific number of days you are proposing that would be bulletproof from criticism or recourse?
I’m not sure how to respond to this without asking whether you are able to accept that the media has a bias, narrative, or political motivation.
Note: for clarification, I’m a Libertarian. I have so many issues with both major political parties (unfortunately, most of my gripes can be applied equally to both). I don’t like online political debates, but I feel compelled to call out hypocrisy, double standards, and inequitable application of standards across the board. Not directing that at you my friend, just explaining where I’m coming from.
Dude, they run for a 4 year term, not 3 years and 6 months. Their obligatoin to their constituents dictates that they fill those vacant spots.
In Canada senators are lifetime appointments. One prime minister didn't bother to fill a bunch of seats as it's widely accepted that the senate is a sham and needs complete reform. The easiest way to rid the country of it is to let it die on the vine. The next prime minister who ran on a plank of senatorial reform. Well, guess what he did? Filled every single one of those seats with party cronies and now there's no balance at all in the senate. Personally, I think the idea of "lifetime appointments" is fucking absurd, so is running 2 guys in the twilight of their life for president, but those are different conversations.
Zero. Like I said, you fight to win and you fight til the bell. Both parties seem to understand this, but the Dems have a constituency that tries to press them to be rule followers in ways the GOP's constituency is less bothered by. There are other ways around late term appointments like adding more justices, which was fairly routine practice up until the late 1800s.
I study media. I'm interested in your perceptions about it versus party pamphleteering. Media has systemic biases and controlled narratives and individuals in media industries often have political motivations, but at the end of the day, their principal goal is to inform. Campaign documents principal goal is to persuade. This isn't about politics so much as my curiosity about how you rate information sources.
I’m not sure if I came off ambiguously or if you aren’t following my train for thought, but I’m not seeing where we would disagree here. I agree with what you said. I also am able to separate what I preset personally with what I think the standards should be and 10/10 times I’ll back the standards over my personal wishes.
To be fully transparent, it would be exhausting to try and hash this out comment for comment. I just don’t like debating online. However, out of respect for you, I’ll answer that I rate informational sources based on my perception of their level of narrative and hypocrisy. It is clear most major news outlets are pushing for one side or the other, so I try to be judicious in fact vs position. IMO I see the vast majority of media outlets as biased towards the left, but that doesn’t make me think Fox et. al. are any better as a result. I don’t know if there is any such thing as an unbiased source of true journalism today so I look at multiple sources and make up my own mind on issues.
I was under the impression you thought the standards should be that SCOTUS positions not be given out when heading into an election. Am I mistaken?