2020 US Election Thread

**Marie Monday** · 09-22-2020, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psy-Fi

Suicides at the Golden Gate Bridge

LETHAL BEAUTY / No easy death: Suicide by bridge is gruesome, and death is almost certain.

Lucem Ferre · 09-22-2020, 01:12 AM

Can't we just kill them both and start over? Is that not an option?

OccultHawk · 09-22-2020, 03:33 PM

Can they really run another impeachment to stall the next appointee and if so why hasn’t it started yet?

~~jwb~~ · 09-22-2020, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

Can they really run another impeachment to stall the next appointee and if so why hasn’t it started yet?

Heh. Just look at this c*nt avoid the question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

I've heard it could cost the GOP the Senate, but they could avoid this by saying nothing until the "Lame Duck" session post-election, and push the justice through in a somehow even scummier manuever

I don't even get what basis there is for suggesting it will cost them the election. Both sides base will be energized by this issue... Seems like a likely toss up to me.

I will be surprised if they don't rush it through before the election.

But keep in mind... Trump can also still win. If that happens you can kiss the courts completely goodbye... They will likely have a 7-2 majority by 2024.

His aggressive appointment of something like 200 federal judges is probably the thing that Republicans like him the most for.. moderates and hardliners alike.

Even Mitt Romney is on board for seating someone before the elections. So I wouldn't underestimate how important this is to them or how it could even be something they literally campaign on.

Also, if the Democrats somehow win the presidency but not the Senate their picks might just end up getting blocked anyway.

SGR · 09-22-2020, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

Can they really run another impeachment to stall the next appointee and if so why hasn’t it started yet?

I think Dems realize this would look blatantly and purely political and it would not generate favoribility for them and would definitely reflect poorly in the polls.

Lisnaholic · 09-22-2020, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoundgardenRocks

I think Dems realize this would look blatantly and purely political and it would not generate favoribility for them and would definitely reflect poorly in the polls.

Yep, I don't think the Dems will go this route either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

Heh. Just look at this c*nt avoid the question.

Isn't that a little harsh if she doesn't want to blurt out a strategy that's still in the making?
I think the Dems are probably considering increasing the number of SC judges in January if they get back into power. Not a good move to publicly announce that to McConnell, though, or he'll start doing the same between Nov and Dec.

~~jwb~~ · 09-22-2020, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisnaholic

Isn't that a little harsh if she doesn't want to blurt out a strategy that's still in the making?

I'd love to be proven wrong here .. but my experience with Pelosi says no. There is no strategy. She shifted it onto the election cause she has so answer to the question and no backbone to start an impeachment hearing. The bitch was resistant as hell against the first impeachment until it became abundantly clear the abuse of power and the pressure mounted on her. And even then she didn't want to pursue many of the obvious other instances of corruption but keep it limited to the Ukraine issue. Basically she has no backbone, like most Democrats. I pray she's voted on of office in 2020.

Quote:

I think the Dems are probably considering increasing the number of SC judges in January if they get back into power. Not a good move to publicly announce that to McConnell, though, or he'll start doing the same between Nov and Dec.

... If they get into power, I pray you're right. I doubt it.

If they don't get into power, we're ****ed either way.

~~jwb~~ · 09-22-2020, 04:54 PM

Which districts specifically?

That's possible but I don't think it will dissuade them from going ahead with it.. there's already a decent chance they are going to lose the Senate and like I said before if they don't lose the Senate it's pretty likely that even if Biden wins they won't confirm his SC pick.

SGR · 09-22-2020, 04:59 PM

If Trump wins again, and the R's maintain the Senate, he might be able to get two more SC picks in the best case. That would probably be the most consequential legacy of any Republican president. For better or for worse. Then again, Bush's presidency was also consequential, but in a different way.

Lisnaholic · 09-22-2020, 05:24 PM

Yes, Pelosi has a reputation as a cunning survivor - not so much as a principalled champion.

Yes, I'm worried about the chances of the Dems getting into power, especially as this has now become a possibilty:-
i) a GOP judge is put in the Supreme Court
ii) the election is close and goes to the SC
iii) a Dem landslide in the election is contested by Trump and goes to the SC
iv) the SC flexes its new-found GOP majority and gives Trump the election result he wants.

09-22-2020, 03:33 PM	#3 (permalink)
OccultHawk one-balled nipple jockey Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Dirty Souf Biatch Posts: 22,006	Can they really run another impeachment to stall the next appointee and if so why hasn’t it started yet? __________________ 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Member of the Year & Journal of the Year Champion Behold the Writing of THE LEGEND: https://www.musicbanter.com/members-...p-lighter.html

09-22-2020, 05:24 PM	#10 (permalink)
Lisnaholic ...here to hear... Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: He lives on Love Street Posts: 4,444	Yes, Pelosi has a reputation as a cunning survivor - not so much as a principalled champion. Yes, I'm worried about the chances of the Dems getting into power, especially as this has now become a possibilty:- i) a GOP judge is put in the Supreme Court ii) the election is close and goes to the SC iii) a Dem landslide in the election is contested by Trump and goes to the SC iv) the SC flexes its new-found GOP majority and gives Trump the election result he wants. __________________ "Am I enjoying this moment? I know of it and perhaps that is enough." - Sybille Bedford, 1953

09-22-2020, 04:54 PM	#8 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	Which districts specifically? That's possible but I don't think it will dissuade them from going ahead with it.. there's already a decent chance they are going to lose the Senate and like I said before if they don't lose the Senate it's pretty likely that even if Biden wins they won't confirm his SC pick.

09-22-2020, 04:59 PM	#9 (permalink)
SGR No Ice In My Bourbon Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: /dev/null Posts: 4,327	If Trump wins again, and the R's maintain the Senate, he might be able to get two more SC picks in the best case. That would probably be the most consequential legacy of any Republican president. For better or for worse. Then again, Bush's presidency was also consequential, but in a different way.