(09-26-2020, 03:42 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(09-20-2020, 05:49 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-20-2020, 04:58 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I am not saying the unraveling Republican presidents met my approval.  I just think they had a better ear to the American people.  We were in a selfish racist sexist time frame, and got the government we deserved.

Largely true. The Republicans also got lucky in 1980, gaining the services of a great communicator for the 1980 election for their corporate agenda (who scores 22-6 on my system). We got into the frame we did partly because he was able to deceive people that his neo-liberal trickle-down economics worked, although it did not. Even today a bare majority subscribe to Reaganomics. Partly that also consists of the welfare scapegoating dog whistle of the sort that the closet-racist Classic Xers like.

But the salesmanship and skill of the candidate (as opposed to the president) matters. That is why I am concerned about a future Kamala Harris nomination (score 4-16, you recall).

Eisenhower 18-8
Nixon 18-7
Reagan 22-6
Bush 14-6
Bush 17-2
Trump 9-4

JFK 13-6
Carter 12-4
Bill Clinton 21-3
Barack Obama 19-2

Ford 12-8
Dole 12-19
McCain 15-13
Romney 4-10

Stevenson 5-21
Humphrey 9-5
McGovern 9-10
Mondale 12-12
Dukakis 2-10
Gore 10-9
Kerry 8-12
Hillary Clinton 9-11

Can the Democrats pick 'em, or what?

It's worked for most, Biden's candidacy is proof that Reaganomics works for most Americans these days. It doesn't seem to have worked as well for Berniecrats/ quasi socialist/ Marxist/ BLM /Antifa/ identity politics/ social justice/ open boarders wing of the Democratic party these days. Honestly, I don't see how anything American related is ever going to work very well with them at this point. So, why do you keep using race against me when I don't give a shit if you're black or white or Hispanic or whatever race you identify with these days? Like I said, we KNOW which party is more racist and racially driven today. You're right about Harris because Harris represents the end of the Democratic party. I'm sorry but the racist whites with all the money and power associated with the bulk of the Democratic party's funding needs a minority to blame for the party's demise.

(09-26-2020, 03:42 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: It's worked for most, Biden's candidacy is proof that Reaganomics works for most Americans these days. It doesn't seem to have worked as well for Berniecrats/ quasi socialist/ Marxist/ BLM /Antifa/ identity politics/ social justice/ open boarders wing of the Democratic party these days. Honestly, I don't see how anything American related is ever going to work very well with them at this point. So, why do you keep using race against me when I don't give a shit if you're black or white or Hispanic or whatever race you identify with these days? Like I said, we KNOW which party is more racist and racially driven today. You're right about Harris because Harris represents the end of the Democratic party. I'm sorry but the racist whites with all the money and power associated with the bulk of the Democratic party's funding needs a minority to blame for the party's demise.

(09-28-2020, 05:11 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: The latest Trump scandal is the New York Times getting a hold of Trump's recent taxes, and revealing in inept businessman who has been running tax evasion schemes for years.  Wonder why Trump has been reluctant to release his tax returns?  Wonder no more.  

I keep thinking all the anti Trump propaganda is coming out too soon.  The various enemies, so called 'friends', the deep state, Democrats and coastal media couldn't possibly keep it coming until Election Day.  Still, it keeps on coming.  The problem is still so many stories, so little time.

(09-28-2020, 09:42 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-28-2020, 05:11 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: The latest Trump scandal is the New York Times getting a hold of Trump's recent taxes, and revealing in inept businessman who has been running tax evasion schemes for years.  Wonder why Trump has been reluctant to release his tax returns?  Wonder no more.  

I keep thinking all the anti Trump propaganda is coming out too soon.  The various enemies, so called 'friends', the deep state, Democrats and coastal media couldn't possibly keep it coming until Election Day.  Still, it keeps on coming.  The problem is still so many stories, so little time.

The tax thing needed to get out now, if there is any chance a decent analysis can be complete before FINAL election day --  and that's the real problem. Voting is happening now.  If GOP voters are waiting to vote on election day, then some really bad news to discourage them makes sense if you're a Democrat.  On the other hand, it won't have any impact on people who already voted, and not much on people getting ready to vote now.

(09-28-2020, 09:42 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-28-2020, 05:11 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: The latest Trump scandal is the New York Times getting a hold of Trump's recent taxes, and revealing in inept businessman who has been running tax evasion schemes for years.  Wonder why Trump has been reluctant to release his tax returns?  Wonder no more.  

I keep thinking all the anti Trump propaganda is coming out too soon.  The various enemies, so called 'friends', the deep state, Democrats and coastal media couldn't possibly keep it coming until Election Day.  Still, it keeps on coming.  The problem is still so many stories, so little time.

The tax thing needed to get out now, if there is any chance a decent analysis can be complete before FINAL election day --  and that's the real problem. Voting is happening now.  If GOP voters are waiting to vote on election day, then some really bad news to discourage them makes sense if you're a Democrat.  On the other hand, it won't have any impact on people who already voted, and not much on people getting ready to vote now.

(09-29-2020, 02:49 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(09-28-2020, 09:42 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-28-2020, 05:11 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: The latest Trump scandal is the New York Times getting a hold of Trump's recent taxes, and revealing in inept businessman who has been running tax evasion schemes for years.  Wonder why Trump has been reluctant to release his tax returns?  Wonder no more.  

I keep thinking all the anti Trump propaganda is coming out too soon.  The various enemies, so called 'friends', the deep state, Democrats and coastal media couldn't possibly keep it coming until Election Day.  Still, it keeps on coming.  The problem is still so many stories, so little time.

The tax thing needed to get out now, if there is any chance a decent analysis can be complete before FINAL election day --  and that's the real problem. Voting is happening now.  If GOP voters are waiting to vote on election day, then some really bad news to discourage them makes sense if you're a Democrat.  On the other hand, it won't have any impact on people who already voted, and not much on people getting ready to vote now.

Agreed. Some barber or bartender struggling to meet house payments who pays much more than $750 a year in federal income taxes because he has no means of dodging them can easily get furious about the low taxes that Trump pays. Some of us remember the late Leona Helmsley who once uttered the fatuous and offensive dictum "only the little people pay taxes".

(09-29-2020, 10:40 AM)David Horn Wrote: Leona and Donald could have been the Borgias of New York, if they didn't hate one another. 

(09-30-2020, 05:34 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-29-2020, 10:40 AM)David Horn Wrote: Leona and Donald could have been the Borgias of New York, if they didn't hate one another. 

Perhaps when Donald joins Leona in hell, the devil will consider putting them together?

(09-30-2020, 03:39 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-30-2020, 05:34 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-29-2020, 10:40 AM)David Horn Wrote: Leona and Donald could have been the Borgias of New York, if they didn't hate one another. 

Perhaps when Donald joins Leona in hell, the devil will consider putting them together?

They certainly deserve each other. Perfect hellfire match! They would both just love the constant battle and chaos.

(10-27-2020, 06:42 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: There are two sorts of supposedly conservative judges.  The first look hard at the intent of the authors and reading the text as written.  I can live with that.  The other sort legislates from the bench.  They have a political agenda and will find reason to interpret the law as their political ideology would prefer it.  With the new appointment of another conservative judge, many are fearing that with the loss of the senate and the White House, the Supreme Court could become a third branch of congress, a way for Trumpism to linger past it's time.

What could the Democrats do about it?  Most by now have heard of a threat to increase the size of the court, to restore some semblance of balance after Biden gets in.

But I have started daydreaming about impeachment.  Any federal employee can be impeached.  With Trumpism, they have set the example that principle are expendable, only the raw vote counts.  That implies that if you can get two thirds of the senate to agree, the supposedly life time appointment can be terminated.

Do we want to set a course where legislation from the bench is grounds for impeachment.  Oh, the won't get enough senators this time around.  If the justices try doing stuff like killing health insurance in a pandemic, killing reproductive rights, etc... going in the face of the will of the people, should the Democrats throw one aspect of Trumpism back at them in 2022?  Wipe the court clean of conservative justices?  Anyone who legislates from the bench goes?

Anyway, it makes for an interesting daydream.

(10-27-2020, 07:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 06:42 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: There are two sorts of supposedly conservative judges.  The first look hard at the intent of the authors and reading the text as written.  I can live with that.  The other sort legislates from the bench.  They have a political agenda and will find reason to interpret the law as their political ideology would prefer it.  With the new appointment of another conservative judge, many are fearing that with the loss of the senate and the White House, the Supreme Court could become a third branch of congress, a way for Trumpism to linger past it's time.

What could the Democrats do about it?  Most by now have heard of a threat to increase the size of the court, to restore some semblance of balance after Biden gets in.

But I have started daydreaming about impeachment.  Any federal employee can be impeached.  With Trumpism, they have set the example that principle are expendable, only the raw vote counts.  That implies that if you can get two thirds of the senate to agree, the supposedly life time appointment can be terminated.

Do we want to set a course where legislation from the bench is grounds for impeachment.  Oh, the won't get enough senators this time around.  If the justices try doing stuff like killing health insurance in a pandemic, killing reproductive rights, etc... going in the face of the will of the people, should the Democrats throw one aspect of Trumpism back at them in 2022?  Wipe the court clean of conservative justices?  Anyone who legislates from the bench goes?

Anyway, it makes for an interesting daydream.

Those two types of conservative judges, are the same judges. They just use the first type as a slogan to defend their second-type decisions.

(10-27-2020, 09:50 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 07:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 06:42 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: There are two sorts of supposedly conservative judges.  The first look hard at the intent of the authors and reading the text as written.  I can live with that.  The other sort legislates from the bench.  They have a political agenda and will find reason to interpret the law as their political ideology would prefer it.  With the new appointment of another conservative judge, many are fearing that with the loss of the senate and the White House, the Supreme Court could become a third branch of congress, a way for Trumpism to linger past it's time.

What could the Democrats do about it?  Most by now have heard of a threat to increase the size of the court, to restore some semblance of balance after Biden gets in.

But I have started daydreaming about impeachment.  Any federal employee can be impeached.  With Trumpism, they have set the example that principle are expendable, only the raw vote counts.  That implies that if you can get two thirds of the senate to agree, the supposedly life time appointment can be terminated.

Do we want to set a course where legislation from the bench is grounds for impeachment.  Oh, the won't get enough senators this time around.  If the justices try doing stuff like killing health insurance in a pandemic, killing reproductive rights, etc... going in the face of the will of the people, should the Democrats throw one aspect of Trumpism back at them in 2022?  Wipe the court clean of conservative justices?  Anyone who legislates from the bench goes?

Anyway, it makes for an interesting daydream.

Those two types of conservative judges, are the same judges. They just use the first type as a slogan to defend their second-type decisions.

Yet, you support packing the courts with Liberal judges and turning the Supreme Court into a legislative branch right.

(10-27-2020, 10:53 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 09:50 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 07:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 06:42 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: There are two sorts of supposedly conservative judges.  The first look hard at the intent of the authors and reading the text as written.  I can live with that.  The other sort legislates from the bench.  They have a political agenda and will find reason to interpret the law as their political ideology would prefer it.  With the new appointment of another conservative judge, many are fearing that with the loss of the senate and the White House, the Supreme Court could become a third branch of congress, a way for Trumpism to linger past it's time.

What could the Democrats do about it?  Most by now have heard of a threat to increase the size of the court, to restore some semblance of balance after Biden gets in.

But I have started daydreaming about impeachment.  Any federal employee can be impeached.  With Trumpism, they have set the example that principle are expendable, only the raw vote counts.  That implies that if you can get two thirds of the senate to agree, the supposedly life time appointment can be terminated.

Do we want to set a course where legislation from the bench is grounds for impeachment.  Oh, the won't get enough senators this time around.  If the justices try doing stuff like killing health insurance in a pandemic, killing reproductive rights, etc... going in the face of the will of the people, should the Democrats throw one aspect of Trumpism back at them in 2022?  Wipe the court clean of conservative justices?  Anyone who legislates from the bench goes?

Anyway, it makes for an interesting daydream.

Those two types of conservative judges, are the same judges. They just use the first type as a slogan to defend their second-type decisions.

Yet, you support packing the courts with Liberal judges and turning the Supreme Court into a legislative branch right.

But I am not claiming some kind of bogus originalist doctrine that is only a slogan and escuse for your conservative idiots to declare rulings regardless of what they mean for our country.

(10-27-2020, 11:14 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 10:53 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 09:50 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 07:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 06:42 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: There are two sorts of supposedly conservative judges.  The first look hard at the intent of the authors and reading the text as written.  I can live with that.  The other sort legislates from the bench.  They have a political agenda and will find reason to interpret the law as their political ideology would prefer it.  With the new appointment of another conservative judge, many are fearing that with the loss of the senate and the White House, the Supreme Court could become a third branch of congress, a way for Trumpism to linger past it's time.

What could the Democrats do about it?  Most by now have heard of a threat to increase the size of the court, to restore some semblance of balance after Biden gets in.

But I have started daydreaming about impeachment.  Any federal employee can be impeached.  With Trumpism, they have set the example that principle are expendable, only the raw vote counts.  That implies that if you can get two thirds of the senate to agree, the supposedly life time appointment can be terminated.

Do we want to set a course where legislation from the bench is grounds for impeachment.  Oh, the won't get enough senators this time around.  If the justices try doing stuff like killing health insurance in a pandemic, killing reproductive rights, etc... going in the face of the will of the people, should the Democrats throw one aspect of Trumpism back at them in 2022?  Wipe the court clean of conservative justices?  Anyone who legislates from the bench goes?

Anyway, it makes for an interesting daydream.

Those two types of conservative judges, are the same judges. They just use the first type as a slogan to defend their second-type decisions.

Yet, you support packing the courts with Liberal judges and turning the Supreme Court into a legislative branch right.

But I am not claiming some kind of bogus originalist doctrine that is only a slogan and escuse for your conservative idiots to declare rulings regardless of what they mean for our country.

I'd rather have a Conservative judge that goes by the rule of law than a Liberal judge who views themself as being above the law and able to change laws as they please. You're playing with fire and you're going to get burned. If you're willing to place everything  on the line and  die for abortion, be my guest.

(10-27-2020, 11:25 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 11:14 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 10:53 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 09:50 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(10-27-2020, 07:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Those two types of conservative judges, are the same judges. They just use the first type as a slogan to defend their second-type decisions.

Yet, you support packing the courts with Liberal judges and turning the Supreme Court into a legislative branch right.

But I am not claiming some kind of bogus originalist doctrine that is only a slogan and escuse for your conservative idiots to declare rulings regardless of what they mean for our country.

I'd rather have a Conservative judge that goes by the rule of law than a Liberal judge who views themself as being above the law and able to change laws as they please. You're playing with fire and you're going to get burned. If you're willing to place everything  on the line and  die for abortion, be my guest.

I'd rather have all of you idiots voted out permanently and this country returned to the rule of law and decency, instead of burning up and flooding the country and taking away our democracy as your court is doing. You are willing to see your land flooded and burned, and you are going to get burned. The antifa and BLM are going to come fer ya, take yer guns, take yer air condishning, and burn your house down.