US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[The Ugly One]

RNC has hung walker out to dry. I'd put money on Warnock. Walker's bad speeches are making internal republican rounds btw. Feels pretty set up.

Unlike the Democrats, the Republicans will never run defense for a mouthbreathing, half-wit nigger. Have you seen how shockingly retarded most of the CBC is? Part of this is the simple fact that they can't - blacks don't vote for black Republicans; white people do.

 

[The Last Stand]

Unlike the Democrats, the Republicans will never run defense for a mouthbreathing, half-wit nigger. Have you seen how shockingly retarded most of the CBC is? Part of this is the simple fact that they can't - blacks don't vote for black Republicans; white people do.

And the Black Republican they picked was an ex football player with a gay son that hates him for hiding an abortion. Great man, seriously.

 

[Agent Abe Caprine]

Reality: our candidates are so bad, our system is so corrupt and incompetent, a proposed solution is a manic rapper whose claim to politics is praising a literal genocidal fascist and marrying a plastic woman.

I'm voting for Ye because it's funny. You're voting for Ye because you think it's a solution. We are not the same.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

It is a smart sounding word pairing that is used to make anything seem like a terror attack when it involves normal occurrences of people being tired of the current bullshit of the year.

Heaven Smile from Killer7 were stochastic terrorists because of the “Terror for the sake of terror.” motto. SJWs are trying to pin average conservative protestors as people that want to randomly bomb your house just so you can be afraid when they have a small march down he road.

It's an extension of the "words are violence" double standard, with the explicitly unstated followup of "our violence is the language of the unheard [i.e., speech]." They've wanted the idea of merely expressing ideas they disagree with (i.e., "hate speech" as defined as "speech that they hate") to be considered a crime against them for years, but it's not really going too well. All just an extension of the same nebulous idea -- you are not allowed to disagree with us, especially in public.

You disagreeing with the left in public on something they have declared to be consensus reality, either stated or unstated, is "terrorism." Because being exposed to people that disagree with them is frightening. Because being told no is even worse.

They have an unstated belief that they are trying to codify -- several, actualy, but the one that comes most to mind is that public school teachers have a stake in your children, ergo they can make certain decisions in their upbringing and not only do you as parents have to respect their decisions they made for your children, you aren't allowed to debate or disagree with them. This is all unstated, of course, but is the natural extension of their behavior -- and once they can get this into consensus, they'll start to try and codify it via law and custom.

They believe a bunch of marxist activists, brainwashed by years in a series of university programs that have been captured and retooled from creating educators into creating marxist activists, have the duty and right to teach your children about sex and sexuality, and not only are you not allowed to disagree with this, you aren't even allowed to express disagreement. That by expressing disagreement you are terrorizing these teachers -- who again, they believe have the established and undeniable right to your children and choosing the belief systems they are taught -- and that's a crime worthy of state sanctioned force and violence.

Fortunately, people like Libs of TikTok and the like have exposed the theory before they could solidify it. And it turns out that even the fat lazy soccer moms of the US start paying attention when some rainbow haired "xie-dyke" starts trying to tell little 8 year old Jenny that she needs to learn how to give a killer blowjob and cut her tits off before they start growing and ruin her for any future pedophiles to lust after.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

States have authority over how they run their elections, buddy. Invoking the spectre of federal oversight is a nightmare scenario that, at least currently, would benefit no one but the DNC.

Depends. Federal courts have ruled that US senators are federal officials so cannot be recalled, so presumably this could give the federal government some right to dictate how senators, representatives, and indeed the US president are elected, similar to how all these shithole states and cities can't legally permit their illegals to vote.

Whatever merits suspending parts of the Constitution might have in fixing this country's problems, Trump shouldn't be the one to say it (and had his chance on 1/6 anyway to try it) since there are legal ways of fixing things.

 

[The Taco Santo!]

Depends. Federal courts have ruled that US senators are federal officials so cannot be recalled, so presumably this could give the federal government some right to dictate how senators, representatives, and indeed the US president are elected, similar to how all these shithole states and cities can't legally permit their illegals to vote.

These are very carefully explained and circumscribed examples. None of them are an invitation for the Federal government to take over running the actual processes and mechanisms of an election. Those powers remain with the states, and most states would vigorously oppose any attempt to change that. Even Pennsylvania, Arizona, Michigan, Washington, and California. It would take a Constitutional Amendment for that to change, and unless things change we're not going to see another one of those in my lifetime. Even direct election of Senators required an amendment to be passed (the 17th).

 

[verissimus]

It's weird that people are acting like stuff Trump does now is going to matter by the time the 2024 elections come around. So much insane shit has been happening every month that there's no way that anyone will be talking about a dinner or a tweet or whatever the outrage of the day is by the time that primaries come around.

Yeah especially since people have completely forgotten about Afghanistan. Honestly, this should send a message to the neo-cons out there that the people do not care for foreign affairs especially when there is rampant crime, inflation, etc.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

These are very carefully explained and circumscribed examples. None of them are an invitation for the Federal government to take over running the actual processes and mechanisms of an election. Those powers remain with the states, and most states would vigorously oppose any attempt to change that. Even Pennsylvania, Arizona, Michigan, Washington, and California. It would take a Constitutional Amendment for that to change, and unless things change we're not going to see another one of those in my lifetime. Even direct election of Senators required an amendment to be passed (the 17th).

Here's another instance (since the recall election one was just the first one I recalled off the top of my head, it involved Senator Frank Church from Idaho for those curious)--US Term Limits Inc. v. Thornton invalidated state laws/constitutions that imposed term limits on US representatives. That case struck down an amendment of Arkansas's constitution, but there were 22 other states whose election laws were affected by this case. Theoretically what some states did before the 17th Amendment (where people voted on which Senate candidate and the state legislature was forced to elect them) was illegal based on these later cases.

This suggests the federal government--for better or worse (I don't agree with either case BTW)--believes they are the ultimate regulator of elections involving Congress and presumably the Presidency, so yes, it would make plenty of sense for the federal government to impose its own standards on electing Congressmen, Senators, and the President. The grey area may be the latter given the electoral college but there's probably some precedent that can be used to make it legal which would likely apply to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Trump and Congress could have done something on these lines and the Supreme Court would uphold it as legal, if not for the fact Trump would need someone to whisper this idea in his ear, Congress wouldn't be full of RINO cucks, and if the Democrat-Federalist Society alliance on the Supreme Court wouldn't strike it down (Democrats would be all in favor for this if it were their guy proposing it).

 

[HTTP Error 404]

Yeah especially since people have completely forgotten about Afghanistan. Honestly, this should send a message to the neo-cons out there that the people do not care for foreign affairs especially when there is rampant crime, inflation, etc.

You know, there's that "hierarchy of needs" chart that shows how some shit is just not important than others. Self Actualization comes after "Food Water and a Place to sleep" for example.

There's probably a political version of that waiting to be created, and it probably differs based on the two political parties or even the various personality temperaments. But "foreign affairs" probably comes generally after stuff like "economic stability" and "safety."

And since Biden has, and some would suggest intentionally, damaged those bedrock tier political needs, the right needs to pivot towards offering to repair said needs while the left continues to demand everyone stop believing their lying eyes and clap harder for dear leader.

 

[teriyakiburns]

US Term Limits Inc. v. Thornton invalidated state laws/constitutions that imposed term limits on US representatives.

The states get to decide the form and process by which representatives are elected, but the federal government sets any potential term limits, because while they are elected by the states, they are elected to a federal position, the actual qualifications for which are described in the constitution. It would take some extensive mental gymnastics to stretch that into a generalised superiority of the federal government over every aspect of how states conduct elections, especially given the how the constitution specifically enumerates the right to decide the form and process to the states.

 

[The Taco Santo!]

This suggests the federal government--for better or worse (I don't agree with either case BTW)--believes they are the ultimate regulator of elections involving Congress and presumably the Presidency, so yes, it would make plenty of sense for the federal government to impose its own standards on electing Congressmen, Senators, and the President.

Well, of course the feds want to believe that. Making it so, though, would be considerably more difficult. Since they're feds, they don't stop to consider whether their assumptions of federal supremacy are correct. And on the left, of course, they don't care. Being the left, though, they'll probably try to ram through some huge, unworkable 'solution' that would piss off everybody. I don't see them getting anything like that through a narrowly divided Congress, though, and anything a Judge decrees another judge can overturn. How many Appeals Court judges did Trump have confirmed, anyway? There's a million legal challenges that can and would be made.

And the people probably wouldn't stand for federal control of elections. The feds are invariably arrogant, which is a big reason why the federal government is regarded with so much contempt by so many people.

There's a disturbing possibility that the last few fucked-up elections were part of a deliberate plan to introduce enough doubt about the system to make the populace throw up their hand and ask Big Daddy Fed to run things. If so, it seems to not be working very well. Nobody but the dullest of NPCs seems to be talking it up.

The grey area may be the latter given the electoral college but there's probably some precedent that can be used to make it legal which would likely apply to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Has that been challenged in the courts? I'm honestly asking, I don't know. It's pretty bad law, but states have the power to form compacts with each other. Expanding that to make it binding for anyone other than those states is doomed to failure, and so, in my opinion, is any attempt to use that as a fig leaf to cover massive changes to existing federal and state law.

 

[ShitLurker]

Depends. Federal courts have ruled that US senators are federal officials so cannot be recalled, so presumably this could give the federal government some right to dictate how senators, representatives, and indeed the US president are elected, similar to how all these shithole states and cities can't legally permit their illegals to vote.

Whatever merits suspending parts of the Constitution might have in fixing this country's problems, Trump shouldn't be the one to say it (and had his chance on 1/6 anyway to try it) since there are legal ways of fixing things.

And does legal mean bureocratic hell that takes over a decade to sort out when it's absolutely irrelevant or that is dependent on a supreme court where Mitch can fuck up any vote with the flick of a finger when one of those "right wing judges" decides to dissent?

I still remember how Clarence and I think Gorsuch were cockblocked from looking at the election fraud claims.

 

[mandatorylurk]

I can't wait to see Ducey literally lick Joepedo's boot.

 

[The Last Stand]

View attachment 4012989

View attachment 4013004

I can't wait to see Ducey literally lick Joepedo's boot.

When a president implies that their country's border is not important... you're a failure of a leader.

 

[Puff]

So all these boomer elites that grew up with the best of America in the 1950s and 1960s.

All these boomer lib and boomer con elites decided to be authoritarian amoral nigger lovers wanting to emulate a gayer version of the USSR.

I don't know the boomers. Not nearly enough clout. I'm hearing from the under-40 rep crowd with secondhand stuff about a few of the boomers.

 

[tehpope]

View attachment 4012989

View attachment 4013004

I can't wait to see Ducey literally lick Joepedo's boot.

And he'll get away with that statement because the GOP is controlled opposition and will do the same in the future. Edit: they dont give a shit about the DNC but will go nuclear over anyone who challenges their place in politics.

If I ran the gop, I'd broadcast this clip in TimesSquare 24/7.

 

[Vyse Inglebard]

If I ran the gop, I'd broadcast this clip in TimesSquare 24/7.

Nah, go even farther. I'd take the "he sexually molested me in the shower" part of Ashley's diary and plaster it all over every major city in the country.

 

[Fatboi Gus]

Nah, go even farther. I'd take the "he sexually molested me in the shower" part of Ashley's diary and plaster it all over every major city in the country.

You think the left would care.

They wouldn't.

The true believer left is ruthlessly pragmatic in their quest for power. They have no real values besides power for power's sake. What's a few rapes compared to the literal utopia they'll build on Chud's corpses? Look at how much support Bill Clinton got from feminists during the Lewinsky affair even after it became extremely clear that he was guilty.

You can't win against this type of enemy unless you go all in too, because they will chisel away small victory after small victory by negotiating in bad faith. While the right disavows its own for "horrible crimes" (as defined by their enemies), the left always circles the wagon. Even their hilarious purity spirals are nothing but power struggles within their internal structure. This realisation is what made me step away from libertarianism. To kill the state, we have to seize it first. For freedom to reign, a rigid structure must exist to support it.

Think of them as you would think of islamic integrists. They wouldn't care for a little bit of hypocrisy (like raping boys) on the way to the glorious worldwide islamic caliphate.

 

[The Nothingness]

View attachment 4012989

View attachment 4013004

I can't wait to see Ducey literally lick Joepedo's boot.

Worst US president in my lifetime.

 

[mandatorylurk]

Bravely letting themselves be used as cheap props for bullshit no one cares about, such stunning GOPe