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

Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: ThisIsGonnaBeGood, The Shredder, ActualCracker and 120 others
Click to expand...
Analysis By The New York Times reveals that support for Joe Biden among women is at a 20 year low for any Democrat.

The polling shows that Donald Trump has an eight-point lead over Biden among women.

The turnaround is once again insane.

Four years ago, Biden led Trump by 13 points among women. Now, Trump has gained 21 points. The figures were gleaned from the Times’s average of more than 30 polls conducted since January.

The Times notes “Overall, twice as many women say they were better off financially under Mr. Trump.”

It adds that “Young women, a key constituency that Democrats are hoping to retain this cycle, were nearly three times as likely to say things were better for them financially under Mr. Trump than Mr. Biden.”


The report also notes how Biden’s support among Black and Latino women is in free fall, calling it “especially striking.”

“He is winning among Black women in the KFF survey by 58 percentage points, but that represents a significant drop from his 86 percentage point margin among Black women in the approach to the 2020 election, according to an average of New York Times/Siena College polls from that election,” the report notes.

It adds that “Biden’s lead with Hispanic women has also shrunk substantially, to about 12 points.”

As we previously highlighted, Biden’s loss of support among Black voters as they shift allegiance to Trump is historic.

CNN data reporter Harry Enten expressed shock at just how much support Biden has lost among the demographic, noting “We’re careening towards a historic performance for a Republican presidential candidate, the likes of which we have not seen in six decades.”


Meanwhile yet another poll, this one from Quinnipiac, shows that Biden’s support among young voters is plummeting.

“Biden is out of step with young people on a number of key issues,” Aidan Kohn-Murphy, the founder of Gen-Z for Change, which was previously TikTok for Biden, told the Washington Post.

He called “the frustrations of young progressive leaders a barometer of widespread dissatisfaction among Gen Z voters.”

Pundits and Democratic insiders have suggested that the upcoming debate against Trump is Biden’s final chance to turn things around, and if he doesn’t he could be forced to stand down.
Click to expand...
 
  • Optimistic
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: Gutless, Vecr, AnitaSarsleezian and 13 others
  • Like
Reactions: Vecr, AnitaSarsleezian, MidZeRo and 11 others
Useful_Mistake said:
"Supreme Court upholds federal ban on firearms for domestic violence offenders. The 8-1 opinion was authored by Chief Justice John Roberts. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented."

Click to expand...
I think it's an understandable ruling.

Good on Thomas for sticking to the letter of the law, but this decision is the proper application of Scalia's "2A is not unlimited" comment. It means that RKBA is presumed a right by default, but that there are certain disqualifying conditions.

Here's an analogy: you also have a right to a fair and speedy trial if you're accused of a crime. But if someone decides to attack another person, and their target shoots them in self-defense, the aggressor is being denied their rights under 6A. But considering the circumstances, the aggressor's 6A rights are trumped by the defender's right to live.
Post Reply said:
"How dare they rule the way I wanted them to!" -Progs
View attachment 6110323
Click to expand...
Ahh. Bloomberg's favorite little trollop hates it when her grift is interrupted. Every time a mass shooting is thwarted by a cop or an armed citizen, she seethes about guns being used instead of lives being saved.

You'd think she'd be happy that it's now spelled out. But as we all know, libtards hate having the rules written down. It makes their agenda of Calvinball Governance more difficult.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Gutless, Simple Wood Plank, Vecr and 20 others
Useful_Mistake said:
View attachment 6110142
Click to expand...
Bannon just needs to shut the fuck up and do his fucking time. 4 months in a minimum security camp, (actually a little over 3 with good time factored in), is a lot less than the J6 morons got and are still getting. This dude got mega-rich off of selling “trusty plan” bullshit to idiots and 3 1/2 months playing uno and dominoes at Club Fed is a small price to pay.
 
  • Dumb
  • Like
  • Optimistic
Reactions: silverstacks, Gutless, Vecr and 15 others
Lorne Armstrong said:
Bannon just needs to shut the fuck up and do his fucking time. 4 months in a minimum security camp, (actually a little over 3 with good time factored in), is a lot less than the J6 morons got and are still getting. This dude got mega-rich off of selling “trusty plan” bullshit to idiots and 3 1/2 months playing uno and dominoes at Club Fed is a small price to pay.
Click to expand...
So now we're handing out Club Fed vacations for being a grifter? Hooooo boy they're gonna have to build a lot more Club Feds I guess. He wasn't charged with telling people to troost the ploon, he was charged with doing something everybody does and never gets charged for. Except he did it while being a former minion and still-vociferous supporter of the Bad Orange Man. It was bullshit selective political prosecution
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Vecr, John.Doe, St.Davis and 5 others
(0:00) bestie intros: big house talk!
(1:37) economy: regulation, taxes, tariffs, taming inflation, de-dollarization
(12:02) federal debt: growth, spend control, where to cut, role of energy, nuclear
(20:22) foreign policy: ukraine/russia
(25:05) foreign policy: israel/palestine
(28:13) abortion: stance on a national ban
(31:09) foreign policy: china
(32:33) covid: origins, fauci relationship, deep state, bad deals
(39:39) border: wall, immigration, h-1bs, recruiting global talent
(46:07) jfk files: full release, importance of transparency
(48:06) debate prediction
(50:15) post-interview debrief
Click to expand...
Trump went on some venture capitalist podcast.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Vecr, Fatsuit Shinji, World Famous Quasi Payer and 7 others
Post Reply said:
"How dare they rule the way I wanted them to!" -Progs
View attachment 6110323
Click to expand...
Meat Target said:
I think it's an understandable ruling.

Good on Thomas for sticking to the letter of the law, but this decision is the proper application of Scalia's "2A is not unlimited" comment. It means that RKBA is presumed a right by default, but that there are certain disqualifying conditions.

Here's an analogy: you also have a right to a fair and speedy trial if you're accused of a crime. But if someone decides to attack another person, and their target shoots them in self-defense, the aggressor is being denied their rights under 6A. But considering the circumstances, the aggressor's 6A rights are trumped by the defender's right to live.

Ahh. Bloomberg's favorite little trollop hates it when her grift is interrupted. Every time a mass shooting is thwarted by a cop or an armed citizen, she seethes about guns being used instead of lives being saved.

You'd think she'd be happy that it's now spelled out. But as we all know, libtards hate having the rules written down. It makes their agenda of Calvinball Governance more difficult.
Click to expand...

Shannon Watts is a cunt that lives in San Francisco.

And deserves getting dumped into a Drug Cartel blacksite, getting skinned alive and ripped apart by chainsaws.

Or being raped and stabbed by a pack of "unaccompanied minors" in San Francisco.
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
Reactions: Smug Cat, Simple Wood Plank, Ghostse and 11 others
Meat Target said:
I think it's an understandable ruling.

Good on Thomas for sticking to the letter of the law, but this decision is the proper application of Scalia's "2A is not unlimited" comment. It means that RKBA is presumed a right by default, but that there are certain disqualifying conditions.

Here's an analogy: you also have a right to a fair and speedy trial if you're accused of a crime. But if someone decides to attack another person, and their target shoots them in self-defense, the aggressor is being denied their rights under 6A. But considering the circumstances, the aggressor's 6A rights are trumped by the defender's right to live.
Click to expand...
The main problem that Thomas brought up was that a restraining order is essentially not enough due process to remove a person's constitutional rights:
Just as important as §922(g)(8)’s express terms is what it leaves unsaid. Section 922(g)(8) does not require a finding that a person has ever committed a crime of domestic violence. It is not triggered by a criminal conviction or a person’s criminal history, unlike other §922(g) subsections. See §§922(g)(1), (9). And, §922(g)(8) does not distinguish contested orders from joint orders—for example, when parties voluntarily enter a no-contact agreement or when both parties seek a restraining order. In addition, §922(g)(8) strips an individual of his ability to possess firearms and ammunition without any due process.1 Rather, the ban is an automatic, uncontestable consequence of certain orders. See §922(g) (“It shall be unlawful for any [qualifying] person [to] possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition”). There is no hearing or opportunity to be heard on the statute’s applicability, and a court need not decide whether a person should be disarmed under §922(g)(8). The only process §922(g)(8) requires is that provided (or not) for the underlying restraining order.
Click to expand...
The current process for restraining orders are akin to "if there is an accusation that SEEMS credible enough to a judge, then it's granted". There's no defense, no due process, no nothing. There's only appeal after the fact, AFTER the right has been taken away. It's the same thing as these "red flag laws". There isn't due process prior to the removal of the right. There's removal of the right, then appeal. It's ass-backwards of constitutional due process, where the state has to PROVE guilt, not the accused having to prove their innocence.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Reticulan Joe, WitchyBitchy, John.Doe and 28 others
draggs said:
So now we're handing out Club Fed vacations for being a grifter? Hooooo boy they're gonna have to build a lot more Club Feds I guess. He wasn't charged with telling people to troost the ploon, he was charged with doing something everybody does and never gets charged for. Except he did it while being a former minion and still-vociferous supporter of the Bad Orange Man. It was bullshit selective political prosecution
Click to expand...
Folks speed all the time, most never get tickets. Folks that do get a ticket, for the most part, just shut the fuck up, pay the fine, and move on with their life. This isn’t 99 years in Leavenworth we’re talking about. It’s 3 1/2 months in FCI Danbury Low Security, the epitome of a “Club Fed”. When was his sentencing hearing, exactly? Back in Oct ‘22? He could have gone in right then and been out before Valentines Day ‘23. He should have just done his few weeks and moved on instead of being a little bitch about it.

 
Last edited:
  • Dumb
  • DRINK!
Reactions: John.Doe, R00T, St.Davis and 3 others
reptile baht spaniard rid said:
As usually the case, the buhlack man is the only valid man on this kangaroo court.

Note that the question isn't about someone convicted of domestic violence, it's about someone accused of such so a restraining order was obtained.

That's a very low bar.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say it’s very low. If the case doesn’t go anywhere, the restraining order is easily appealed. But I also wouldn’t have been upset if the case had gone the other way. I’m pretty neutral on this, and it may be a matter of ‘Congress can make laws going either way’ in which the solution is to elect a better Congress (and get rid of Chevron; hopefully that’s coming). I haven’t read the opinion yet. Sometimes Thomas’s dissents are great and sometimes I think he’s off the mark.
 
  • Disagree
  • Optimistic
Reactions: St.Davis, Ghostse and Fatsuit Shinji
Lorne Armstrong said:
Folks speed all the time, most never get tickets. Folks that do get a ticket, for the most part, just shut the fuck up, pay the fine, and move on with their life. This isn’t a Life sentence in Leavenworth we’re talking about. It’s 3 1/2 months in FCI Danbury Low Security, the epitome of a “Club Fed”. When was his sentencing hearing, exactly? Back in Oct ‘22? He could have gone in right then and been out before Valentines Day ‘23. He should have just done his few weeks and moved on.

Click to expand...
Some men are truly servile by nature

A speeding ticket is analogous to several months in Federal prison. Oh wait, Club Fed. Is he allowed to leave? Can he do what he pleases there? No? Oh. It's prison. You go serve 3 months there if it's so cool

By the way, automatic speeding ticket systems universally get tickets mailed to the people caught by them. Bannon wasn't speeding on a country road with no cameras or cops within many miles, he defied a congressional subpoena. Dozens of people have defied congressional subpoenas with no consequence because of political decisions by the Department of Justice. But Bannon and Peter Navarro got charged because they are connected to the Debbil Trump. Minions of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Joe Biden can do it. Minions of Donald Trump can't. Equality before the law used to mean something. Better hope you are never retarded enough to make yourself vulnerable to the State if you're connected to someone unacceptable to the powers that be
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Mad at the Internet
Reactions: John.Doe, St.Davis, Larry David's Opera Cape and 13 others
draggs said:
Some men are truly servile by nature

A speeding ticket is analogous to several months in Federal prison. Oh wait, Club Fed. Is he allowed to leave? Can he do what he pleases there? No? Oh. It's prison. You go serve 3 months there if it's so cool

By the way, automatic speeding ticket systems universally get tickets mailed to the people caught by them. Bannon wasn't speeding on a country road with no cameras or cops within many miles, he defied a congressional subpoena. Dozens of people have defied congressional subpoenas with no consequence because of political decisions by the Department of Justice. But Bannon and Peter Navarro got charged because they are connected to the Debbil Trump. Minions of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Joe Biden can do it. Minions of Donald Trump can't. Equality before the law used to mean something. Better hope you are never retarded enough to get the State pissed off at you
Click to expand...
Look, Bannon spent almost 2 years and certainly tens of thousands of dollars trying to avoid 14 weeks in Club Fed and failed, which anyone on Earth could see would happen since like you said it’s selective prosecution. He could have just manned up, sat the 14 weeks back then, and had it over and done with. Instead, he chose to suffer the weight of that millstone of a looming sentence around his neck for 2 years, plus he wasted untold amounts of money in a vain attempt to try and get out of it, and he STILL has to go sit in time-out for 14 weeks. I’ll say it again, he’d have been better off just self-surrendering at the gates of FCI Danbury back in late Oct ‘22. It’s not about being “servile” but sometimes you just have to accept the way things are.
 
Last edited:
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
Reactions: John.Doe, St.Davis, AnitaSarsleezian and 2 others
George Lucas said:
I wouldn’t say it’s very low. If the case doesn’t go anywhere, the restraining order is easily appealed. But I also wouldn’t have been upset if the case had gone the other way. I’m pretty neutral on this, and it may be a matter of ‘Congress can make laws going either way’ in which the solution is to elect a better Congress (and get rid of Chevron; hopefully that’s coming). I haven’t read the opinion yet. Sometimes Thomas’s dissents are great and sometimes I think he’s off the mark.
Click to expand...
From a practical viewpoint of "how does this affect people on the ground" it's probably fine, but it is a weakness and line of attack that is theoretically an issue.
 
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: World Famous Quasi Payer, byuuWasTaken, YarrBlueballs and 2 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back