Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died at 87. - 🦀

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
I just hope whoever they pick isn't a fundamentalist. Right wing feels-over-reals ideology is no better than left wing feels-over-reals ideology. Remember when some American schools didn't teach evolution? 🤢
There's a chance it will be. And the defense will be: "What about the Left?" Two wrongs don't make a right.
 
Has anyone realized that Martha McSally, who is likely losing the election to Mark Kelly, will be evicted on November 30th? That means, regardless of if Trump wins or lose, a seat will likely be filled by the Democrats.

That means if they had started the nominee process after the election, they would have less than a month to confirm a seat. Whereas with right now, they have over a month, which may buy enough time to ram Barrett or Lagoa through. I'm not sure that with the inevitable DNC stalling that they could do that after the election.

Even if Republicans only lose one seat, come November 30th, Republicans would have a 52-48 advantage, not 53-47. That means not only would they need to get Grassley to agree (I've heard he's a RINO, may I ask why?), but also get Collins, Murkowski, and Romney to grow some balls and vote "Yes". I know there are rumors that Ted Cruz is saying he's got enough Republicans to slam a nominee through, but there is zero evidence Rooster knows anything. I asked this multiple times and got nothing. Even if this is true, stalling could change all that as McConnell would have to sell the nominee to one more RINO.

Trump is making the wise play here, regardless of how it affects his election chances. Holding off the nomination is a trap the Democrats are setting and he will not fall for that. Now he has to get McConnell to force an expedited process. Announcement tomorrow please.
See my above comment. Also, Blacks as a population aren't increasing. Hispanics are. There are much better inroads with Hispanics anyway. A critical issue is to slow the rate of immigration to increase assimilation and have the ones who come actually have a stake in the success of the club they've been let in to. If America's policies indicate it's a free-for-all, people will treat it like one.
I see this a lot on this forum, but it needs to be said.

The black population is increasing and has been since the 1940 census. As of last year, 13.4% of the population is black (archive). That's larger than the 2010 census. Furthermore, they're by far the most politically active non-white voting block. Even with their massive downturn in 2016 (archive), they still outpaced Hispanics and Asians by double digit. Even with Hispanics being the most populous minority, blacks still vote at a higher percentage than them.

I agree that Republicans have far more in-road to make with Hispanics than blacks, but they are not fading from relevance as a voting block anytime soon which is why the Democrats are doing everything they can to get out the black vote.
 
seeing a graham tweet get 50,000 YOU'RE WINNER!!! stickers is slightly perturbing when this is the same decrepit zombie that snuck the anti-encryption earn it act through the senate not even half a year ago - although as i (poorly) understand it, the amended version that passed was dumbed down

i get that he's clearly OWNING stupid dumb baby libtards but christ... politicians aren't your friends folks. then again if i tried telling that to the mobs of wine moms wailing and moaning over a stubborn jewess hag croaking, i'd probably be publicly stoned
 
So the Dems just announced to the world that they plan on abusing the Impeachment process to blackmail the sitting US President into doing their bidding? On national TV? And they don't have any problems with that, you know..blackmailing both the attorney general and the president to either do what the Dems want or get Impeached?

Well...good to know.
Mitch can just not bring it to the floor until he wants to, and they'll never get 2/3 of the Senate to vote to impeach Barr let alone Trump. Not even sure what Barr is supposed to have to do with SCOUTS

seeing a graham tweet get 50,000 YOU'RE WINNER!!! stickers is slightly perturbing when this is the same decrepit zombie that snuck the anti-encryption earn it act through the senate not even half a year ago - although as i (poorly) understand it, the amended version that passed was dumbed down

i get that he's clearly OWNING stupid dumb baby libtards but christ... politicians aren't your friends folks. then again if i tried telling that to the mobs of wine moms wailing and moaning over a stubborn jewess hag croaking, i'd probably be publicly stoned
It's getting attention precisely because he is the embodiment of ConInc. It's a bellwether for others like him and indicator of having enough support to seat a Justice

Mitch can just not bring it to the floor until he wants to, and they'll never get 2/3 of the Senate to vote to impeach Barr let alone Trump. Not even sure what Barr is supposed to have to do with SCOUTS


It's getting attention precisely because he is the embodiment of ConInc. It's a bellwether for others like him and indicator of having enough support to seat a Justice
Unless I'm reading something wrong, that site shows both 2010 and 2019 estimate at 13.4%
 
Last edited:
seeing a graham tweet get 50,000 YOU'RE WINNER!!! stickers is slightly perturbing when this is the same decrepit zombie that snuck the anti-encryption earn it act through the senate not even half a year ago - although as i (poorly) understand it, the amended version that passed was dumbed down

i get that he's clearly OWNING stupid dumb baby libtards but christ... politicians aren't your friends folks. then again if i tried telling that to the mobs of wine moms wailing and moaning over a stubborn jewess hag croaking, i'd probably be publicly stoned
The list of politicians who have never supported anything retarded or malicious is zero names long. I'm still happy when they decide to do something good for a change, and can recognize which ones do that more often than others. Lindsay Graham is a faggot, a centrist, and a retard, but i respect how consistently he loathes bad-faith behavior. He's an excellent mouthpiece for dissent against the left's behavior, expressing people's general reaction to it pretty well. I still remember his rant during the Kavanaugh hearings, and that picture of him being filled with joy at the realization that he could just ignore the dumb bitch screaming at him on the street. He's like a little avatar of moderate-reactionary America.

Lindsey-Graham-Kavanaugh-Protester-via-Benny-Johnson.jpg
We stan a king.
 
Unless I'm reading something wrong, that site shows both 2010 and 2019 estimate at 13.4%
The 13.4% estimate is from 2019. Here is the estimate from 2010 at 12.6%.
It's getting attention precisely because he is the embodiment of ConInc. It's a bellwether for others like him and indicator of having enough support to seat a Justice
It's a good sign when he's falling in line to get Trump's nominee into the Supreme Court. Now we just need one of Romney, Collins, Murkowski, and Grassley to vote for Barrett/Lagoa and we have an originalist judiciary for years to come. Heck, we could get a 5-4 decision that holds the inevitable voting fraud accountable that the DNC will do.
 
The list of politicians who have never supported anything retarded or malicious is zero names long. I'm still happy when they decide to do something good for a change, and can recognize which ones do that more often than others. Lindsay Graham is a faggot, a centrist, and a retard, but i respect how consistently he loathes bad-faith behavior. He's an excellent mouthpiece for dissent against the left's behavior, expressing people's general reaction to it pretty well. I still remember his rant during the Kavanaugh hearings, and that picture of him being filled with joy at the realization that he could just ignore the dumb bitch screaming at him on the street. He's like a little avatar of moderate-reactionary America.

View attachment 1610566
We stan a king.
Don't abandon your short term memory too fast. These same people would have given their left nut to have Romney or Jeb! instead of Trump. The only reason we don't have a new wave of Bush era conservatives is because Trump is extremely popular and anyone in the party that butts heads with him risks losing their seat. As soon as that job security is back, guys like Graham will go back to being slimy fucks.
 
I just hope whoever they pick isn't a fundamentalist. Right wing feels-over-reals ideology is no better than left wing feels-over-reals ideology. Remember when some American schools didn't teach evolution? 🤢
And judging by her choice of adoption, it could be the bleeding-heart Oprah/Pope Francis brand of Christianity, the kind of shit that leads to what we find in the Tard Baby thread and all those misguided charities that have flooded the African food markets and thus rendered them terminally dependant, and terminally overpopulated. Who knows, she might suddenly recall that Jesus was a refugee and decide that border control is evil and that taking in those huddled masses and uplifting them is a moral imperative that any good Christian nation should aspire to, proceeding of course to rule against any attempt to curb immigration.
 
The dems are fucking losing their shit over the replacement. At this rate it'll be necessary for a 3rd party that's more akin to their 80s or early 90s incarnation to rise up in order to take their place. But sadly the Dems are just too ingrained into society and the pockets of the elite for that too happen.

Also since they have no problem with resorting to blackmail on live television, would they actually try to sugarcoat an attempt to assassinate the president as an "extreme but understandable response" or be stupid enough to call it a "a fiery but mostly peaceful assassination attempt"? And in the event that this occurs or an assassination attempt is successful, this could only prove incredibly bad.

@It's HK-47 any thoughts?
hk-47.jpg
 
View attachment 1610282

Oop, looks like they're already starting to put feelers out on the candidates to try and see which particular tantrum they'll throw when the time comes. I'm sorry to burst your bubble but that's just religion 101. Most people tend to value the immortal and eternal afterlife significantly more than their nine-to-five. That statement isn't strange at all, that's just Christians in general.

That being said, you're more than welcome to kick and scream about how she's a Christian during the upcoming shit-flinging festival because that would be very funny and completely ineffective.
WHY WOULD YOU CHOOSE THIS LINE OF ATTACK!?
When your candidates surrogates are actively anti-religion, when several riots have cooked off and much of the world has turned to God in hard times, when many states have actively surprised the freedom of assembly for churches specifically?

"This supreme court nominee is very religious"

Yah? You wanna know who else is? Blacks and Hispanics, both CORE voting blocs you are -already- waning in. Whose data said this was a good idea, what strategist thought he should float this?
 
Last edited:
WHY WOULD YOU CHOOSE THIS LINE OF ATTACK!?
When your candidates surrogates are actively anti-religion, when several riots have cooked off and much of the world has turned to God in hard times, when many states have actively surprised the freedom of assembly for churches specifically?

"This supreme court nominee is very religious"

Yah? you wanna know who else is? Blacks and Hispanics, both CORE voting blocs you are -already- waning in. Whose data said this was a good idea, what strategist thought he should float this?
If it appeals to Bill Maher, then it must work in the minds of the Dems. He's their idea of a "moderate" at this point because he questions them sometimes.
 
Who knows, she might suddenly recall that Jesus was a refugee and decide that border control is evil and that taking in those huddled masses and uplifting them is a moral imperative that any good Christian nation should aspire to, proceeding of course to rule against any attempt to curb immigration.

This line always fucks with me. Jesus was not a refugee. The story about his family fleeing to Egypt is not only historically unviable, but it's clearly a narrative based on Exodus. It pisses me off so much to hear people swing around scripture when they know absolutely nothing about what's behind the text. Read a goddam commentary, you "Christians." Metzger, Brown, fucking anything. Go buy an annotated NRSV. Do anything but say this bullshit.
 
Don't forget the 66 year old type 1 diabetic.
Elites rarely die young. They have access to constant medical examinations, on site nurses, and experimental treatments. For example, Steve Jobs was able to apply for transplants in multiple regions because of his money. By having multiple houses and a private jet, he could meet the requirements for residency in different regions.
 
Back