2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

[Pointless Pedant]

I hope that if western society ends up turning out to be a failed state, we somehow still get to keep social media so I can laugh at zoomers and formally-middle class suburban moms starving to death on the streets (but at least we refer to them by their preferred pronouns).

I know you're joking, but mass starvation will not happen in the USA. I would bet money on this, and I'm not a gambling man. If there is a food shortage, it will just decrease the 36% obesity rate a bit.

 

[The High Prophet of Truth]

They are unironically trying to push this as the MAGA March.
View attachment 1729608

The fog made me think it was smoke and that they were trying to play it off as a riot.
Also, good to see that some Biden supporters decided to show their pride for him here.

 

[Random Internet Person]

You have been told this thrice now, please do try to remember it. The Supreme Court makeup is now 6-3 Republican - Democrat, and everyone assumes Roberts will vote democrat. He is UTTERLY IRRELEVANT to a deciding vote.

Sorry. I just remember hearing how Roberts was appointed by George W. Bush. And him being called an “establishment type”.

View attachment 1729585View attachment 1729586View attachment 1729587View attachment 1729588View attachment 1729589View attachment 1729590View attachment 1729591View attachment 1729593View attachment 1729594View attachment 1729595View attachment 1729596
View attachment 1729597View attachment 1729599

Wow, the MAGA crowd really looks night and day different from the Charlottesville crowd. Can’t wait to hear the spin of this lot.

Roberts is a rock solid member of the left wing bloc. He will vote for Biden period

The court isnt 6-3 it is 5-4

When RBG was "alive" it wasnt 5-4, it was 4-5

Roberts cast his lot in NFIB v. Sebelius as bending to pressure tactics and has never looked back. He will never stop throwing others into the crocodile's maw hoping it will leave him alone

Alito was spitting some straight fire at the Federalist Society a few days ago. Makes me wonder what he is saying behind closed doors. He's the clear leader of the right wing bloc on the court since Thomas doesnt like to be front and center. I think Alito will make the argument to Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Barrett that enough is enough (his speech to the FS was basically saying this over and over again) and they have to stand up to the infringement of liberties and general left wing shenanigans sometime and that time is now. If he does, will he convince them? I dunno

If Alito is willing to raise Hell like what happened in 12 Angry Men, then maybe Trump has a chance. I guess the next question is: were the Obama appointees known to be the progressive activist types? I just remember that talked about when it came to RBG and anyone that’d be on the bench presiding after a court pack.

 

[Gehenna]

A breakdown of United States Supreme Court Justices (In order of seniority):

John Roberts: Republican, nominated by George W. Bush, his judicial philosophy is a mutt between two, Judicial Restraint (The philosophy that all decisions should be made with the intent to ensure they touch as little other laws as possible) and Judicial Deference (Belief that judicial opinions should heavily weight towards existing power structures).

Clarence Thomas: Republican, nominated by George H. W. Bush, infamously slandered by Joe Biden and proto-MeToo'd during Nomination. Proponent of Originalism which states to consider the constitution in the meaning of its original founding and the amendments to it in the meaning of their founding. Considered the most conservative of justices on SCOTUS. Also a prponent of Natural Law, but more on that under Gorsuch.

Stephen Breyer: Democrat, nominated by Bill Clinton, his legal philosophy is that decisions should be made int he light of those choices which most encourage participation in government decisions. General sides with the democratic judges.

Samuel Alito: Republican, nominated by George W. Bush, is the one whose orders were ignored in Pennsylvania, is a "Practical Originalist", effectively see Thomas above, but add in a level of pragmatism that how the founders saw things is not always viable in a modern world.

Sonia Sotomayor: Democrat, Nominated by Barack Obama, I can't find -anything- on what her Judicial Philosophy is supposed to be, but her decisions generally fall in line with proponents of a "Living Constitution", a philosophy stating that original intent is less important than ensuring that the constitution remains up to date with modern culture.

Elena Kagan: Democrat, nominated by Barack Obama, see Sotomayor for judicial philosophy, its an exact match.

Neil Gorsuch: Republican, nominated by Donald Trump,. MASSIVE prponent of Natural Law (And a minor in Originalism), Effectively a philosophy out of the Renaissance, it says that all men are imbued with Natural Rights, and that all judicial decisions must be made to minimally impact and to reinforce said rights.

Bret Kavanaugh: Republican, nominated by Donald Trump, dragged through the -mud- during nomination, a proponent of Judicial Restraint.

Amy Coney Barrett: Republican, nominated by Donald Trump, very religious, newest judge with a bit of a cloud over her nomination, massive proponent of Originalism as she learned it under the prior most conservative SCOTUS judge, Scalia.

 

[make_it_so]

Been away for a few hours. What did I miss? Any developments that may help Trumps case at SCOTUS?

Aside from the DC march, nothing. Courts aren't open on Saturday.

 

[Syaoran Li]

I know you're joking, but mass starvation will not happen in the USA. I would bet money on this, and I'm not a gambling man. If there is a food shortage, it will just decrease the 36% obesity rate a bit.

Agreed.

The United States is a net exporter of food and IIRC, is the largest of the net exporters. If we do get a true and honest global famine, expect the USA to export less and the prices of food to go up. Aside from higher prices and certain shortages of specific items, the United States is the one country that'll be affected the least by any pandemic-induced food shortages or famines.

 

[Pointless Pedant]

Agreed.

The United States is a net exporter of food and IIRC, is the largest of the net exporters. If we do get a true and honest global famine, expect the USA to export less and the prices of food to go up. Aside from higher prices and certain shortages of specific items, the United States is the one country that'll be affected the least by any pandemic-induced food shortages or famines.

Correct. The USA has vast swathes of arable farmland and is a major food exporter. In some hypothetical famine scenario they would just export a bit less.

I'd also point out that even flat out civil war would be mostly contested in cities, like this year's rioting was. The biggest battles in Iraq and Syria were urban warfare and sieges. Most farmland would be relatively unscathed, and since agriculture is an essential industry all sides would want to keep it running.

 

[draggs]

Ordering full audits with full Republican participation (they're actually allowed to observe and challenge, not be put 100 feet away and ignored then thrown out of the room when they complain, or be barred from the room in the first place) is the obvious solution to equal protection and due process being denied to Republicans during the initial vote counts in at least 4 states, those being PA GA WI MI. It's the easiest case to prove, there's tons of video and eyewitness evidence that things were done in a majorly improper way. If Rudy isn't going for that because he's trying to get the court to directly invalidate about a million and a half votes in those 4 states, he's fucking retarded. Those votes are never getting tossed in the trash where they belong except through rigorous, honest audits.

 

[Gustav Schuchardt]

> Judicial philosophies other than Originalism exist
> Absolute degeneracy

1949 was the start of the Stalinist era in Hungary, which ended with a popular uprising.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_People's_Republic#Stalinist_era_(1949–1956)

 

[the fall of man]

Can confirm. When I cruised down to “the Salad Bowl of America” around Salinas, based immigrant workers were out in the fields picking vegetables in hundred degree weather, while wildfires were throwing smoke into the air. And they were all forced to wear coronavirus masks.

America is still happening behind the scenes. This is all a play for bourgeoisie pricks who think they’re suffering by owning a last-gen iPhone.

 

[Gehenna]

> Judicial philosophies other than Originalism exist
> Absolute degeneracy

1949 was the start of the Stalinist era in Hungary, which ended with a popular uprising.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_People's_Republic#Stalinist_era_(1949–1956)

Generally, there is an undercurrent of Originalism to most conservative justices who focus on other philosophies. For example, Natural law tends to view the constitution as immutable, but interprets it with the additional layer of the innate rights of man.

Hypothetically, even proponents of a Living Constitution can coexist with originalism, so long as one reigns in the living nature with the immutability of the words on the page.

The only judicial philosophy I find truly repugnant is Judicial Deference, as the judiciary exists to REIGN IN the powers that be, not defer to them in any capacity.

 

[Feline Supremacist]

Alito was spitting some straight fire at the Federalist Society a few days ago. Makes me wonder what he is saying behind closed doors. He's the clear leader of the right wing bloc on the court since Thomas doesnt like to be front and center. I think Alito will make the argument to Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Barrett that enough is enough (his speech to the FS was basically saying this over and over again) and they have to stand up to the infringement of liberties and general left wing shenanigans sometime and that time is now. If he does, will he convince them? I dunno

Here's a video and transcript of the speech if anyone's interested

https://reason.com/volokh/2020/11/12/video-and-transcript-of-justice-alitos-keynote-address-to-the-federalist-society/

 

[NJBear]

>pick up a point of the livestream at random (2:26:48.)

>"we're naming these people: they're not just comunists, they're jews "

Absolutely based with extra crisp

This monster ran for Congress on DNC ticket in IIRC 2016 and lost thankfully.

 

[Random Internet Person]

A breakdown of United States Supreme Court Justices (In order of seniority):

John Roberts: Republican, nominated by George W. Bush, his judicial philosophy is a mutt between two, Judicial Restraint (The philosophy that all decisions should be made with the intent to ensure they touch as little other laws as possible) and Judicial Deference (Belief that judicial opinions should heavily weight towards existing power structures).

Clarence Thomas: Republican, nominated by George H. W. Bush, infamously slandered by Joe Biden and proto-MeToo'd during Nomination. Proponent of Originalism which states to consider the constitution in the meaning of its original founding and the amendments to it in the meaning of their founding. Considered the most conservative of justices on SCOTUS. Also a prponent of Natural Law, but more on that under Gorsuch.

Stephen Breyer: Democrat, nominated by Bill Clinton, his legal philosophy is that decisions should be made int he light of those choices which most encourage participation in government decisions. General sides with the democratic judges.

Samuel Alito: Republican, nominated by George W. Bush, is the one whose orders were ignored in Pennsylvania, is a "Practical Originalist", effectively see Thomas above, but add in a level of pragmatism that how the founders saw things is not always viable in a modern world.

Sonia Sotomayor: Democrat, Nominated by Barack Obama, I can't find -anything- on what her Judicial Philosophy is supposed to be, but her decisions generally fall in line with proponents of a "Living Constitution", a philosophy stating that original intent is less important than ensuring that the constitution remains up to date with modern culture.

Elena Kagan: Democrat, nominated by Barack Obama, see Sotomayor for judicial philosophy, its an exact match.

Neil Gorsuch: Republican, nominated by Donald Trump,. MASSIVE prponent of Natural Law (And a minor in Originalism), Effectively a philosophy out of the Renaissance, it says that all men are imbued with Natural Rights, and that all judicial decisions must be made to minimally impact and to reinforce said rights.

Bret Kavanaugh: Republican, nominated by Donald Trump, dragged through the -mud- during nomination, a proponent of Judicial Restraint.

Amy Coney Barrett: Republican, nominated by Donald Trump, very religious, newest judge with a bit of a cloud over her nomination, massive proponent of Originalism as she learned it under the prior most conservative SCOTUS judge, Scalia.

So Sotomayor and Kagan were just as I thought: activists from the bench. At least Trump got some guys who’ll hopefully hold their ground in their philosophies. And Breyer seems like he can be convinced to go your way.

 

[Epsteindidnothingwrong]

1949:

• Communists forces gain power in China; nationalists flee to Taiwan.
• North Atlantic Treaty Organization established.
• Soviet Union detonates its first atomic bomb.
• Israel admitted to U.N.
• Soviet Union lifts Berlin blockade; Berlin airlift ends.
• Apartheid becomes official government policy in South Africa.

 

[Gehenna]

So Sotomayor and Kagan were just as I thought: activists from the bench. At least Trump got some guys who’ll hopefully hold their ground in their philosophies. And Breyer seems like he can be convinced to go your way.

Of the Non Roberts judges (Fuck Roberts and his Judicial Deference bullshit), Alito and Gorsuch can be most convinced to join the liberals when arguing for a realistic issue that the founders could not have considered or an issue which would impact individual rights, respectively. Breyer generally has sided with the right-wing of the bench when it can be argued that what is brought before the court would disenfranchise or harm public participation.

Alita and Gorsuch will hate the fraud, if it can be proven. Breyer is a toss-up but NOT to be counted out. It can be argued that massive fraud disenfranchises a LOT of people, the problem with him is he needs to be convinced fraud occurred as the other side of the argument is that overturning chunks of the vote is disfranchisement itself.

Thomas is almost certainly voting on the right here, Kagan and Sotomayor are rubber stamps for the left.

Roberts, as much as I hate him, isn't for sure going to vote for the left. As repugnant as I find Judicial Deference, it does make him more likely to side with the powers that be... the question is who he considers those powers to be.

Kavanaugh and Barrett are also question marks, Kavanaugh might vote for it because allowing fraud would impact -everything-, but he'd want the solution narrowly tailored which might give Trump a win without victory. Barrett theoretically is a lock in like Thomas, but I remain unconvinced until I know for a fact she will not recuse herself under pressure.

 

[Puerto Pollo]

In a normal country I wouldn't count on Democrat judges to vote automatically against Trump, as there's a literal mountain of evidence and they're judges, but America stopped being normal a long time ago

 

[MrJokerRager]

Is this a cope?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/maga-march-dc-million-kayleigh-mcenany-b1723044.html

Who seriously gives a fuck at this point. That fact that Trump supporters showed up in a town that went like 90 percent and filled with niggers for Biden is a miracle.

I'm sure Trump was happy to see his supporters outside the White House compared to the usual degenerates. He was smiling and energetic in that car.

Now I guess we wait for next week to see what is the 4d chess move.

 

[Shield Breaker]

OK, which one of you assholes is this?

@Puff obviously.

 

[Mr Cuddles]

Ordering full audits with full Republican participation (they're actually allowed to observe and challenge, not be put 100 feet away and ignored then thrown out of the room when they complain, or be barred from the room in the first place) is the obvious solution to equal protection and due process being denied to Republicans during the initial vote counts in at least 4 states, those being PA GA WI MI. If Rudy isn't going for that because he's trying to get the court to directly invalidate about a million and a half votes in those 4 states, he's fucking retarded. Those votes are never getting tossed in the trash where they belong except through rigorous, honest audits.

I was thinking the same thing. How much of an affront to the american electoral system would it be for the SCOTUS to say we've seen enough evidence of fuckery that the entire election should be audited; that the dates for sending electors and inauguration should be set back a month to allow for this?

To me, this would be a decent solution as tossing out ballots wholesale looks bad/partisan whilst just saying the election should be fully audited with the appropriate rules attached might actually help either a) expose Democrat/Republican fraud or b) restore faith in the voting process.

As many others have stated, the constitutional crisis lies with the process and the protection thereof. If Trump lost fairly, which I highly doubt that, we'll just have to suck up the loss and hope biden isn't as bad we think he'll be. At least then there is hope of change down the line. If the machine cheated to get the presidency and gets away with it then there is literally nothing beyond the smallest scale subversion any individual can do. You will literally be waiting for a Gorbachev figure to save you, that might take 10 years or it might take 75 years.