• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

ivysaur12

Banned
5 cases left.

Independent redistricting (AZ. Leg)
EPA rules (Utility Air)
Short-barrel-shotgun as a felony (Johnson)
Marriage! (Obergefell)
Lethal injection (Glossip)

With today's opinions by Roberts and Kennedy:

Roberts: 7
Scalia: 7
Kennedy: 5
Thomas: 7
Ginsburg: 6
Breyer: 8
Alito: 7
Sotomayor: 7
Kagan: 7

My guess:

AMK: AZ. Leg, Obergefell
JGR: Glossip
AGS: Johnson
RBG: Utility Air
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
pigeon said:
On King: it's a big deal that SCOTUS affirmed the Fourth Circuit but refused to apply Chevron deference (which would have left it in the hands of the IRS and the executive branch as to whether subsidies were available or not). Even if a GOP president is elected, it will not be a straightforward executive action to dismantle Obamacare.
Click to expand...

I'm quite shocked. I figured that'd be the best we'd get. I guess the court isn't completely useless.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
thepotatoman said:
I'm quite shocked. I figured that'd be the best we'd get. I guess the court isn't completely useless.
Click to expand...

The Majority didn't want to be flooded with a bunch of "inartful language" challenges to laws.

Think about it. How many laws probably have the same type of "mistake" the ACA has as in this case? Probably a shit ton. It's going to happen when you have numerous people writing many pages of laws.

It's why I never believed Roberts and Kennedy would join the conservative hacks. The precedent would have been enormous.

The Chevron defense would have not stopped everything in the same way and would have allowed for different admins to have different interpretations of numerous laws. Blah.


On a similar note, love how Jonathon Cohn put today's ruling:

Either way, they got a pretty clear message from the Supreme Court on Thursday: Take a sledgehammer to the Affordable Care Act if you’d like. Just don’t ask us to do it for you.
Click to expand...
 
A

AnotherNils

Member
ivysaur12 said:
5 cases left.

Independent redistricting (AZ. Leg)
EPA rules (Utility Air)
Short-barrel-shotgun as a felony (Johnson)
Marriage! (Obergefell)
Lethal injection (Glossip)

With today's opinions by Roberts and Kennedy:

Roberts: 7
Scalia: 7
Kennedy: 5
Thomas: 7
Ginsburg: 6
Breyer: 8
Alito: 7
Sotomayor: 7
Kagan: 7

My guess:

AMK: AZ. Leg, Obergefell
JGR: Glossip
AGS: Johnson
RBG: Utility Air
Click to expand...
next we need dissent stats.

Of course it seems like it's always Scalia in the big cases
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Black Mamba said:
The Majority didn't want to be flooded with a bunch of "inartful language" challenges to laws.

Think about it. How many laws probably have the same type of "mistake" the ACA has as in this case? Probably a shit ton. It's going to happen when you have numerous people writing many pages of laws.

It's why I never believed Roberts and Kennedy would join the conservative hacks. The precedent would have been enormous.

The Chevron defense would have not stopped everything in the same way and would have allowed for different admins to have different interpretations of numerous laws. Blah.


On a similar note, love how Jonathon Cohn put today's ruling:
Click to expand...

True, and I guess it's not like there is any chance where a republican president could stop subsidies for a few random states and get anything useful out it even if they did leave that option open. So no real reason to open a can of worms for that little gain.

No real reason to open the can of worms by doing anything against the ACA at all really, since it'd probably just leave the GOP with nothing but a big headache by the end, thanks to popular support for a fix.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Black Mamba said:
The Majority didn't want to be flooded with a bunch of "inartful language" challenges to laws.

Think about it. How many laws probably have the same type of "mistake" the ACA has as in this case? Probably a shit ton. It's going to happen when you have numerous people writing many pages of laws.

It's why I never believed Roberts and Kennedy would join the conservative hacks. The precedent would have been enormous.
Click to expand...

Which was probably the best argument against it, trying to rid the world of typos is an impossible feat. Even professional copy editors let them through sometimes, to hold Congress, of all things, to a higher standard is madness and is just asking to clog the court system.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
B-Dubs said:
Which was probably the best argument against it, trying to rid the world of typos is an impossible feat. Even professional copy editors let them through sometimes, to hold Congress, of all things, to a higher standard is madness and is just asking to clog the court system.
Click to expand...

I argued as much maybe even before SCOTUS took the case up.

Now I'm thoroughly convinced the liberals are the 4 who asked to hear the case. Not just because it's 6-3, but how definite the ruling was by Roberts. They wanted to harm Scalia's legal theories and they accomplished that today.

Scalia believes the words only matter in the most strictest of ways, even if a mistake. The Liberals believe intent and context matters to a more expanded way than Scalia.

This wasn't just a win for Obama and the law, it was a win for those of us who believe such things should matter when interpreting law. Scalia lost big time today.
 
M

Measley

Junior Member
NeoXChaos said:
Chris Christie is running. inb4 fat jokes.

MenLoseToHillary_zpsc6qkdda5.jpg
Click to expand...

LMAO! That's pretty great.

But seriously, how many Republicans are running for president? It's getting out of hand.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
I just woke up to the King decision.

I can't believe there was so much stress over this absolutely fucking stupid case.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
NeoXChaos said:
Why didnt the Democrats have 15+ candidates? Its weird with no incumbent President or VP running that they only have 5.
Click to expand...

Hilary has the political strength of an incumbent. She polls better than the second coming. Plus Biden likes having Obama's ear too much to give it up for a fight with Hilary he might not win.
 
C

CrimzonSamurai

Member
NeoXChaos said:
Why didnt the Democrats have 15+ candidates? Its weird with no incumbent President or VP running that they only have 5.
Click to expand...

I think, historically, Dems have always had a smaller field. I can't prove that, just seems that way to me thinking about the elections I remember. Still, there are too many also-rans to count.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
B-Dubs said:
Hilary has the political strength of an incumbent. She polls better than the second coming. Plus Biden likes having Obama's ear too much to give it up for a fight with Hilary he might not win.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is if anything an understatement. We've never had a candidate with the presumptive lead that Hillary has, basically ever in American politics.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
CrimzonSamurai said:
I think, historically, Dems have always had a smaller field. I can't prove that, just seems that way to me thinking about the elections I remember. Still, there are too many also-rans to count.
Click to expand...

The '08 primary was sizable, but no one outside of Hilary, Biden and Obama factored into it. The GOP primaries haven't always been this big either, this is a result of the tea party. We've basically got two parties competing in one primary right now, until one manages to kill the other.
 
T

Third Strike

Member
NihonTiger90 said:
Hillary is the answer to your question. Nobody who had future aspirations wanted to get crushed by her.
Click to expand...

I wonder if O'Malley and Jim Webb are running for a cabinet position in Hillary's admin? I almost feel like most Dems that have aspirations of becoming president are probably biding their time until like 2024. I can actually see that election being pretty sizable for the Dems, assuming Hillary wins next year. If not, then 2020.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Third Strike said:
I wonder if O'Malley and Jim Webb are running for a cabinet position in Hillary's admin? I almost feel like most Dems that have aspirations of becoming president are probably biding their time until like 2024. I can actually see that election being pretty sizable for the Dems, assuming Hillary wins next year. If not, then 2020.
Click to expand...

The Dems have a lot of up-and-comers that will factor into future elections if things don't go tits up. In New York alone there's Gillibrand and de Blasio, both of which are just great. If Hilary somehow loses this election, which she won't, then Gillibrand will be our first woman president. She'll be sitting in the oval one day, mark my words.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Sam Seder reading Scalia's quote in Fenton's voice is too perfect. I've been listening to it over and over.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6scAaY46e_0&t=1190

You know, for someone that's supposely just all about reading the text, he seems strangely more focused on the fact that SCOTUS didn't take this chance to get rid of SCOTUScare, and not on the fact that they're not being textualists.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Roberts is a tool most of the time, but this is pretty funny:

The dissent in King is literally hard to believe. On page 17 of the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts even mocks the dissenters for making the opposite conclusion that they drew three years ago:

“It is implausible that Congress meant the Act to operate in this manner. See National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U. S. ___, ___ (2012) (SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., dissenting) (slip op., at 60) (“Without the federal subsidies … the exchanges would not operate as Congress intended and may not operate at all.”).

It’s no small detail. Three years ago, when the Affordable Care Act’s constitutionality was challenged, Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Sam Alito read the law in such a way as to see all eligible consumers receiving subsidies, regardless of state or federal exchanges. In today’s dissent, these three had to read the law in the polar opposite way.
Click to expand...


Also, too. Was there any baby splitting that Roberts did like with the individual mandate decision, or is this just straight good news all around?
 
C

Crisco

Banned
He gave some fuel to the conservative fire by basically rewriting the law rather than going with Chevron or the government's term of art argument. But other than that, no, this was a clean win for the government.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Oblivion said:
Roberts is a tool most of the time, but this is pretty funny:




Also, too. Was there any baby splitting that Roberts did like with the individual mandate decision, or is this just straight good news all around?
Click to expand...
I think it's just good news. The only part that was in contention were the subsidies.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
pigeon said:
Yeah, this is if anything an understatement. We've never had a candidate with the presumptive lead that Hillary has, basically ever in American politics.
Click to expand...

Certainly not in the modern era. Maybe Eisenhower comes close to it. Gore would be comparable but he was the incumbent VP.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
RustyNails said:
How was papa bush polling ahead of 1988 election?
Click to expand...
In Jan-July 1987, the average was:
36% Bush, 21% Dole, 7% Kemp, 4% Robertson, 4% Haig

He lost Iowa to Dole. Then barely beat him in NH.

In July 1988 he trailed Dukakis 54-37.

CrimzonSamurai said:
I think, historically, Dems have always had a smaller field. I can't prove that, just seems that way to me thinking about the elections I remember. Still, there are too many also-rans to count.
Click to expand...
"Major" candidates who contested primaries, attended debates and/or were Senator/Governor/Congressman/etc. who had not dropped out by "this point" in the cycle.

Incumbent party bolded, incumbent President as one of the candidates underlined.

2016 - GOP: 14 (+2 exploratory), DEM: 4 (+1)
2012 - GOP: 9 (+3 jumped parties and Thad McCotter), DEM: 1
2008 - GOP: 12, DEM: 10
2004 - GOP: 1, DEM: 10
2000 - GOP: 12, DEM: 2
1996 - GOP: 10, DEM: 1
1992 - GOP: 4, DEM: 7
1988 - GOP: 7, DEM: 12
1984 - GOP: 1, DEM: 8
1980 - GOP: 9, DEM: 4
1976 - GOP: 2, DEM: 15
1972 - GOP: 3, DEM: 16
1968 - GOP: 4, DEM: 5*
1964 - GOP: 9, DEM: 2

EDIT: Prior to 1964 the primaries were not really relevant. Goldwater's primary victories sucked the wind out of Rockefeller's sails since Rockefeller always tried front-porch campaigns. And LBJ poured money into the 1964 Democratic primaries out of fear that George Wallace or even worse stalking horses for Robert Kennedy would contest and win. In any case, it was not until 1972 that the nomination could be won through primaries. Humphrey and Goldwater both still had to win at the convention even if they had won 100% of every primary vote. Nixon's opponents all dropped out in 1968 so he was able to round up nearly all the delegates beforehand, but theoretically he could have still been challenged at the convention.

*Counted Kennedy and McGovern as one as McGovern entered after Kennedy was killed to try and keep his delegates together.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
NeoXChaos said:
Certainly not in the modern era. Maybe Eisenhower comes close to it. Gore would be comparable but he was the incumbent VP.
Click to expand...
Bradley was eventually polling competitively with Gore. By the end of 1999, which is why they had five thousand debates. And he was literally the only other candidate so Gore's 50-20 advantage in early 1999 isn't as absurd.

Dole in 1996 was averaging 40-50% against the field of GOP candidates who were stuck between 2-12% prior to June 1995.

W. Bush polled 46% vs. 18% Elizabeth Dole, 7% Quayle, 5% McCain, 5% Forbes, 3% Buchanan, 2% Kasich prior to June 1999.
 
Y

Yellowtail

Member
benjipwns said:
Bradley was eventually polling competitively with Gore. By the end of 1999, which is why they had five thousand debates. And he was literally the only other candidate so Gore's 50-20 advantage in early 1999 isn't as absurd.
Click to expand...
Bradley was beating out Gore in the polls in NH by September 1999 (and only narrowly lost the state in the end). I expect there'll be a rogue poll showing Sanders beating Hillary there at some point this year and the entire political press will have a meltdown.

But one of the reasons Hillary is so incredibly dominant is because she's the only candidate continually beating all the Republican candidates (Biden and Warren were behind when they were polled, never mind O'Malley and Sanders who are down double digits). Gore was behind Bush the entire election cycle (it's a marvel he ever won the popular vote in the end) - did no one in the DNC think they needed to draft in someone more electable?! Or did that person just not exist?

I'd say Clinton is the most dominant primary candidate since Nixon in 1960 (who got 87% of the vote), although there's no polling to show what his leads were throughout the process. And she's got the clearest path to the White House for a non-incumbent since Eisenhower. For all the horserace punditry from now till November, if she wins everyone in the future will say that this whole election was a foregone conclusion since 2012.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Yellowtail said:
Gore was behind Bush the entire election cycle (it's a marvel he ever won the popular vote in the end) - did no one in the DNC think they needed to draft in someone more electable?! Or did that person just not exist?
Click to expand...
John Kerry, Chris Dodd, Dick Gephardt, Howard Dean, Bob Kerrey, Jesse Jackson and Paul Wellstone all were considering 2000 bids and started into the invisible primary to some extent.

This is one reason Kerry, Gephardt and Dean shot out of the gate in 2002-03.

Wellstone backed out at the last second and was one of the first big names to endorse Bradley.
 
Y

Yellowtail

Member
I'm not sure if any of them would have performed better in a general election. Just like now, a disaffected left and hostile media provided serious headwinds for anyone running for a Clinton third term.

The latest CNN New Hampshire poll has Hillary only 8 points ahead of Sanders: 43-35%. He'll probably be beating her there by September like Bradley did to Gore. White men are already siding with Sanders. At least she's got a good campaign team this time I guess.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
To explain further, prior to 1972, delegates were won via state conventions/caucuses. The primaries/vote were all beauty contests and as late as the 1960's still weren't selecting the delegate slates. (Just as they currently don't in some states...like Iowa!)

They were mostly useful to candidates to show their strength.

The non-primary selection method is also one reason the Unit Rule and 2/3rds Rule were constantly trying to be broken at national conventions. The Unit Rule, for example, was predominant in the GOP and bound an entire state's delegation to the candidate who "won" it.

Grant in 1880 and Roosevelt in 1912's only chances were to break the unit rule and then otherwise bound delegates could vote for their otherwise not majority candidacies. 1912 had primaries (the first presidential ones) but only some 400 delegates from 12 states (this would rise to 20 in 1920, before falling back to 12 in 1936 where it remained until 1972) were awarded in total, Taft had more than these and more than the majority already locked up if the unit rule held. So Teddy, pissed off that the party wouldn't just hand him the candidacy back over the sitting President he originally foisted on them, told his delegates to abstain and formed his own party, with black jack and hookers. And so we got the worst and arguably most evil President of all time instead of another boring Taft term. (Which Teddy couldn't stand because Taft was trust-busting Teddy's friends' companies like U.S. Steel and Teddy wanted to be known as the trust-buster, it wasn't fair for Taft to get any credit for enforcing a law that TEDDY signed against people he didn't want it enforced against!)

In 1911, Senator Albert Cummins of Iowa proposed a bill for a national primary vote to be held on August 1st (of the presidential election year), with the conventions left to the platform and party organization. Do your own research if you want to find out if that bill ever passed and was signed into law and became how we elect our Presidential candidates today.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/06/fox-news-drops-bob-beckel-209504.html
Fox News has officially dropped "The Five" co-host Bob Beckel from the network, saying the show could no longer be held "hostage" to his personal issues.

"We tried to work with Bob for months, but we couldn’t hold The Five hostage to one man’s personal issues," Bill Shine, executive vice president of programming, said in a statement. "He took tremendous advantage of our generosity, empathy and goodwill and we simply came to the end of the road with him."

Shine said Fox News personalities Juan Williams and Geraldo Rivera will be "among those rotating on the show for the near future.”

Beckel, who joined the network in 2000, had entered rehab therapy for his addiction to prescription pain medication in April.
Click to expand...
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
BIG NEWS
Bristol Palin said:
(I’m announcing this news a lot sooner than I ever expected due to the constant trolls who have nothing better to talk about!!!)

I wanted you guys to be the first to know that I am pregnant.

Honestly, I’ve been trying my hardest to keep my chin up on this one.

At the end of the day there’s nothing I can’t do with God by my side, and I know I am fully capable of handling anything that is put in front of me with dignity and grace.

Life moves on no matter what. So no matter how you feel, you get up, get dressed, show up, and never give up.

When life gets tough, there is no other option but to get tougher.

I know this has been, and will be, a huge disappointment to my family, to my close friends, and to many of you.

But please respect Tripp’s and my privacy during this time. I do not want any lectures and I do not want any sympathy.

My little family always has, and always will come first.

Tripp, this new baby, and I will all be fine, because God is merciful.
Click to expand...
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150625/us--irs-lost_emails-47ff44b9ff.html
Investigators are blaming mistakes by IRS employees — not a criminal conspiracy — for the loss of thousands of emails related to the tax agency's tea party scandal.

IRS workers erased 422 computer backup tapes that "most likely" contained as many as 24,000 emails to and from former IRS official Lois Lerner, who has emerged as a central figure in congressional investigations, according to IRS's inspector general.

The workers erased the tapes a month after IRS officials discovered that an untold number of Lerner's emails were lost. The IG says the workers were unaware of a year-old directive not to destroy email backup tapes.
Click to expand...
whoops
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
Wilsongt said:
So they wanted to get rid of the "liberal" and uses his addiction as an excuse. Got it
Click to expand...
Honestly, I think that this is actually about the addiction. First of all, kicking somebody out after they go into rehab is plenty shitty enough for me to believe it's their real reasoning. Secondly, the Fox News Liberal is a pretty stock part of their shtick. It's necessary for them to be able to claim bipartisanism, plus they get to use the "look, even our pet liberal agrees with us!" thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
Top Bottom