• 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.
C

Crisco

Banned
Nah, other than religious exemptions, the law is entirely safe from the courts now. Now they are going to try and pass a repeal by going around the filibuster, but Obama will never sign such a bill. After 2016, I imagine most of the repeal talk will die down since it's not only implausible, it will prove to be a political loser.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
NBC just fired Donald Trump.

LOL.

CIr8oHQWcAAsz4w.png:large
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Fantastic Trump news. Keep the story alive for a few more news cycles.

His comments have been pretty damn far-reaching. Almost every day, I peek-in on Univision news, and they have something about his comments. But here's the kicker: they've asked his fellow candidates to repudiate his comments, and they have declined. His comments have tarred the candidate pool.

Great outreach to a critical voting demographic, eh? They're really listening to that post-mortem!
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
HylianTom said:
Fantastic Trump news. Keep the story alive for a few more news cycles.

His comments have been pretty damn far-reaching. Almost every day, I peek-in on Univision news, and they have something about his comments. But here's the kicker: they've asked his fellow candidates to repudiate his comments, and they have declined. His comments have tarred the candidate pool.

Great outreach to a critical voting demographic, eh? They're really listening to that post-mortem!
Click to expand...

If they didn't figure out that pissing off minorities isn't going to get them wins nationally in 2012, I didn't expect them to suddenly figure it out now.

Pretty incredible though.
 
R

Retromelon

Member
Taste Test:What Happens When We Fed Bobby Jindal Hillary Clinton's Cookies?
Click to expand...

That title is one hell of a tease.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/06/29/we-fed-bobby-jindal-hillary-clintons-cookies-and-youll-never-believe-his-reaction/

So upon his visit last week to The Wall Street Journal’s Washington bureau, we presented Mr. Jindal with a cookie challenge: Would he enjoy more the cookies baked from the official recipe of the Louisiana governor’s mansion in Baton Rouge, or the cookie recipe Hillary Clinton gave to Family Circle magazine in 1992 when she was a presidential candidate’s spouse.
Click to expand...

The comments are brutal:

This is the sort of topic the GOP is best suited for
Click to expand...

Cute story.
But I loved it when Chuck Todd called him out on what a financial mess of cookies Bobby Jindal left Louisiana in
Click to expand...
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Metaphoreus said:
I don't understand what contradiction between sections 1 and 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment you're referring to. (EDIT: Oh, you mean the First Amendment, not section 1 of the Fourteenth. This isn't a contradiction; it's a revision. And it's a revision properly situated in time: the later Fourteenth Amendment creates a carveout from the protections of the earlier First. You're attempting to have the Eighth Amendment preemptively amend the Fourteenth, but that's not how it works.)

To the extent of a conflict between the Eighth Amendment and the Fourteenth, the later-ratified amendment (i.e., the Fourteenth) would be read as controlling. The only way you get around that is by arrogating to the courts the power to impose judge's personal philosophies without Constitutional warrant.
Click to expand...

I think its absurd to base things on their chronology. Of course the 14th writers didn't disavow the death penalty and the original framers didn't either but we have the 8th amendment and can read it today with new understanding. The fact that others make passing reference to the state taking life (which is really just a copy and paste of Locke btw) but never explicitly authorize the death penalty as its de facto practiced today I think makes a good case for its abolishment on 8th amendment grounds. We've had 1st amendment case law trump arguments on more recent amendments. Why aren't the new cases controlling? Obviously everyone's read the 1st. Shouldn't the others ALWAYS have precedent? No we understand that certain values (not chronology) have precedent. These values are not only found in the constitution but in our and other countries consensus. Of course I want judges to not look at the US constitution in isolation and see it as a living document. Again, the court as agreed when its comes to the death penalty by using "extra constitutional ideas" to help interpret what the constitution means today. Again, its not the bible or Koran, it can't be read isolation.

And Scalia even has conceded that in his marijuana case were he imposed his personal view extra constitutional view on interstate commerce (one that I personally don't disagree with)

But its obvious you don't agree and fall into the textualist or originalst camp (originalism is a fraud IMO). Its why I like thomas so much more than Scalia. Thomas always is consistent, scalia, alito and roberts never are. I don't mind the other liberal not being so, not so much because of their decisions but because they're stated ideology allows it and their not lying about what they're doing.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
So SCOTUS has stayed the Texas abortion restrictions case, pending cert decision.

Looks like we're going to have some pretty big cases going into campaign season. Abortion, affirmative action..

I wonder how GOP operatives feel about the outcome of each case.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
HylianTom said:
So SCOTUS has stayed the Texas abortion restrictions case, pending cert decision.

Looks like we're going to have some pretty big cases going into campaign season. Abortion, affirmative action..

I wonder how GOP operatives feel about the outcome of each case.
Click to expand...
Every case is big now just do to its closeness to a replacement which has the chance of changing the composition of the court.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Metaphoreus said:
Scalia's right on this. Both the Fifth Amendment (ratified contemporaneously with the Eighth) and the Fourteenth Amendment (ratified some 75 years later) imply that the death penalty is allowed, so long as "due process" is provided. Any reading of "cruel and unusual" that prohibits what the Constitution elsewhere (and subsequently) clearly permits is disingenuous. Such a reading could only be endorsed because of prior (non-Constitutional) philosophical or political commitments.
Click to expand...

I've read the whole back and forth (so far) on this and am going to agree with Meta on this one, legally speaking.

I don't see anything in the Constitution that directly bans the death penalty, even if I accept the argument that our understanding of "cruel and unusual" has changed.

That said, I do think there are due process claims because the death penalty is used disproportionately against minorities and I do believe bans can be enforced by the judicial system this way, but not though anything else right now.

Thought it was only right to say I agree with meta after all the times we've argued. :)
 
R

Roland_Gunner

Member
HylianTom said:
So SCOTUS has stayed the Texas abortion restrictions case, pending cert decision.

Looks like we're going to have some pretty big cases going into campaign season. Abortion, affirmative action..

I wonder how GOP operatives feel about the outcome of each case.
Click to expand...

Has to be a good sign that Kennedy voted to grant the stay.
 
M

Macho Madness

Member
http://deadline.com/2015/06/donald-trump-response-nbc-lawsuit-threat-brian-williams-1201461940/

As of today, Donald J. Trump is no longer affiliated with NBC. Mr. Trump stands by his statements on illegal immigration, which are accurate. NBC is weak, and like everybody else is trying to be politically correct— that is why our country is in serious trouble.

Mr. Trump says, “We must have strong borders and not let illegal immigrants enter the United States. As has been stated continuously in the press, people are pouring across our borders unabated. Public reports routinely state great amounts of crime are being committed by illegal immigrants. This must be stopped and it must be stopped now. Long ago I told NBC that I would not being doing The Apprentice because I am running for President in order to Make our Country Great Again.”

Mr. Trump continued, “If NBC is so weak and so foolish to not understand the serious illegal immigration problem in the United States, coupled with the horrendous and unfair trade deals we are making with Mexico, then their contract violating closure of Miss Universe/Miss USA will be determined in court. Furthermore, they will stand behind lying Brian Williams, but won’t stand behind people that tell it like it is, as unpleasant as that may be.”
Click to expand...
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
The Arizona ruling is a potentially huge deal isn't it? If we can somehow get ballot initiatives in 2016, it could really work in the Dems favor, no?
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
With this Texas ruling and 4 named dissents, it really seems like Roberts's dream of small, unanimous opinions has come crashing down. I guess that's the inevitable end game of when nine strangers are picked to live in a house, stop being polite and start being real.
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
ivysaur12 said:
With this Texas ruling and 4 named dissents, it really seems like Roberts's dream of small, unanimous opinions has come crashing down. I guess that's the inevitable end game of when nine strangers are picked to live in a house, stop being polite and start being real.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go in the hot tub after Scalia and RBG were in there.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
ivysaur12 said:
With this Texas ruling and 4 named dissents, it really seems like Roberts's dream of small, unanimous opinions has come crashing down. I guess that's the inevitable end game of when nine strangers are picked to live in a house, stop being polite and start being real.
Click to expand...

I don't do reality TV, but I'm certain I'd watch that. Holy hell.

Can we have mystery houseguests? They can add Judge Posner after a few weeks, just to stir things up.
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
Oblivion said:
The Arizona ruling is a potentially huge deal isn't it? If we can somehow get ballot initiatives in 2016, it could really work in the Dems favor, no?
Click to expand...
I can almost guarantee we'll have one on the ballot in Ohio in 2016.

They actually tried a few years ago, but the plan was kind of lousy and it didn't pass.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
BertramCooper said:
I can almost guarantee we'll have one on the ballot in Ohio in 2016.

They actually tried a few years ago, but the plan was kind of lousy and it didn't pass.
Click to expand...

Yeah, someone mentioned it was in 2012, which must have been pretty bad if it couldn't get passed in a Dem wave year.

PhoenixDark said:
You can bet your ass rich liberals will make sure those ballot initiatives are ready to go by November 2016.
Click to expand...

They fucking better. This is of equal importance to the presidency itself.

edit: Also, reading more about the ruling, we REALLY dodged a bullet it seems because if the court voted the other way, it would have taken power away from governors to veto redistricting maps, which would mean Dems would be even more fucked than they already are.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
Dem groups in Ohio seem very bad at organizing for ballot initiatives. See: pot.

States with initiated statutes are:

Alaska
Washington
Oregon
California
Idaho
Nevada
Arizona
Montana
Wyoming
Colorado
North Dakota
South Dakota
Nebraska
Oklahoma
Missouri
Arkansas
Michigan
Ohio
Maine
Massachusetts

Dems would really only get big wins in Michigan and Ohio here, and those are issues that could win in 2016. Pennsylvania and North Carolina would be nice, but, no initiative process.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
Oblivion said:
Yeah, someone mentioned it was in 2012, which must have been pretty bad if it couldn't get passed in a Dem wave year.



They fucking better. This is of equal importance to the presidency itself.

edit: Also, reading more about the ruling, we REALLY dodged a bullet it seems because if the court voted the other way, it would have taken power away from governors to veto redistricting maps, which would mean Dems would be even more fucked than they already are.
Click to expand...

and that is the Democrats fault. The midterms under Obama and 94' under Clinton were catastrophic.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Holy fuck, the Ohio redistricting initiative got ANNIHILATED. 63% voted against it.

Well, it was a nice dream once.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Black Mamba said:
I've read the whole back and forth (so far) on this and am going to agree with Meta on this one, legally speaking.

I don't see anything in the Constitution that directly bans the death penalty, even if I accept the argument that our understanding of "cruel and unusual" has changed.
Click to expand...
That said, I do think there are due process claims because the death penalty is used disproportionately against minorities and I do believe bans can be enforced by the judicial system this way, but not though anything else right now.

Thought it was only right to say I agree with meta after all the times we've argued. :)
Click to expand...

Neither do I see anything that says separate but equal is unconstitutional that seems to be bringing a personal opinion into constitutional questions, nor do I see privacy mentioned, criminal defendants aren't guaranteed being read their rights. The only way meta's argument can stand (which I think it can btw) is if you adopt a thomas type textualism that hold most of the 20th century case law was decided incorrectly

anyways I just saw this on twitter and though it was probably about gay marrage I think it applies for a lot of things including the death penalty

CIcRiokWUAEC67R.jpg


Obviously I'm not appealing to him as some god or something I just think its a great quote.


I mean me and meta disagree fundamentally on the courts and law in general so I'm not trying to convince him by any means
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
NYCmetsfan said:
Neither do I see anything that says separate but equal is unconstitutional that seems to be bringing a personal opinion into constitutional questions, nor do I see privacy mentioned, criminal defendants aren't guaranteed being read their rights. The only way meta's argument can stand (which I think it can btw) is if you adopt a thomas type textualism that hold most of the 20th century case law was decided incorrectly

anyways I just saw this on twitter and though it was probably about gay marrage I think it applies for a lot of things including the death penalty

CIcRiokWUAEC67R.jpg


Obviously I'm not appealing to him as some god or something I just think its a great quote.


I mean me and meta disagree fundamentally on the courts and law in general so I'm not trying to convince him by any means
Click to expand...


There are unenumerated rights in the Constitution. Privacy is one of them.

I don't agree with your take that the Death Penalty is either cruel or unusual. Someday it might, but I don't agree that's the case right now. And the Constitution most certainly allowed for capital punishment during its ratification, so that is not up for debate.
 
N

NobleXenon

Member
Speaking of gerrymandering, are there any kind of auto-generated electoral college maps someone created if say the number of House of Representatives changed or certain territories became states?

I was wondering if adding more House Members (Let's say it was upped to 501) would change things in favor for certain political parties for either the House or Presidency control.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
I find this sort of fascinating in terms of the generational divide on this particular issue (note the RT, also note this is from 2011, also note she hasn't tweeted since 2014, which I get).

UnLQHVY.png


I also don't really see this like Roberts's dissent where it felt as if he believes marriage equality is probably good public policy. Alito's dissent was, like Thomas and Scalia's, ugly. Not really a commentary on anything more than Meghan McCain and John -- that's the reality of why Obergefell is not Roe.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
The entire Kardashian (and Jenner) family is cynical as fuck, to the point I don't believe a single thing they try to sell. There's something wrong when a mom pimps her daughters.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Wilsongt said:
GAF is so gungho about Bernie. It's so naively cute. :3
Click to expand...

I mean, I really like him. I love what he's saying, but I also know he doesn't stand a goddamn chance. He's running to move the needle because he's read the mood and sees that if there was ever a moment to move the needle left this is it. God bless him for it, but anyone that expects anything more is fooling themselves.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
thezerofire said:
It's not nearly as crazy as Reddit though
Click to expand...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/why-bernie-sanders-will-become-the-democratic-nominee_b_7685364.html

or as delusional as this.

Also, Sanders has a better chance than Hillary of defeating Jeb Bush or any other GOP challenger. According to a POLITICO piece titled The 2016 Results We Can Already Predict, Democrats across the nation simply have to vote in a similar manner to 2012 for Sanders to win:
Click to expand...
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
By the way, the EPA ruling isn't as bad as it's made out to be is it? From what I've read, the SC didn't dispute the EPA's ability to regulate toxins. They just wanted them to write a new report that took costs into account.
 
E

ErasureAcer

Banned
Wilsongt said:
GAF is so gungho about Bernie. It's so naively cute. :3
Click to expand...

Hardly, there's plenty of people here supporting Clinton in this thread. They got the next 10 presidents mapped out based on demographics while totally ignoring what they stand for: Female, Hispanic, Homosexual, Transgender, Hermaphrodite, Asian-American, Islamic, Atheist, Agnostic, Antartican-American.
 
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