• 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 2016 |OT13| For Queen and Country

Status
Not open for further replies.
U

User 463088

Banned
shinra-bansho said:
And you all make fun of adam for his horrible horrible taste.
Click to expand...
tumblr_inline_n1834bVa7D1spzj7s.gif
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
TestOfTide said:
We need people like Maher as a constant reminder to conservatives that political incorrectness goes in all directions.
Click to expand...

It is completely ironic to me that the ABC version of his show Politically Incorrect was actually better than Real Time has been likely because there was a level of self-control Maher had to maintain in order to not get cancelled.

The comment he made that also got him cancelled also ironically was probably one of the most salient points he's ever made in his career.
 
C

Carpe Carnim

Member
AntraxSuicide said:
Hastert Rule would prevent this. Ryan just won't bring up such bills for a vote.

God I want the House.
Click to expand...

You have no idea how disgusted I was with my fellow Americans in 2010 when she was ousted from her Speakership, only to elevate Cryin'John.

The funny thing about Ryan pissing on swing-state Repubs while only holding a fraction of their current margin, would be that the Dems could make a deal w/ a few of them to vote for a "moderate" Gooper as Speaker, ousting Ryan and giving a giant fucking bird to the Freedumb Caucus. Ryan would have to weigh a coup from his left against the Hastert Rule BS
 
T

TestOfTide

Banned
excelsiorlef said:
It is completely ironic to me that the ABC version of his show Politically Incorrect was actually better than Real Time has been likely because there was a level of self-control Maher had to maintain in order to not get cancelled.

The comment he made that also got him cancelled also ironically was probably one of the most salient points he's ever made in his career.
Click to expand...

I mean yeah Maher can be overbearing, but I just love New Rules way too much to hate the man.
 
P

Pyrokai

Member
I don't understand how one HALF of ONE branch of government can literally prevent all of the government from functioning. I want the House back, too, dammit!

But seriously....why can the House block the Senate and Presidency simply by not allowing a vote? Why do they even have that OPTION?!
 
T

TestOfTide

Banned
Pyrokai said:
I don't understand how one HALF of ONE branch of government can literally prevent all of the government from functioning. I want the House back, too, dammit!

But seriously....why can the House block the Senate and Presidency simply by not allowing a vote? Why do they even have that OPTION?!
Click to expand...

Well hopefully there are parts of the Constitution that a liberal SCOTUS could potentially interpret as meaning the house has a duty to actually do its damn job.
 
C

Carpe Carnim

Member
Pyrokai said:
But seriously....why can the House block the Senate and Presidency simply by not allowing a vote? Why do they even have that OPTION?!
Click to expand...

That's an entire Doctorate in History/PoliSci worth of a question.

Nutshell: Founders wanted the chamber closest to the People to have control over the purse-strings, which also limited the ability of Presidents to wage destructive and entangling wars. Plus a lot of paranoia, but largely the money thing
 
P

Pyrokai

Member
TestOfTide said:
Well hopefully there are parts of the Constitution that a liberal SCOTUS could potentially interpret as meaning the house has a duty to actually do its damn job.
Click to expand...

What kind of case would the SCOTUS have to be presented with?

Carpe Carnim said:
That's an entire Doctorate in History/PoliSci worth of a question.

Nutshell: Founders wanted the chamber closest to the People to have control over the purse-strings, which also limited the ability of Presidents to wage destructive and entangling wars. Plus a lot of paranoia, but largely the money thing
Click to expand...

Too bad the House no longer represents the People. Thanks, gerrymandering! Why didn't the Founders think of THAT?! -_-
 
C

Cyanity

Banned
operon said:
How the hell is there 81 updates pending
Click to expand...

I uh, turned off automatic updating. As a result, I usually do a mass update of only the apps I actually use + the backend and security stuff. But there are probably ~50 things I never use and refuse to update.
 
C

Carpe Carnim

Member
Pyrokai said:
What kind of case would the SCOTUS have to be presented with?
Click to expand...

None, no lower court would give standing to anyone to bring it, and if they did, the Roberts court has an Alaska-sized chubby for throwing out cases on concerns of standing. Plus it's antithetical to the idea of co-equal branches to have one dictating the policy and schedule of another


Too bad the House no longer represents the People. Thanks, gerrymandering! Why didn't the Founders think of THAT?! -_-
Click to expand...

Yeah, GOP really has fucked shit up, but lazy, crazy, hateful voters keep em there, so DEMOCRACY WORKZ!!!
 
T

TestOfTide

Banned
Pyrokai said:
What kind of case would the SCOTUS have to be presented with?
Click to expand...

Well it would have to involve a lawsuit. I can think of the following kinds of lawsuits that could force the GOP to do its job:

- executive branch sues the Senate for refusing to give a hearing or vote on POTUS's nominees; SCOTUS could rule that the constitution requires the Senate to give at least a hearing or vote.

- House Minority leader or executive branch sues the Speaker of the House for putting unnecessary riders to bills; SCOTUS rules that riders have to have at least a minimal relevance to the main bill.

- Same as the second, but for the reason of the Speaker not putting Senate bills up to a vote; SCOTUS rules that House has a duty to put passed Senate bills up to a vote and vise versa.
 
P

Pyrokai

Member
Carpe Carnim said:
None, no lower court would give standing to anyone to bring it, and if they did, the Roberts court has an Alaska-sized chubby for throwing out cases on concerns of standing. Plus it's antithetical to the idea of co-equal branches to have one dictating the policy and schedule of another
Click to expand...

Sorry if I'm being daft, but I'm not sure what exactly you're saying. You're basically saying that they could basically do nothing about it?
 
C

Carpe Carnim

Member
Nazgul_Hunter said:
If the Trump statue was fair game, I think this was too.
Click to expand...

This is what I said would happen when the Trump statues showed up.

Sauce. Goose. Gander.

I despise the fact that we have all the worst aspects of the politics in Transmetropolitan, but none of the bowel-disrupters and temporary genetic-modifications. Sad!
 
P

Pyrokai

Member
TestOfTide said:
Well it would have to involve a lawsuit. I can think of the following kinds of lawsuits that could force the GOP to do its job:

- executive branch sues the Senate for refusing to give a hearing or vote on POTUS's nominees; SCOTUS could rule that the constitution requires the Senate to give at least a hearing or vote.

- House Minority leader or executive branch sues the Speaker of the House for putting unnecessary riders to bills; SCOTUS rules that riders have to have at least a minimal relevance to the main bill.

- Same as the second, but for the reason of the Speaker not putting Senate bills up to a vote; SCOTUS rules that House has a duty to put passed Senate bills up to a vote and vise versa.
Click to expand...

Ah, okay. This makes sense.

But without a time limit, what's the difference in what they're doing now? They could just say "we'll vote on it in about 10 years"
 
G

Grief.exe

Member
Wilsongt said:
Fox tried to run with quid pro quo gate this morning but got shut down with facts.
"B-b-bit it LOOKS bad!!"

No it doesn't. Half the people looking at that email wouldn't understand it. Hell, I don't even understand it.
Not to mention half of Fox's audience may not even know what the quid pro quo is.
Click to expand...

We speak American in this country not European-Mexican
 
C

Carpe Carnim

Member
Pyrokai said:
Sorry if I'm being daft, but I'm not sure what exactly you're saying. You're basically saying that they could basically do nothing about it?
Click to expand...

Despite what Tides is saying, there is no precedent I can think of that would allow a co-equal branch to force another branch into actions. The Constitution doesn't mandate that either House or Senate MUST take up something just because it was passed by one of them. It's entirely the prerogative of the Majority what it will and won't vote on/for

Standing is sticky in questions of politics. It's a prerequisite of any court that the plaintiff have a grievance that can be addressed. Otherwise we would be inundated by lawyers brining cases for shit no one hired them to litigate.

"Hi Judge, I am suing my neighbor's insurance because he ran over a different neighbor's cat. I am in no way involved with this situation! Pay me!"
 
T

tbm24

Member
I think McMuffin did a better job than anyone I've heard thus far in the media explaining Trump's base and the problems with the current GOP. As far as white supremacy is concerned anyway.
 
W

Wolfgunblood Garopa

Member
The best are those segments on the cable news shows where they look at the electoral map with Clinton already set at 272, then they analyze national polls and discuss how Trump could turn it around with a great third debate.
 
G

gutter_trash

Banned
about Bill Maher, he isn't an intellectual who words his thoughts like say a Salmon Rushdi but it is perfectly legitimate to be critical about organized religion that have Conservative tenants that negate social-Liberalism

I am critical of organized religion and I distrust religious leaders who incorporate conservative political ideology into their theological sermons
 
P

Plumbob

Member
mo60 said:
It looks like YouGov's election model which is probably really flawed is showing trump leading in MS by like 3 points right now. Digging around it looks like their model is really flawed.
Click to expand...

Arent't they an A+ pollster?

Don't do this to yourself
 
C

Crocodile

Member
tbm24 said:
I think McMuffin did a better job than anyone I've heard thus far in the media explaining Trump's base and the problems with the current GOP. As far as white supremacy is concerned anyway.
Click to expand...

Is there a link to what he said? I don't know too much about his actual positions (and since he's definitely a conservative I doubt I would ever want to vote for him if I learned what they were in detail) but just in terms actually being a "principled conservative" he seems like the real deal. Actually getting a Republican of notoriety to acknowledge BLM (among other issues) feels like pulling teeth but it seemed like such an obvious "no shit" concept to him when he spoke about it that I was actually pleasantly surprised.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2
98
7K
digdug2 replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
52K
Topher replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
60K
DGrayson 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
Top Bottom