• 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 Interim Thread of cunning stunts and desperate punts

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JayDubya

Banned
lawblob said:
On another topic, anybody else see this NY Times article? Interesting stuff; apparently over the last 8 years the number of foreign courts that cite to the decisions of the US Supreme Court has decreased dramatically.

Because the US is the oldest constitutional democracy, foreign courts have always looked to US Supreme Court decisions in drafting their own opinions, which in turn has been one of the primary ways the US has exported its democracy throughout the world. But as other nation's legal systems develop, the US remains adamant in never referencing other countries legal decisions in our own cases, and other countries are starting to get pissed.
Click to expand...

Um. Good? Let them be pissed?

Rulings in other countries have no bearing in ours.
 
C

capslock

Is jealous of Matlock's emoticon
artredis1980 said:
again where the hell is Obama with his big economic speech, stupid americans will eat up this stupid McCain plan, where the hell is Obama?
Click to expand...

Um, where were you 2 days ago?
 
C

Cheebs

Member
Voting begins today via early voting in Virginia:
Virginia voters will start casting their ballots on Friday at early voting sites around the commonwealth. Another half dozen states will open up early voting next week before the candidates even meet for their first debate of the campaign. In all, 36 of the 50 states will allow early voting this year, including many key battleground states like Ohio and Colorado. As many as one-third of all voters are expected to make their selection before Election Day.
Click to expand...
 
B

Barrett2

Member
JayDubya said:
Um. Good? Let them be pissed?

Rulings in other countries have no bearing in ours.
Click to expand...


Thats not really the point. Obviously, foreign jurisdiction's rulings don't have any 'controlling' impact on our case law, and nobody argues against that. The idea, rather, is that US Courts should at least be willing to include other countries legal principles in the dicta of our legal decisions, so as to encourage other countries to continue relying on and quoting our own legal principles. Right now the US views the information exchange as a purely one way street; but in order for us to expect other countries to continue looking to our laws as guidance, we should at least be willing to throw them a bone every now and then, via dicta.

And also, it should be noted that back in the day American courts quoted and cited English decisions all the time. The foundations of much of our common law is directly brought over from England.
 
S

Steve Youngblood

Member
Incognito said:
There are whispers and mummerings about the Keating 5 from the media every now and then. Hopefully, Obama can push the ball along to a point where he leaves the media to connect the dots therefore leaving Obama's hands relatively clean.
Click to expand...
That would be convenient, now, wouldn't it? Too convenient, in fact. He's got some tough questions to answer, now. Questions that only a maverick like McCain is brave enough to ask. How low is Obama willing to stoop in order to win this election? First, he caused gas prices to go up, and now people are losing their homes -- all because of one man.
 
G

gcubed

Member
Frank the Great said:
I don't understand this:

men M 53 O 44
woman O 53 M 43

Women are always sampled higher than men, so if Obama is winning women by that much and has a smaller losing margin among men than McCain has among women, then shouldn't Obama be ahead by at least a couple points?
Click to expand...

isnt Ras the one where there LV scenario is completely fucked?
 
J

JayDubya

Banned
Hitokage said:
Magna Carta? All that John Locke bullshit you love so much? ;)
Click to expand...

I'm talking in the here and now, and you want to bring things back before "Rock Band" split off from "Guitar Hero," if you'll pardon the metaphor.
 
S

syllogism

Member
Frank the Great said:
I don't understand this:

men M 53 O 44
woman O 53 M 43

Women are always sampled higher than men, so if Obama is winning women by that much and has a smaller losing margin among men than McCain has among women, then shouldn't Obama be ahead by at least a couple points?
Click to expand...
His LV sauce is probably off, but that could partly be due to rounding.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
OuterWorldVoice said:
However, the very fine medical practitioners here just delivered my beautiful baby girl, Isla. So bam! She and mom are sleeping the sleep of the blessed. Goodnight gaf.
Click to expand...
Congrats, Frank. Great name. Happy parenting!

You will never be rested again.
 
C

Cheebs

Member
Ras was pretty spot on in 2004 and has a high ranking on 538's pollster rating still remember. They were also pretty good in the primaries.
 
P

Price Dalton

Member
Steve Youngblood said:
That would be convenient, now, wouldn't it? Too convenient, in fact. He's got some tough questions to answer, now. Questions that only a maverick like McCain is brave enough to ask. How low is Obama willing to stoop in order to win this election? First, he caused gas prices to go up, and now people are losing their homes -- all because of one man.
Click to expand...

This.

Wake up, folks. The guy wields this much power and influence as a mere candidate; imagine the havoc he'll wreak on our nation if he actually gets elected.
 
E

Evlar

Banned
lawblob said:
Thats not really the point. Obviously, foreign jurisdiction's rulings don't have any 'controlling' impact on our case law, and nobody argues against that. The idea, rather, is that US Courts should at least be willing to include other countries legal principles in the dicta of our legal decisions, so as to encourage other countries to continue relying on and quoting our own legal principles. Right now the US views the information exchange as a purely one way street; but in order for us to expect other countries to continue looking to our laws as guidance, we should at least be willing to throw them a bone every now and then, via dicta.

And also, it should be noted that back in the day American courts quoted and cited English decisions all the time. The foundations of much of our common law is directly brought over from England.
Click to expand...
This. Early American courts would have been perplexed at how, exactly, they were supposed to build case law without importing precedents from England and colonial governments. The Supreme Court still does this occasionally.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
Cheebs said:
Ras was pretty spot on in 2004 and has a high ranking on 538's pollster rating still remember. They were also pretty good in the primaries.
Click to expand...
True. As for the tracking poll, they have adjusted their party ID weightings to sample republicans and democrats almost equally. Every other tracking poll samples democrats 5-9 points higher, because that reflects actual US registrations. Rasmussen made this adjustment last week. That is why they lag all of the other trackers.
 
E

elostyle

Never forget! I'm Dumb!
lawblob said:
Thats not really the point. Obviously, foreign jurisdiction's rulings don't have any 'controlling' impact on our case law, and nobody argues against that. The idea, rather, is that US Courts should at least be willing to include other countries legal principles in the dicta of our legal decisions, so as to encourage other countries to continue relying on and quoting our own legal principles. Right now the US views the information exchange as a purely one way street; but in order for us to expect other countries to continue looking to our laws as guidance, we should at least be willing to throw them a bone every now and then, via dicta.

And also, it should be noted that back in the day American courts quoted and cited English decisions all the time. The foundations of much of our common law is directly brought over from England.
Click to expand...
You may keep your bone if that is your motivation.
 
P

PhatSaqs

Banned
artredis1980 said:
again where the hell is Obama with his big economic speech, stupid americans will eat up this stupid McCain plan, where the hell is Obama?
Click to expand...
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/19/campaign.wrap/index.html

Obama planned to meet with his economic advisers in Coral Gables, Florida, Friday morning and is expected to make a statement about the economy afterward.

Obama said his economic team would not present a detailed economic plan at this time, "given the gravity of this situation, and based on conversations I have had with both Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke." Obama said he would not present his plan until the Treasury and Federal Reserve presented theirs.

"It is critical at this point that the markets and the public have confidence that their work will be unimpeded by partisan wrangling, and that leaders in both parties work in concert to solve the problem at hand," Obama said.
Click to expand...
 
B

BotoxAgent

Member
Jason's Ultimatum said:
Only 6 pages were added since I was on last night? PoliGaf is slowing down. Usually when I wake up in the morning, I have to go through 15 or more pages. :lol
Click to expand...

Probably because everyone is not as panicky anymore since Barack has surged back up in the polls, lol.
 
C

Cheebs

Member
GhaleonEB said:
True. As for the tracking poll, they have adjusted their party ID weightings to sample republicans and democrats almost equally. Every other tracking poll samples democrats 5-9 points higher, because that reflects actual US registrations. Rasmussen made this adjustment last week. That is why they lag all of the other trackers.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know, their dem advantage is like only 4%, but before we mock them we should take into consideration they have a reliable track record so far.
 
S

Son of Godzilla

Banned
Cheebs said:
Ras was pretty spot on in 2004 and has a high ranking on 538's pollster rating still remember. They were also pretty good in the primaries.
Click to expand...
Ras was only good because that's the poll Pubs lined up the numbers to match.
 
N

NewLib

Banned
Why should America have to quote other countries Judiciary decisions? Our system is built on a foundation which is absolutely NOTHING like the rest of the world outside of the UK and other former UK Colonies.

And American judges reference British law all the time as it kind of has to when it talks about Common Law. But the idea that America isnt referencing French or German law is ridiculous because our systems of judiciary law are so completely different it would be pointless.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
Cheebs said:
Yeah I know, their dem advantage is like only 4%, but before we mock them we should take into consideration they have a reliable track record so far.
Click to expand...
I wasn't mocking them. Just pointing out the reason.
 
G

gcubed

Member
so... with all the ramapant regulation going on in the market shoring up wall street and the huge gains it got the last 2 days. How does this bode for McCain/Palins "we want less regulation"... or have the sufficiently moved on from there and since its working, are now for more regulation?
 
C

Cheebs

Member
Son of Godzilla said:
Ras was only good because that's the poll Pubs lined up the numbers to match.
Click to expand...
Gallup was spot on in 2004 too though lol

gcubed said:
so... with all the ramapant regulation going on in the market shoring up wall street and the huge gains it got the last 2 days. How does this bode for McCain/Palins "we want less regulation"... or have the sufficiently moved on from there and since its working, are now for more regulation?
Click to expand...
They have been pro-regulation since like tuesday.
 
N

NewLib

Banned
Hitokage said:
Montesquieu wasn't American OR English...
Click to expand...

What does Montesquieu have to do with common law? Also the British government had already been well divided between Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary by that point so his ideas weren't new.
 
Keylime

Keylime

ÏÎ¯Î»Ï á¼Î¾ÎµÏÎγλοÏÏον καί ÏεÏδολÏγον οá½Îº εἰÏÏν
Anyone get that Obama Camp e-mail?

I signed up for the Jersey Shore training on 9/29. Actually kind of excited to see if I'd get selected.
 
D

Dr_Cogent

Banned
lawblob said:
Thats not really the point. Obviously, foreign jurisdiction's rulings don't have any 'controlling' impact on our case law, and nobody argues against that. The idea, rather, is that US Courts should at least be willing to include other countries legal principles in the dicta of our legal decisions, so as to encourage other countries to continue relying on and quoting our own legal principles. Right now the US views the information exchange as a purely one way street; but in order for us to expect other countries to continue looking to our laws as guidance, we should at least be willing to throw them a bone every now and then, via dicta.

And also, it should be noted that back in the day American courts quoted and cited English decisions all the time. The foundations of much of our common law is directly brought over from England.
Click to expand...

No, we shouldn't. This idea is just dumb. Our courts should make decisions based on our Constitution.
 
B

Barrett2

Member
gcubed said:
so... with all the ramapant regulation going on in the market shoring up wall street and the huge gains it got the last 2 days. How does this bode for McCain/Palins "we want less regulation"... or have the sufficiently moved on from there and since its working, are now for more regulation?
Click to expand...

Yesterday McCain said he wanted to regulate on Chris Cox with his bare knuckles. McCain is walking a fine-line, he wants to appear outraged at the lack of accountability, but he refuses to say he will do anything specific, other than firing Cox and set up a 9/11 style commission. Considering that both of these are inevitable to happen regardless of who wins, they are essentially hot air.
 
X

xnipx

Member
I swear to God I wish I could just backhand mccain and ask him why he keeps blatantly lying on obama to the public.I feel like he actually gave a pretty good speech even tho it completely contradicts his stances on regulation and the lying piece of shit jab at obama was completely unnecessary Imo. and CNN just replayed the clip without even calling him out on it. is it not their job to refute lies and inform the general public of the truth? if mccain flat out said obama was a muslim terrorist would they just play the clip and just go to commercial?
 
N

NewLib

Banned
Dr_Cogent said:
No, we shouldn't. This idea is just dumb. Our courts should make decisions based on our Constitution.
Click to expand...

Well the Supreme Court should make decisions based on the Constitution and Federal Statutes. There isnt much common law that gets up to them.

The State courts however still base a ton of their decisions on common law especially civil cases as not everything has or will be codified.
 
B

Barrett2

Member
Dr_Cogent said:
No, we shouldn't. This idea is just dumb. Our courts should make decisions based on our Constitution.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of judicial decisions have nothing to do with the Constitution.

Also, it should be recognized that even the Constitution says that treaties are valid law, and certain treaties require us to follow foreign law, etc.

In other words, your post is emblematic of the entire argument behind the article. Nobody is arguing the US courts should begin deciding cases based on foreign law, the idea is that we should continue to promote other countries adopting our values, legal system, etc., but in order to do that we can't keep hiding behind a wall of outrage at the thought of any foreign law coming into play in the American legal system. In my opinion, doing so has very limited application, but it shouldn't be tossed aside completely.

Other countries law does not 'decide' our legal cases, but you can make the argument judges should at least be permitted to cite comparative laws in their dicta.
 
C

Cheebs

Member
Dr_Cogent said:
No, we shouldn't. This idea is just dumb. Our courts should make decisions based on our Constitution.
Click to expand...
I agree. I am a Europe-loving diehard librul but the idea of considering other countries law precedents and ideals is absurd.
 
D

Dr_Cogent

Banned
lawblob said:
The vast majority of judicial decisions have nothing to do with the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Regardless, they shouldn't have anything to do with what other foreign countries do. The idea to the contrary is ludicrous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
RNC suspending GOP Feb '16 debate with NBC (Because lol CNBC)
2 3 4 5
212
19K
OuterLimits replied
  • Locked
The Democratic National Committee Chair Debate |OT| - Dem One: A Politics Story
2
79
8K
kirblar replied
  • Locked
NYT: G.O.P. Urges Donald Trump to Broaden Outreach to Black Voters
2 3 4
178
21K
mckmas8808 replied
  • Locked
Hillary Clinton retweets Slate voter guide calling her most corrupt candidate
3
4K
ModBot replied
  • Locked
NYT: "Trump-Size Idea for a New President: Build Something Inspiring"
2
74
9K
jerry113 replied
Top Bottom