Banning all social media for teens, Moving voting to 25 unless you serve in the military, A border wall with Canada. Yep, that's a libertarian.
But, compared to the rest of the field. He's the closest you can get to a libertarian.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
But, compared to the rest of the field. He's the closest you can get to a libertarian.
True, but those superdelegates are not the majority. Here's what I found via Ballotpedia: "In 2024, there are an estimated 4,672 delegates: 3,933 pledged delegates and 739 automatic delegates—more commonly known as superdelegates." So superdelegates can help you but those superdelegates are NOT the majority.
Just can’t see it. No way they will roll with Kamala.
The only thing that might lose the black women for the DNC is jumping over Kamala. Jessie Lee Peterson said he doesn't think they can skip her because of this. Too many cities are run by black females now. If they skip her to nominate Newsom.... LOL. Popcorn.
I watched EVERY GOP primary debate. Hated Vivek. Didn't care for his policy stances and his attitude. To each their own but I would not be a fan of his if he were nominated for an office.
Actually, with respect to the nominee, they CAN'T. And by forcing the issue, they risk severely fracturing the party.
But Trump and Biden aren’t far apart in age. Your implication of an age limit would apply to both. So by default you were talking about both.
They’ll have to come up with some juicy golden parachute package to make her go away willingly and continue being supportive of the party.
Who do you think was so embarrasing, he's being talked about as someone who should step down?
Now, knowing this, who do you think I could be talking about?
You've clearly not actually watched him and are just nitpicking quotes to fit your ideas.... like you do with everything. LOL.
Erin Burnett commented on the CNN poll that said Trump won 67%-33%.
She said” Who are these 33%?
Every pundit tonight is saying it was 100-zero. “
She said it in a disgusted way, it was funny.
She said” Who are these 33%?
Every pundit tonight is saying it was 100-zero. “
She said it in a disgusted way, it was funny.
Yes. I was just saying... If it's close... the superdelegates can swing it how they want and they are the money side of the party so once they make a decision tons of other people are just going to fall in line. The party of democracy after all... LULZ.
Why? What things do they want for this country that makes them idiots?
At the end of the day, unless Biden refuses to run (and I don't think there is a chance in hell that Jill would support that, unless SHE became the nominee) it's going to be a pretty tall order, at this late date, to replace him.
They could hope that he croaks, but there is no way in hell they want Kamala running, so she'd need a pretty nice golden parachute to go away. I don't think Newsome can win. I think he's shot his wad for this cycle. Honestly, Michelle Obama would probably be their best Hail Mary.
They could hope that he croaks, but there is no way in hell they want Kamala running, so she'd need a pretty nice golden parachute to go away. I don't think Newsome can win. I think he's shot his wad for this cycle. Honestly, Michelle Obama would probably be their best Hail Mary.
Most Trump supporters, individual takes on things. Are hilariously awful. Like them saying the 10 commandments in schools. Does not violate the establishment clause.
Fair enough. Just saying his podcast appearances were 1 to 2 hours of open q and a. You get a better feel for someone than in a debate with 8 people on a stage with 20 seconds to answer.
It doesn't at all. Educate yourself.
Also, I don't think Trump knocked it out of the park by any means. He's actually not a very good debater (technically speaking), but he's tough to land a punch on. This was way more about (and most would agree) Biden just coming across as a man that is suffering from the onset of dementia.
Have to kind of wonder why Trump didn't hammer back with "I have no idea what he just said BUT...." I laughed when he did that the first time Biden gave an incoherent statement. He should've kept that up.
Yeah, it's tough for me to see Biden dropping out either. He's wanted to be president his entire life and has the office. He's not going to surrender it. I also don't think Michelle Obama wants anything to do with a campaign. And by all accounts there are tensions between she and the Bidens.
Tonight's debate is also a big win for RFK, Jr. in my opinion. He wasn't on the stage but if he was, he would've been more cogent than Biden at least as an alternative.
''Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State''-Thomas Jefferson, 1802.
The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.' Reynolds v. United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164, 25 L.Ed. 244.-Justice Hugo Black
Stone v. Graham - Wikipedia
Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980), was a court case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a Kentucky statute was unconstitutional and in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, because it lacked a nonreligious, legislative purpose. The statute required the posting of a copy of the Ten Commandments on the wall of each public classroom in the state. The copies of the Ten Commandments were purchased with private funding, but the Court ruled that because they were being placed in public classrooms they were in violation of the First Amendment.
Dems cheated their ass off last election and most anyone with half a brain knows it. My fear is they will do it again. I just dont think they are going to let Trump back in or anyone for that matter. They have their own anti American agenda going and will dare the American people to do something about their nefarious efforts to remain in power. They are all truly evil IMO and deserve a firing squad.
Like I said, Trump is cool. His supporters are mostly idiots. I'm not a RAH-RAH Trump guy. He was just better than the other options.
Dementia is a bitch. You can’t tell the disease when to come and go.
I know at least 2 dozen Trump "voters" and none of them care a wit about displaying the 10 commandments in schools. I mean, nobody ever thought to even bring it up. It's mostly about sound domestic policies.
Issues like Federally mandated abortion, religion in schools, trans rights for minors, ribbons, confederate statues etc. Those are the dominion of the stupid 40 percent (20 for each side)
Normal people don't even THINK about that crap. And since, as the current polls indicate, half or more of American voters support Trump, it's illogical to make a statement that "most Trump supporters" support that nonsense.
Issues like Federally mandated abortion, religion in schools, trans rights for minors, ribbons, confederate statues etc. Those are the dominion of the stupid 40 percent (20 for each side)
Normal people don't even THINK about that crap. And since, as the current polls indicate, half or more of American voters support Trump, it's illogical to make a statement that "most Trump supporters" support that nonsense.
Unless Trump miraculously beats all the odds and subverts the election manipulation, the Next President will not be there by the will of the voters. He/she/she-he will be essentially planted and in lockstep with the globalist agenda of tyranny.
LIke I said, that stuff is for the stupids (on both sides)
You specifically said there should be an age limit. This age limit would obviously apply to both. Doesn’t matter who you based the need for age limits on. It would disqualify both. You can’t say “Biden is impaired, there should be age limits, well ‘cept for Trump. He’s ok I guess”
One of the best ways to improve our government would be for the single-subject amendment to be ratified. The only way that is going to happen though (and the chances are slim and none) would be for a constitutional convention to be called for by 33 state legislatures (and then you'd still need 38 states to ratify it.)
It's a shame, because deficit spending only concerns the citizens of this country. It doesn't bother our government at ALL. In fact, in spite of all the hot air they spew about it, they actually PREFER it.
It's a shame, because deficit spending only concerns the citizens of this country. It doesn't bother our government at ALL. In fact, in spite of all the hot air they spew about it, they actually PREFER it.
Ok, that's fine too. But I was saying it because of how Biden is obv running. As a dementia patient.
So you think putting the 10 commandments in a room is the same as establishing a religion for the state? LOL''Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State''-Thomas Jefferson, 1802.
The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.' Reynolds v. United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164, 25 L.Ed. 244.-Justice Hugo Black
Stone v. Graham - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980), was a court case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a Kentucky statute was unconstitutional and in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, because it lacked a nonreligious, legislative purpose. The statute required the posting of a copy of the Ten Commandments on the wall of each public classroom in the state. The copies of the Ten Commandments were purchased with private funding, but the Court ruled that because they were being placed in public classrooms they were in violation of the First Amendment.
They would have to classify the mainstream media outlets as pornography for all the on air orgasms being had over Michelle If she-he is the nominee.
Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa.
Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.
No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion
Which btw, this was already voted on in 1980. A Kentucky classroom put up the 10 commandments. The supreme court said it violated the 1stA.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
JaMarcus Russell ($36.4m career earnings) accused of stealing $74k from his HS
- Latest: PopesReignOverCardinals
-
