Dems Latest Scheme: ‘Balance’ Supreme Court by Adding Two Liberal Judges

You keep replying to me without answering such a simple question. I see by your avatar that you are not happy with how much your party is losing.

Do you care to answer my question or are you going to keep avoiding it?

It's a simple one. Happy to repost it if you have forgotten what it was.

 

No need to repost your deflection - which appears to be your favorite posting/trolling tactic. My answer stands. Troll elsewhere.

 

"No AS, I refuse to answer such an easy question as it would expose my own hypocrisy"
Thank you, Phyxius, I appreciate your honesty

 

Keep trolling. Someone might give you the attention you appear to so desperately crave.

 

I don't understand why you keep replying if you can't answer a simple question. Just don't reply. You've shown you don't have the guts to answer such an easy question.

No need to reply.

/conversation

 

What did I post that was a lie? Each point is fairly self evident

I don’t know about that - but I have been watching the disgusting tactics used by cons in N.C. quite closely. So I will just have to disagree unless you can give me specific examples.

Republicans like Americans unless they belong to a group they don’t like. I guess the same could be said for Demos as well.

I hope he can be an impartial and non-partisan judge, but looking at Trumps nominees for other positions I doubt he was picked to do this.

 

There are FOUR +30 GOP Districts

Texas 13 R+33 Republican
Texas 11 R+32 Republican
Georgia 9 R+31 Republican
Kentucky 5 R+31 Republican

And I'd say the GOP likely drew all 4 of them:

There are TWENTY FOUR Dem +30 districts and the Dems drew that vast majority of them.

New York 15 D+44 Democratic
New York 13 D+43 Democratic
Pennsylvania 3 D+41 Republican
California 13 D+40 Democratic
Illinois 7 D+38 Democratic
New York 7 D+38 Democratic
California 12 D+37 Democratic
California 37 D+37 Democratic
New York 5 D+37 Democratic
New Jersey 10 D+36 Democratic
New York 8 D+36 Democratic
California 34 D+35 Democratic
California 44 D+35 Democratic
Florida 24 D+34 Democratic
Georgia 5 D+34 Democratic
Massachusetts 7 D+34 Democratic
New York 9 D+34 Democratic
California 40 D+33 Democratic
Illinois 4 D+33 Democratic
Michigan 13 D+33 Democratic
Washington 7 D+33 Democratic
Ohio 11 D+32 Democratic
Florida 20 D+31 Democratic
New York 12 D+31 Democratic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cook_Partisan_Voting_Index#By_congressional_district

 

I don’t understand what you are trying to show? Gerrymandering has nothing to do with CPVI - it shows a measurement of how strongly a United States congressional district or state leans toward the Democratic or Republican Party, compared to the nation as a whole.

There is nothing wrong with a party draws districts, the problem is when they do it to defraud the electorate like the Republicans have been doing for years in N.C.
It’s actually disgusting how they are treating both the rule of law and their constitutes in that state.

 

For all our lifetimes, the EC has been a rubber stamp for the popular vote. That changed in 2000 and 2016.

Not equally. I live in California. My vote for senator/president is much, much less influential than a North Dakotan's vote for senator/president.

 

They won't forget about it. It's not like SCOTUS goes away. They're going to continue making momentous decisions. If those decisions go against what 2/3 of the country wants (e.g., overturning Roe), you're going to hear a lot about expanding the Court.

 

That doesn't happen.

 

The popular vote has never, not even once, in any way, mattered in a Presidential election. Not ever. Period.
No US President has -ever- been elected by the people.

And your vote was counted, and was counted equally, with everyone else that voted in your election.

 

When the Dems get enough votes to break a GOP filibuster on the issue, let me know - until then, all this talk is less than idle.
This presumes, of course, the Dems are stupid enough, end petty enough, to go down this rabbit hole in the first place.

 

That wasn't the point. The point is that we all have seen the EC as a rubber stamp for the popular vote. That is no longer the case. The EC is not democratic. People eventually won't tolerate that. It's been an anachronism for a long time, but it never interfered with anything. Now that's changed. Without the EC to drag the Republicans over the finish line, there would be no Republican Presidents since 2000.

Not even close. Take away 500,000 Californian's votes. What happens? Nothing. Take away 500,000 N. Dakotan's votes. What happens? There is no N. Dakota.

The system we have is not democratic.

 

The only people who see this are those who do not understand how US Presidential elections work.
Are you ignorant of the procedure? Do you need a link to help educate yourself?

On the contrary - I am absolutely correct.
CA held an election to determine which slate of electors would represent CA in the electoral college; you voted for your state's slate of electors, just like everyone else in your state.
As such, you vote counted, and it counted exactly as musch as everyone else in the election.

 

The Democrats will change the filibuster rule. Why wouldn't they?

 

If you're not going to quote me correctly, what's the point of talking to you?

 

I heard the guy interviewed and was asked "So then when the Republicans take back the Congress again they could add two more too right?". The guy got tongue tied.

So how many people do you think we will end up with on the court? Perhaps McConnell and Ryan should do a preemptive and go ahead and add two more so Trump can go ahead and nominate them and get them in place.

 

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand that's the great compromise that founded our nation.

 

Ahhhhh speak for yourself. We ALL do NOT see the EC as a rubber stamp of a popular vote, there is no national popular vote. The EC is the states electing a President and VP as the Constitution dictates which is as the Founding Fathers designed in the great compromise.

It's not supposed to be the federal government is not a Democracy. Our country is not a Democracy.

You seem to not understand our system of government and the Constitution, are you a US citizen?

BY DESIGN. The Constitution GUARANTEES to the States that we will not be a Democracy. We are a Federal Republic.

 

California doesn't count your vote equally with other Californians? How do they do that?

 

The SCOTUS does not issue rulings based on what people want. That is not their job although some liberals believe it is. The role of the SCOTUS is to decide if a law is constitutional or a court decision was correct under existing law. That's all. Not even whether it is a good law, that's not their role.

Again I have to ask are you a citizen of the US who studied government and civics?

 

The Left seems inherently incapable of grasping the concept of consequences where their filthy political maneuverings are concerned.

 

I have a better idea'r.How about go out and Fuch yerself.better still
stay at home and do it.The country got F'd butt good by Obama and his
drat democrats.In fact,The Middle Class under Obama became worst off
than during the Great Depression.
A first in Modern America.

 

Ah - but the filibuster rule for legislation is different than the filibuster rule for nominees - Harry Reid can't simply wave his hand and make it go away.
Nope- the entire sentate gets a say.