Nicker on 8/12/2023 at 13:49
I keep seeing Trumpers insisting that DJT is one of them, understands the little guy, is the only politician who can be trusted to do what's right for them, loves them. Typical populist crap. The GOP and their ilk, are masters of getting stupid people to vote against their interests.
And now we have mini-trumps infesting Canadian politics. Federal and provincial leaders using legislative dirty tricks and threatening secession. Roving gangs of "grassroots parents" going out of district and invading school board meetings to protest gender issues. The truckers "protest" demanding that an elected prime minister simply be replaced by their preferences. Fuck voting, just gimmie what I want.
Didn't we have a world war about this shit and didn't the fascists lose that?
Tocky on 8/12/2023 at 15:43
Doesn't matter. They want dictators now. They reason that gas prices will be lower that way. I wish I were kidding.
Nicker on 8/12/2023 at 19:40
Because handing over the keys for the Whitehouse to the petrochemical industry is the best way to control the price at the pump...
Cipheron on 21/12/2023 at 01:15
Interesting stuff on the Trump Colorado case. Trump claiming it's some Biden/Soros initiated hit job, but it doesn't really look like that if you look at the details
(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson_v._Griswold)
first, the idea was mainly from conservatives:
Quote:
In August 2023, conservative legal scholars and Federalist Society members William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen, in an article published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, posed that Trump is ineligible to be president.[3] Baude and Paulsen argue that Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment—a section that prevents individuals from holding office who, having "previously taken an oath [...] to support the Constitution of the United States", have "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" against the United States
Second, the plaintiffs were registered Republicans and they named a Democrat as the culpable party
Quote:
On September 6, 2023, six Republican voters in Colorado, joined by the watchdog organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, filed a lawsuit in the District Court for the District of Colorado invoking the Fourteenth Amendment disqualification theory. The lawsuit asks for the court to prevent Trump from appearing on the state's Republican presidential primary, naming Colorado secretary of state Jena Griswold
The case was then rule in Trump's favor by a judge recently appointed by the Democratic governor:
Quote:
The trial began on October 30. Judge Sarah B. Wallace refused a request from Trump's lawyers to dismiss the case. ... However, she ruled that Section 3 did not apply to Trump because the President of the United States is not an Officer of the United States and thus Trump had not "previously taken an oath ... as an officer of the United States," as required by Section 3. She declined to remove Trump from the primary ballot, saying there is "scant direct evidence regarding whether the Presidency is one of the positions subject to disqualification".
The (Republican) plaintiffs then appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court, who ruled in their favor 4:3. Note that the 3 dissents were all Democratic-nominated judges too:
Most of the push here is coming from Republicans who want their party back. It's plausible that the Democratic Party would actually *prefer* to see Trump win the primary and not DeSantis.
Anarchic Fox on 21/12/2023 at 16:10
This is an interesting story, thank you for sharing it. But I take issue with something:
Quote Posted by Cipheron
The (Republican) plaintiffs then appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court, who ruled in their favor 4:3. Note that the 3 dissents were all Democratic-nominated judges too...
Most of the push here is coming from Republicans who want their party back. It's plausible that the Democratic Party would actually *prefer* to see Trump win the primary and not DeSantis.
It's petty to speculate that these four Democrats (including the one who rendered the first judgment), presumably professionals, rendered their decision on political grounds. Their decisions are publicly available if you want to discover their reasoning.
RippedPhreak on 21/12/2023 at 16:17
I'm happy about this because it means the civil war starts sooner.
Anarchic Fox on 21/12/2023 at 16:20
Shoo, little insect.
Cipheron on 21/12/2023 at 19:13
Quote Posted by me
Most of the push here is coming from Republicans who want their party back. It's plausible that the Democratic Party would actually *prefer* to see Trump win the primary and not DeSantis.
Quote Posted by Anarchic Fox
It's petty to speculate that these four Democrats (including the one who rendered the first judgment), presumably professionals, rendered their decision on political grounds. Their decisions are publicly available if you want to discover their reasoning.
I didn't speculate that. What I meant was that there's no reason for the Democrats to want to push this, and that the Republicans have all the motive here. After all, it's about the primaries, which is a Republican thing.
heywood on 21/12/2023 at 20:20
Quote Posted by RippedPhreak
I'm happy about this because it means the civil war starts sooner.
Considering the collective brainpower of the numb nuts who showed up on Jan 6, I am not worried about this in the slightest. But if Texas would like to secede, I could get behind that. :)
Seriously though, we all know this is going to SCOTUS and what the outcome is going to be. Just let the voters decide.
Nicker on 22/12/2023 at 05:55
Or even if only the southern half of Florida's limp dick seceded and the Magats could move there. Build a small wall and let non-climate change handle the clean up. Test the hypothesis that humans had semiaquatic ancestors.
