What if he DOES leave and the Republicans choose their candidate at the RNC. That would be after the DNC. The Democrats wouldn't know how to frame their convention. We are running against ...mystery person.
Speaking of conventions, how are they going to do them with Covid anyway?
I think the Dems are going to go virtual. Biden is the de facto nominee, so it's just a formality at this point. So it doesn't matter - it may require re-framing the campaign, but that's doable.
GOP moved to Jacksonville FL - Gov. DeSantis is firmly up Shitler's butt...
I think regardless of who the GOP candidate is (although I believe Shitler will be it), the goal of the GOP is to undermine the election so thoroughly and so permanently that they remain in power forever. Or until the pitchforks, torches, and AR-15s come out.
@dhyanaji I ask myself, where are the hero’s? The ones who will stand up when it’s difficult? So disappointing. We deserve better, we have to do it for ourselves. We can and will.
SUPREME COURT BLOCKS TRUMP FROM ENDING DACA!
Wham! (@lovendures another one two punch - are we up to 7?)
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/18/politics/daca-immigration-supreme-court/index.html
(@jessi1978 great minds think alike - we both posted at the same time lol)
I think 7 @TriciaCT.
What a great day for dreamers and our country. Thank you Justice Roberts.
So many blessings. For now, they are safe.
Twitter response to smack down
These horrible & politically charged decisions coming out of the Supreme Court are shotgun blasts into the face of people that are proud to call themselves Republicans or Conservatives.
Sometimes I love it when I am wrong.
Earlier this week, I posted my thought on several Supreme Court cases and expressed my concern that Roberts would side with the conservative block against DACA (I based this opinion on Roberts' past decisions to support Trump on his travel bans against Muslims.)
But Roberts surprised me. While he did a bit of a cop-out (summary-we the Supreme Court are not saying whether or not DACA is legal. We are saying Trump did not follow the rules when he attempted to end it), his decision has changed the face of the election for the next few months.
It is not difficult to see why Trump wanted a win in this case. If the Supreme Court ruled in Trump's favor, then Trump would have somewhere between 700,000 to 800,000 children and young people who, if he had his way, could be deported at any time. Trump was basically creating a crisis so that he could strong-arm the Democrats and cause havoc in both policy and the election. He was hoping that, if he won, he could go to the Democrats and say "ok, I am going to deport these children. However, if you give me more money for ICE and funding for my big, beautiful wall, then I am willing to work out a deal to keep the children here."
Obviously, the Democrats would refuse. Why in the world would they support funding for ICE and the wall when their base is so opposed to it? So Trump would then start the process of deportation and then speak on the news and say "the Democrats obviously don't care about these children! They had the chance to work out a deal to save them, and they refused!"
This would have put pressure on Democrats from immigrant friendly states, who would have to at least address the President's statements. At the same time, Democrats from more conservative (aka-less immigrant friendly states) would be unable to say anything. If a conservative state Democrat said that he or she would support trying to work out a deal with Trump in exchange for ICE and wall funding, the democrats in that state would turn against that person. But if he or she said that they did not support Trump, then they may face heat from immigrants in the state and/or some of the conservative independent voters.
Now, would Trump do this? Absolutely. Remember that this is a man who spoke volumes about caravans in 2018 and encouraged his voters to shoot immigrants at the border. He needed this to energize his base.
But Roberts put a wrench in his plan, and now Trump has a big, big problem.
As I mentioned before, Trump has the ability to go back and try the process again to end DACA, since the Supreme Court did not make a decision as to whether or not DACA is legal. However, this will not help him because now his own tried and true tactic (delay, delay, delay) is now being used against him. There is simply no way that he can get the process through the courts again quick enough to have the Supreme Court make another decision on this before November 2020. If he does try again (and I suspect he will), it will take YEARS to get back to the Supreme Court.
So now Trump is really having a problem. The economy is in the tank, the country is being torn apart, and now the Supreme Court has ruled against him on gay rights and immigration.
So let's hit the pause button for a moment and consider (in my opinion) the last two major cases for the Supreme Court to decide.
The case, June Medical Services v. Russo, comes out of Louisiana. As I said before, it is practically identical to a case that the Supreme Court heard four years ago but is strikingly similar to a Texas law the Court struck down a similar case four years ago in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. Both are considered to be the targeted regulation of abortion providers (Known as TRAP laws), they are medically unnecessary abortion restrictions that lawmakers pass under the guise of protecting women’s health. The Supreme Court decided against the law 5-3.
What is the issue now? Well, Trump put two justices on the court who are anti-abortion. And Roberts did not join his fellow judges in the decision to find against the Texas law. Based on this, you would have to think that the Supreme Court will rule against abortion in the Louisiana case.
Except...maybe not. While Kavanaugh has thus far shown himself to be Trump's man, Gorsuch and Roberts may surprise us. Roberts, especially, does not often like to overturn existing case law (aka-states can't put undue restrictions on a woman's right to an abortion). While I do not doubt that Roberts will eventually rule against abortion in the future, I am not certain that he will here. It will be hard to show why the Louisiana case is different from the Texas case to the point that it required a different decision.
But let's say that Trump gets a win here and the Supreme Court basically curtails a woman's rights over her own body (basically Trump making rape great again). The majority of women (many of whom have marched against Trump from the beginning and have been instrumental in the Republican's loss of the House in 2018) will be enraged. They will pack the voting booths and target every single Republican they can. And as this is an issue that affects women of all races (but, as usual, seems to disproportionately affect minorities), people who Republicans are trying to keep from voting will only be more energized to fight back. Further, because the Louisiana case is identical to the Texas case, this would prove that the Supreme Court has become politically corrupted in that there is no justification as to why the Lousianna case deserved a different outcome. Calls for the Democrats to "stack the court" will become more popular, and could even occur as a direct result of this case if the Supreme Court choses now to change the law.
But let's say the Supreme Court errs on the side of caution and rules against conservatives in this case. This is certainly possible, as I am sure Roberts and the rest of the Supreme Court are well aware of the highly charged atmosphere right now and may decide to wait until the future (aka after the election) before making a decision to change the existing law. This would benefit them greatly. If they said "Sorry, but the Louisana case is too similar to the Texas case," then they can wait until after the election before they entertain the option of restricting women's rights on a stronger, different case. Further, they can see how the election ends and who ultimately gets control of the country (although they can't be dismissed, they know that Democrats, with the right support, can delute the conservative majority by adding more justices, thus making them ineffective. Waiting until after the election would help them to avoid the immediate pushback from liberals and women's rights groups, who are waiting only a few months until the next election. It would be far more prudent to wait until a non-election year. Also, if the Democrats win the Presidency and gain a supermajority of the House and Senate, they could pass a law protecting women's rights to their health and ultimately set controls on what states can and can't do in terms of restricting reproductive rights. As many Supreme Court justices have said over the years, it is their job to interrupt the laws, not make them, so it would be far less risky for the Supreme Court to rule against conservatives now.
So my instinct says that the Supreme Court will somehow punt the ball and wait until a non-election year before they start dismantling abortion rights. But we will wait and see what happens. As I said before, I misjudged Roberts on the DACA decision, so I may be wrong here too.
As to the taxes case, this technically shouldn't even be discussed, as there are so many cases that clearly show that Congress has the right to investigate wrongdoing, as well as New York State prosecutors. Previous cases (Clinton and Nixon) were decided unanimously against the presidents in those cases. However, we don't know how the Supreme Court will rule here. While I have more hope in the Supreme Court after these last two cases, I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop and I am anxious that they may try to change existing law to save Trump. But we will see what happens.
Let's assume that, for sake of argument, the best case scenario happens and the Supreme Court rules against conservatives on abortion and against Trump on his taxes. The following is the likely outcome of events:
1. Trump will fume and scream and try to do whatever he can to keep the taxes from being released. He may try to file some sort of emergency hold to delay the delivery of the taxes. Further, he will engage in more behavior to try to distract from the tax returns (distract, distract, distract.)
2. Many conservatives will be demoralized and disheartened. Those who dislike Trump but voted for him on the promise that the Supreme Court would turn the clock back (aka-make abortion illegal, keep gays in their "place," deport innocent children, etc.) will see that none of Trump's promises have come to fruitation. They will see the economy is down, Covid 19 is killing hundreds of thousands (as opposed to mere thousands, had Trump actually done something to try to stop the spread), and that the Supreme Court will not "own the libs" before November 2020.
They will try to do a new rally, of course. They will point out that Ginsburg is in bad health and say that, if Trump is given a second term, he will ultimately replace Ginsberg with another conservative judge and give the conservatives the victories they sold their souls for. But many Republicans, like most other people, only see the here-and-now. They will see this abortion case as the end to their dreams to stop women's productive rights and forget that there are still several other abortion-related cases that are waiting for the Supreme Court to rule on. They will believe that despite everything, they still lost. There is no strong economy, no overturn of abortion rights, and no wall. So why go vote? Why give Trump another four years when he couldn't even deliver results in the first four?
So let's hope for a complete knock-out in these last two cases so that Trump goes 0-4. If that happens, then there is a better than normal chance that Trump may finally, finally resign. For Trump, it is all about winning, and the possibility that he may be wiped out by voters in November may finally hit home with him in light of the Supreme Court cases and the knowledge that Trump's taxes will finally be released to the general public. And considering how much time and resources he has spent to hide them, it must be pretty bad.
Fingers crossed!
These horrible & politically charged decisions coming out of the Supreme Court are shotgun blasts into the face of people that are proud to call themselves Republicans or Conservatives. - Donald Trump
Shot gun blasts in the face?
This is violent rhetoric that seeks to foment shotgun blasts into his adversaries' faces. This is beyond unconscionable and Twitter should take it down.
If what Trump says is true, then the conservatives are committing mass suicide, and Trump is pulling the trigger.
After all, Trump filled two spaces in the Supreme Court (one stolen, of course). The conservatives have the majority. How can he possibly blame liberals or Democrats for this?
Let him use his violent rhetoric! He is just driving more people to vote against him in November. If we are lucky, he will pull the trigger on this nightmare and resign before he's fired by the American people.
He is already requesting new Supreme Court justices ?
President Trump on Thursday escalated his criticism of the Supreme Court after a pair of rulings this week against his administration, calling for new justices to be appointed and pledging to release a new list of potential nominees ahead of November's presidential election.
"The recent Supreme Court decisions, not only on DACA, Sanctuary Cities, Census, and others, tell you only one thing, we need NEW JUSTICES of the Supreme Court," Trump tweeted just hours after the court ruled against his move to rescind deportation protections for young undocumented immigrants.
This is the reply to the moron’s comment about the shotgun blast from Fred G whose daughter was killed in the school shooting in Florida . IQ45’s ignorance never ceases to horrify me.
. twitter.com/realDonaldTrum
Shirley Chisholm was so fantastic. I remember watching her interviewed about her early days in Washington when she would be assigned to things like the Farmers Committee.
Fred G's comment breaks my heart. Very brave and to the point.
Every time he says 2nd amendment it is obvious he is calling his base to arm themselves and commit violence.
I am hoping that is a fear and not a psychic prediction on my part.
@jeanne-mayell YES! And, Trump knew exactly what he was doing with that rhetoric.