• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

PhDeac said:
District, you’re describing an honor system. I’m saying an honor system is not sufficient when leaders have no honor.

We are going in circles. Just stop. You believe “honor” is sufficient. I don’t. That’s fine. Some people believe in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus and we don’t shame them for it.
Click to expand...

Big claim to say SCOTS justices have no honor. But you continue to do you. Keep accusing them of breaking ethical rules with zero evidence.
 
That's not what we're arguing about. We are arguing about if there is any reason why conservatives justices wouldn't coordinate with states in order to accomplish their goals. You claim they wouldn't because they're honorable or because they fear getting convicted and removed by people who share their beliefs. I believe conservative desire to repeal Roe supersedes any "honor" similar to when Wrangor said he didn't mind if Republicans lied and cheated in their efforts to get rid of abortion.

It's funny when lawyers realize "the law" only extends as far as people are willing to enforce it. If corrupt people are in charge of enforcing "the law," laws are merely what those people say they are.
 
PhDeac said:
District, if those consequences are not possible then they're not possible consequences. But I'm fine ending this stupid conversation. You have more confidence in Senate Republicans doing the right thing than I do. Whatever.

Interesting poll discussed in 538 that shows Sanders does much better with voters who aren't following the race. Could be an age effect. Could be a sign he has more ground to lose. Biden does better with high information voters.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...s-running-are-more-popular-with-swing-voters/
Click to expand...

So dumbasses vote for Bernie, least surprising news all day.
 
PhDeac said:
That's not what we're arguing about. We are arguing about if there is any reason why conservatives justices wouldn't coordinate with states in order to accomplish their goals. You claim they wouldn't because they're honorable or because they fear getting convicted and removed by people who share their beliefs. I believe conservative desire to repeal Roe supersedes any "honor" similar to when Wrangor said he didn't mind if Republicans lied and cheated in their efforts to get rid of abortion.

It's funny when lawyers realize "the law" only extends as far as people are willing to enforce it. If corrupt people are in charge of enforcing "the law," laws are merely what those people say they are.
Click to expand...

Well believe what you want. But there's currently a lack of any evidence that it's occurring.

And thank goodness Wrangor isn't the bar we set for our Supreme Court justices.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
Well believe what you want. But there's currently a lack of any evidence that it's occurring.

And thank goodness Wrangor isn't the bar we set for our Supreme Court justices.
Click to expand...

Except that several states are in the process of passing similar laws at the same time? Who knows? This is an off-topic discussion anyway. Feel free to PM me if you want to keep talking about it.
 
PhDeac said:
Except that several states are in the process of passing similar laws at the same time? Who knows? This is an off-topic discussion anyway. Feel free to PM me if you want to keep talking about it.
Click to expand...

That’s a tale as old as time. Conservative states were merely waiting for Kavanaugh to get confirmed to do this, they’ve been waiting ages. All they needed was 5 lockdown conservative justices and then the floodgates were going to open. There doesn’t need to be a SCOTUS justice telling them to do this; the Federalist Society has had this lined up for years.
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
That’s a tale as old as time. Conservative states were merely waiting for Kavanaugh to get confirmed to do this, they’ve been waiting ages. All they needed was 5 lockdown conservative justices and then the floodgates were going to open. There doesn’t need to be a SCOTUS justice telling them to do this; the Federalist Society has had this lined up for years.
Click to expand...

This is the claim that DistrictDeac and others have been disputing. Based on history, as you point out, it’s pretty clearly happening. I’m not sure what the disconnect is.
 
I may be naive but I still don’t think we’re anywhere close to the current SCOTUS overruling Roe. For starters their review would likely end with whether these statutes constitute an undue burden on a woman’s right to get an abortion (without even reaching the constitutional question of whether abortion is a right). With a 5-4 current makeup, I also don’t think Roberts wants any part of a “I helped overturn roe” on his resume.
 
Strickland33 said:
This is the claim that DistrictDeac and others have been disputing. Based on history, as you point out, it’s pretty clearly happening. I’m not sure what the disconnect is.
Click to expand...
Not really. It doesn't take a genius to know that advocacy groups are going to try to push a test of Roe versus Wade if the court got more conservative. Doesn't mean that there was an orchestrated event that occurred out of the Supreme Court to tell them to do so
 
ChrisL68 said:
Not really. It doesn't take a genius to know that advocacy groups are going to try to push a test of Roe versus Wade if the court got more conservative. Doesn't mean that there was an orchestrated event that occurred out of the Supreme Court to tell them to do so
Click to expand...

But that doesn't make for a good conspiracy theory.
 
It’s not a crazy conspiracy to assume people with the power to do something they want to do are working together to do it. That’s just how power works.

Why do people assume Roberts doesn’t want to overturn Roe? Even dramatically restricting Roe would be a huge loss.
 
PhDeac said:
It’s not a crazy conspiracy to assume people with the power to do something they want to do are working together to do it. That’s just how power works.

Why do people assume Roberts doesn’t want to overturn Roe? Even dramatically restricting Roe would be a huge loss.
Click to expand...

Because I believe he cares about the credibility and legitimacy of the SC. If what you are claiming ever became public it will absolutely shred it.

For someone who is surprised at any criticism of academia, you have no problem casting aspersions at other professions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top