I challenge the Biden supporters on this board to justify this nonsense.
Biden’s contempt for the average American voter knows no bounds
- Thread starter ukalum1988
- Start date
I challenge the Biden supporters on this board to justify this nonsense.
Greatest con the dems have ever pulled is fooling the sheep into thinking they are the party of 'the little guy'. They view everyday Americans as trash that are like ants under their feet.
The stupidity of Hiden here is that he's claiming if he answers then his answer will be all we will talk about. But now his NONANSWER is all we are talking about. And everyone knows he wants to pack the court, so now we are talking about how he won't answer the question and how he ISN'T BEING HONEST WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
He should just own it. Say he wants 30 on the court and screw you if you disagree. Won't lose him any votes and will actually pick him some up from radicals that are probably planning on doing a write in vote for AOC or Bernie. Or Stalin. Or Hitler.
The stupidity of Hiden here is that he's claiming if he answers then his answer will be all we will talk about. But now his NONANSWER is all we are talking about. And everyone knows he wants to pack the court, so now we are talking about how he won't answer the question and how he ISN'T BEING HONEST WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
He should just own it. Say he wants 30 on the court and screw you if you disagree. Won't lose him any votes and will actually pick him some up from radicals that are probably planning on doing a write in vote for AOC or Bernie. Or Stalin. Or Hitler.
They need to have ad out immediately and pound this home This should end his damn campaign
Maybe he should lie just like Trump did about releasing his tax returns.
Democrats/Contempt...Peanut Butter/ Jelly = 0 difference!
Clearly morals and honesty doesn't matter to Hiden supporters, else they wouldn't support him.
False. While Trump’s foot-dragging on his tax returns, due to legitimate reasons or not, may not be the model of transparency, does not impact the separation of powers and fundamental structures of our constitutional government like Biden’s in-your-face, “**** you” kind of response about this important issue.
Foot dragging? Legitimate reasons? LOL.Thats hilarious. He lied, plain and simple.
The pubs have turned SC nominations into a partisan ruse. It would serve them right for what MM started.
The pubs have turned SC nominations into a partisan ruse. It would serve them right for what MM started.
^^^^^This
We are only weeks away from the election and we still do not know the policy position of Harris/Hiden. They refuse to answer most questions on policy and those that they do, change their mind before sundown.
The only policy we know that will not change is we are all racist. What a joke they are.
In 2010 this hag did the same EXACT thing about the 2010 Obama care passing. They're ALL liars!!! Believe them when they're trying to hide something people..
Trump is doing the same thing in 2020 that obama did in 2016. Besides Merrick Garland was a shitty pick, be grateful we replaced him with a real judge.
Do you make your own Strawman or do you buy them at the strawman store?
Last edited:
LOL false again. I wasn’t defending Trump on his tax returns at all. I was simply pointing out that what Biden is doing is much worse to our body politic. He’s demonstrating his disdain for the American people, but as usual you gaslight and deflect.
As to your second point, the Dims are the ones to corrupt the SC confirmation process. They’re the ones who make “Borking” into a verb and slandered Kavanaugh as a rapist. Finally, MM wouldn’t be in a position to be doing what he’s doing if Harry Reid hadn’t blown up the judicial filibuster.
Yeah, i don’t understand their strategy of blatantly dodging this question. Everyone knows that the answer is either “yes” or “maybe” (not “no”) so why not just be honest? Repeatedly dodging the question just comes across as lame attempts at Jedi Mind Tricks and gives Trump something to hammer them with.
It was actually Bill Frist who tried to remove filibustering for nominees. But, yes, ultimately the Democrats are the ones who opened that pandora’s box.
Democrats were foolish to do it because the senate tends leans slightly conservative due to small states having the same number of senators as big states. They are now being hoisted by their own petard.
Packing the court is also stupid for the same reason. The Democrats should be looking for ways to weaken the senate and strengthen the house. Packing the court would give the senate a huge amount of power.
Democrats were foolish to do it because the senate tends leans slightly conservative due to small states having the same number of senators as big states. They are now being hoisted by their own petard.
Packing the court is also stupid for the same reason. The Democrats should be looking for ways to weaken the senate and strengthen the house. Packing the court would give the senate a huge amount of power.
LMAO, the pubs did that, eh?
Those poor dems. They were playing nice but the pubs wouldn't have it.
Harry Reid says hi
Excellent post and something libs would like for us to forget. They trash every nominee and it began with Ted Kennedy and his borking agenda. But we will not forget.
They can't and it is beyond their character to be honest with the American people. Hiden Biden is their motto for a reason. Pathetic bunch of lemmings.
Can the SCOTUS itself block an expansion? I guess it’s technically not unconstitutional if the Constitution doesn’t state a number, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they assert that expansion goes against the original framers’ intent. When does it end? The smarter Dems have to realize that doing this will work against them over the long-run.
I suspect that the Democrats’ intention may be to use the threat of expansion as leverage when negotiating with the GOP. I don’t think the idea is popular with anyone other than the Far Left. It really doesn’t make sense as an election strategy. Personally, I want Trump gone, but I don’t want all three branches of the federal government to be controlled by Democrats.
I suspect that the Democrats’ intention may be to use the threat of expansion as leverage when negotiating with the GOP. I don’t think the idea is popular with anyone other than the Far Left. It really doesn’t make sense as an election strategy. Personally, I want Trump gone, but I don’t want all three branches of the federal government to be controlled by Democrats.
Apparently, Biden went on the record as opposing expanding the SCOTUS during the primaries.
I think playing coy is an attempt to appease the Far Left. The Biden campaign is probably betting that moderates/independents are less interested in this issue and will not be concerned about it one way or the other. But I don't think this issue is going away.
I think playing coy is an attempt to appease the Far Left. The Biden campaign is probably betting that moderates/independents are less interested in this issue and will not be concerned about it one way or the other. But I don't think this issue is going away.
Everything the dems do is about their donors. They could care less what the voters think.
Entirely possible and perhaps even likely. That's only one of the positions that they won't tell us about until after the election, however. At some point it's risk vs reward even if you really hate Trump.
Deep down I believe Biden knows that packing the court with additional justices is a horrible thing to do. However, his handlers and the super-progressive activists whose support he needs won't countenance such "nonsense".
1) I'm sorry his tax returns didn't show Putin owns him.
But he never built his tax returns for public consumption like a lifelong politician does - he built them for maximum profit/revenue.
But ultimately the fact that you're comparing that to someone permanently politicizing and fundamentally changing one of the three core branches of gov't are all I need to know about the strength of your argument.
And while it might seem awesome now, with Biden leading in the polls, the party in power always oscillates. You won't like it one bit when the shoe is on the other foot.
2) The Pubs turned it into a ruse? You mean the same republicans who - at the very last second - trotted out Ballsy Ford to do her scared college girl act with literally zero corroboration? Or the second girl who claimed rape trains, and later copped to making everything up?
The same repubes who came up with the Anita Hill BS and tried to ruin Clarence Thomas?
The Democrats have a pretty solid record of making these confirmation hearings complete theater, where truth doesn't matter at all...the only goal is to destroy the nominee that they fear will try to be an originalist.
The current placement, while unfortunate for Democrats, is supported by precedent.
He's caught between a rock and a hard place on so many issues I actually feel sorry for him.
Once it starts it'll be a political tool used by each party moving forward. There's no telling how big the court might get...or how political it might get.
People get wrapped around the axle about who nominates SC justices, but if you look back many have moved their ideologies while on the bench. And they aren't supposed to be political - it's about whether you try to interpret the original intent of our founding documents or feel they need to be read with modern glasses and applied to today's environment.
Awwww....poor baby, are you still butthurt over merrick garland?
Elections have consequences.
Can you imagine the MSM if Garland had been Borked Kavanaugh style?
Even if the Democrats win the senate, they will only have 50, or 51, seats. That’s probably not going to be enough to expand the SCOTUS.
In general, senators are more moderate than congressmen because they have to carry an entire state. Radical polemicists, like AOC, can win in their little ultra partisan gerrymandered echo chambers, but winning statewide forces you to deal with broad swath of constituents.
It’s unlikely that guys like Joe Manchin are going along with expanding the SCOTUS. He voted to confirm Kavanaugh, after all.
In general, senators are more moderate than congressmen because they have to carry an entire state. Radical polemicists, like AOC, can win in their little ultra partisan gerrymandered echo chambers, but winning statewide forces you to deal with broad swath of constituents.
It’s unlikely that guys like Joe Manchin are going along with expanding the SCOTUS. He voted to confirm Kavanaugh, after all.
Why the deflection? Why can people never stay on the topic being discussed?
Obama didn't have the Senate. Why have a hearing when the outcome of the vote is already known?
The only reason Obama nominated Garland was to enable whining and cries about how unfair it was. He knows how the system works.
You deflect when you can't come up with anything on topic that has merit.
Why would the vote already be known? Garland was a moderate. Are you saying Senators should only confirm nominees their own party nominates? That’s quite a change from tradition.
At least don’t lie about it and say “the American people” should have a say. I respect Cruz for admitting it’s now just a partisan game, rather than people like MM and Lindsey Graham who outright lied about it.
That’s pretty much all we do on here. It is a political message board after all.
The point is that all Politicians are liars and hypocrites. This is not news.
Latest posts
-
-
Hiden's first day in office saw a record number of covid deaths- Latest: BillCutting4585
-
-
