Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One of the CNN "reporters" said that she asked Nancy Pelosi if she would be in charge of the House to presumably begin impeachment proceedings against Kavanaugh and Nancy's reply was "I'm not going there, I'm not going there on impeaching the President and I'm definitely not going there on impeaching Brett Kavanaugh" because she knows what a rallying tool that is for Republicans.
Maxi waters is always dependable for that unless the Democrats shut her up.
Roosevelt proposed it in 1937. It died when the court agreed to stop torpedoing his New Deal programs. I doubt the court is going to repeal Roe and same sex marriage but doing that would be the spark that ignites the call for a less-biased court. By 2024 Dems will very possibly control the government and younger people will be taking power. Look out!
When I was straight out high school I though the same like many of those young people, but eventually over time I realize that the policies related to immigration, identity, social welfare and others aren't long term solutions. Massive unskilled immigration only benefits corporation, business owners, and elites who use them as maids, gardeners, and other home services. I hold the same views for the H1B program. Those people point of view will change with time. There is no guarantee that they will hold the same political point of view. If anything, young people are naive and easily manipulated.
I think you are overplaying your hand. Demographics show that subsequent generation will be smaller than older generations, which means their influence based solely on numbers will be less. Besides, those younger people will have other problems such as automation. AI, and other yet to be seen problems. In engineering, models used to predict the future are less reliable the further into future such models are used to predict an outcome. A lot could change by 2024 and making such a prediction, especially a political one, is futile.
You are only mad that things didn't go your way with the supreme court and are make these statements as a future threat exactly like a child or immature person would say. You make big statements, but you have not bite.
The Congress has rarely expanded the USA supreme court. Expanding the supreme court as you suggested would be political suicide for the Democrats. Only left extremist are advocating such a measure. Such an act would destabilize the USA government. A subsequent Republican government would reduce or further expand the supreme court.
You are not an independent, but a left wing extremist who is advocating a "by any means" policy.
I'm confidant that the vast majority of Americans will not advocate expanding the supreme court simply to annul the conservative advantage on the supreme court. That only happens in countries like Venezuela, dictatorships, or one party countries.
Forgot to mentioned, no corporation regardless of political affiliation will advocate or support such a policy. An unstable government is very bad for business.
Well--there is certainly an "unstable" POTUS
What would have happened if Kavanaugh didn't get anointed???
Do you think Trump would have accepted that with equanimity?
And McConnell certainly used "any means necessary" when he blocked Obama's nomination of Meritt Garland
Someone Susan Collins revealed was basically JUST LIKE Kavanaugh in their decisions from the bench...
Who knew??? But not good enough for McConnell--although Collins didn't mention that when she was attacking the Dems for their opposition to Kavanaugh and their attack on the tradition and partisanship in the Senate...
We could have had a Kavanaugh clone on the court lo these many months ago---one w/o the attached history Kavanaugh will trail around behind him with every decision that is made by the court...
I will say that Collins history has shown that she will support a viable judge put forward by a D or R president
She just didn't complain when McConnell blocked Garland for 10 months---
Nothing wrong with breaking precedent when YOUR party is doing it...
And her claim that Kavanaugh promised her that he would not vote to over turn precedent is just disengenuous
I give him 9 months before he put his 2 cents in and a major reversal occurs...
One of the CNN "reporters" said that she asked Nancy Pelosi if she would be in charge of the House to presumably begin impeachment proceedings against Kavanaugh and Nancy's reply was "I'm not going there, I'm not going there on impeaching the President and I'm definitely not going there on impeaching Brett Kavanaugh" because she knows what a rallying tool that is for Republicans.
Maxi waters is always dependable for that unless the Democrats shut her up.
I think many Democrats would rather have Maxi stay quiet.
He could vote to overturn Roe v Wade, Same-Sex Marriage. These are issues that should remain in place!
Those are unlikely to even arrive on the court docket, frankly. And didn't you say a little while ago that you were going to make yourself Canada's problem?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
