If you are anti-Trump, you are pro-abortion

[HankD]

There's one major flaw with your reasoning: Supreme Court nominees have to be approved through Congress.

If your statement were true, we'd have a liberal majority on the Supreme Court right now. As it stands, the Congress has blocked Obama's Supreme Court nominee, leaving the court at 8 members instead of 9. So there's clear evidence that your statement is incorrect.

SO - "neverTrumpers" can still help control the Supreme Court, as well as Trump supporters if Hillary wins, by ensuring democrats don't hold the majority in Congress.

True but we won't know the status of congress until November 9th so if one cannot in good conscience vote for Trump they would have to vote down the ticket on the (R) side for what you say to be true.

Then by all means it should be done.

HankD

 

[InTheLight]

True but we won't know the status of congress until November 9th so if one cannot in good conscience vote for Trump they would have to vote down the ticket on the (R) side for what you say to be true.

Then by all means it should be done.

HankD

Which is precisely what I will be doing.

 

[Calminian]

There's one major flaw with your reasoning: Supreme Court nominees have to be approved through Congress.

If your statement were true, we'd have a liberal majority on the Supreme Court right now. As it stands, the Congress has blocked Obama's Supreme Court nominee, leaving the court at 8 members instead of 9. So there's clear evidence that your statement is incorrect.

SO - "neverTrumpers" can still help control the Supreme Court, as well as Trump supporters if Hillary wins, by ensuring democrats don't hold the majority in Congress.

The only reason the republicans blocked this nominee was because it's an election year. This has much precedence, in fact it's often called the Biden rule as Biden made the same argument during Bush's presidency (think it was Bush, correct me if I'm wrong). When it's an election year, generally, the opposition party holds off to see the results of the election. If Hillary wins, Obama's nominee will be on the SC.

The Republican congress has always been a rubber stamp for Obama. He got both his liberal supreme court picks and several others. That's why the party has rebelled against the Republican congress. Recent polling shows 60+ % of republicans feel betrayed by their party for not stoping Obama's agenda. If you think Paul Ryan is going to refuse Hillary's nominees, I've got a bridge to sell you.

There is one way and one way only to keep the court from going off the left edge—a Trump win. There is no other way. If you're neverTrump, you're neverLife.

 

[Calminian]

Which is precisely what I will be doing.

We expect that. You want a liberal court. That's your dream scenario. We're appealing to those abhorred by liberal policies like abortion.

 

[InTheLight]

We expect that. You want a liberal court. That's your dream scenario. We're appealing to those abhorred by liberal policies like abortion.

InTheLight: "I'm voting for Republicans all the way down the ticket."
Calminian: "You want a liberal court. That's your dream scenario."

Your stupidity is flabbergasting. Then again, you are voting for Trump, so I shouldn't be shocked by it.

 

[InTheLight]

There is one way and one way only to keep the court from going off the left edge—a Trump win. There is no other way. If you're neverTrump, you're neverLife.

Yes, because we all know that a majority of Democrats in the Senate is irrelevant to the equation of a conservative SCOTUS. Maybe you should go back to school?

 

[Don]

...I've got a bridge to sell you.

There is one way and one way only to keep the court from going off the left edge—a Trump win. There is no other way.

Here's the problem with that: None of the Trump supporters have been able to guarantee me that Trump will actually follow through on any of his promises.

Trump is all about the art of the deal. What compromises is he going to make in order to pass through some parts of what he's actually promised? (not all of it; just some part, or parts) We've already seen that he's changed his position on the wall to "going to build the wall; *then* make Mexico pay for it." You'll pardon me, but I don't think I'm going to hold my breath for Mexico to reimburse us. In the meantime, you and I will have paid for a wall that he originally promised we wouldn't have to pay for.

But that's okay, right? Because we'll have the wall, even though we went bankrupt doing it, right? But then again, isn't that another Trump strategy? Getting the hotel built, even if/when that particular shell corporation goes bankrupt in the process?

If you're neverTrump, you're neverLife.

Not a single Trumpette that has done anything to convince me, a declared Independent, that Trump can be trusted to actually do *anything* he's promised.

I trust Trump to do one thing: Be Trump. If you don't know what that means, then I expect you'll find yourself the proud owner of a rivet on a bridge pretty soon.

I pray I'm wrong; and yes, I've previously posted that I'll make a post stating such.

But if I'm right - will you be man enough to post that you were wrong?

 

[Calminian]

Here's the problem with that: None of the Trump supporters have been able to guarantee me that Trump will actually follow through on any of his promises.....

You don't have that with any candidates ever in politics. GHW Bush appointed very liberal justices.

What you do have is Hillary promising you she'll put the most liberal justices on the court possible. And you have Trump who has actually provided a list of good justices (which is unprecedented). Not only this, if Trump did backtrack, he'd destroy himself politically. If he likes winning, he won't do that. And look at Trump's choice for veep. Look at the people he's surrounding himself with.

Yes, of course there are no guarantees in life, but which do you think is the better bet?

 

[Don]

You don't have that with any candidates ever in politics. GHW Bush appointed very liberal justices.

That doesn't help your case a bit. We had a very good idea that Bush was going to appoint conservative judges; and it didn't happen. Now we have a candidate that we know will say/do what it takes to seal the deal, and you want to give this more trust?

What you do have is Hillary promising you she'll put the most liberal justices on the court possible. And you have Trump who has actually provided a list of good justices (which is unprecedented). Not only this, if Trump did backtrack, he'd destroy himself politically. If he likes winning, he won't do that. And look at Trump's choice for veep. Look at the people he's surrounding himself with.

Yes, of course there are no guarantees in life, but which do you think is the better bet?

When going to Las Vegas, playing the games with less risk -- still leads to losing money.

The *only* thing Trump has going for him is Pence. I believe I wrote a post a month or so ago identifying that we actually need to be examining the VP candidates. In Hillary's case, her health is a grave concern; and I believe that if she's elected, she's going to have to step down within the first half of her presidency -- leaving Kaine as president. In Trump's case, I believe he's going to be impeached by either democrats or republicans (or both) within the first half of his presidency, and we'll be left with Pence as president.

If you would promote that viewpoint (of Pence as president), you'd get a LOT more people buying into a Trump candidacy....

 

[Benjamin]

I pray I'm wrong; and yes, I've previously posted that I'll make a post stating such.

Don, of course we have no guarantees and we know in politics many things are said and are subject to change, but, FTR, I have no need of you publicly humiliating yourself should we be blessed to find out that Trump does many of the things he said he would.

 

[Calminian]

That doesn't help your case a bit. We had a very good idea that Bush was going to appoint conservative judges;....

No we did not. GHW Bush was a liberal. He's voting for Hillary Clinton. He was likely to govern liberally just as his career showed. But he was better than Dukakis, so we had no choice. But it's no surprise what he did, if you followed politics at the time. He was a liberal globalist and he governed like one.

Trump is infinitely more conservative that GHW Bush. He's actually put out a list of potential justices, praised by everyone.

The *only* thing Trump has going for him is Pence.....

Yes, Pence is his first political appointment and it's a fantastic one, as time has proved. That's what he does. He makes good decisions.

We have one chance to save the SC. It's Trump. If' you're neverTrump, you're throwing the Supreme Court away.

 

[Don]

Don, of course we have no guarantees and we know in politics many things are said and are subject to change, but, FTR, I have no need of you publicly humiliating yourself should we be blessed to find out that Trump does many of the things he said he would.

I don't consider it a "humiliation." I consider it manning up and saying, "I was wrong." And if we're blessed, and it happens that way, I don't mind doing it.

I still haven't heard from any of y'all whether you'll do the same if it turns out you're wrong.

 

[Calminian]

I don't consider it a "humiliation." I consider it manning up and saying, "I was wrong." And if we're blessed, and it happens that way, I don't mind doing it.

I still haven't heard from any of y'all whether you'll do the same if it turns out you're wrong.

Why wouldn't we? It'll be a fact. But we still would have made the right choice, just like GHW Bush was the right choice. Hillary is promising to destroy the court. Trump is promising to preserve it. It's a no brainer.

 

[InTheLight]

...should we be blessed to find out that Trump does many of the things he said he would.

That would be a first for him.

He said he doesn't need the votes of #NeverTrump to win. Is he lying? Then why don't his followers believe him and leave us alone?

 

[Calminian]

That would be a first for him.

He said he doesn't need the votes of #NeverTrump to win. Is he lying? Then why don't his followers believe him and leave us alone?

Unlike your hero, Hillary, Trump has a track record of making good decisions.

 

[Benjamin]

I don't consider it a "humiliation." I consider it manning up and saying, "I was wrong." And if we're blessed, and it happens that way, I don't mind doing it.

Well, I wish you weren't such a pessimist but I'll wish you much delight if and when you fulfill your need to publicly admit how very ashamed or foolish you feel about your predictions here on this board.

 

[InTheLight]

Unlike your hero, Hillary, Trump has a track record of making good decisions.

Name two of them.

 

[Calminian]

Name two of them.

how about 4 Billion?

 

[InTheLight]

how about 4 Billion?

Two of them will suffice. Choosing Mike Pence as his running mate would be one of them. You don't get to use that one.

 

[Calminian]

Two of them will suffice. Choosing Mike Pence as his running mate would be one of them. You don't get to use that one.

Not surprised you didn't get that.