CalvinBall wrote:

pacino wrote:

JUburton wrote:I'm not like, anti-beto, just haven't seen a lot of policy out of him yet. Which I'm sure will change when he actually launches and has a website and all that.

I'm not anti-Beto as he seems nice enough, I'm just curious who a New Democrat like Beto would actually staff in his administration to that would actually implement the policy he may endorse on the campaign trail.

I am anti-Biden because I know who he would staff and what he'd do.

that is something to think about for sure.

do we know who the others would staff though? have you seen that kind of stuff? i am curious.

we are so early yet. i think making lists and all that, while fun, is not productive. we just dont know a ton about anything or anyone at this point.

Nothing is productive here! Just shootin the shit imo.

Unless we get to election time and I see some I'm voting howard schultz bullshit then you (not you specifically obviously) will incur the wrath of JU

pacino wrote:I am anti-Biden because I know who he would staff and what he'd do.

I though Obama on the SC was the dream.

JUburton wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

pacino wrote:

JUburton wrote:I'm not like, anti-beto, just haven't seen a lot of policy out of him yet. Which I'm sure will change when he actually launches and has a website and all that.

I'm not anti-Beto as he seems nice enough, I'm just curious who a New Democrat like Beto would actually staff in his administration to that would actually implement the policy he may endorse on the campaign trail.

I am anti-Biden because I know who he would staff and what he'd do.

that is something to think about for sure.

do we know who the others would staff though? have you seen that kind of stuff? i am curious.

we are so early yet. i think making lists and all that, while fun, is not productive. we just dont know a ton about anything or anyone at this point.

Nothing is productive here! Just shootin the shit imo.

Unless we get to election time and I see some I'm voting howard schultz bullshit then you (not you specifically obviously) will incur the wrath of JU

Damn JUs.

Daniel Dale
@ddale
Trump to Breitbart on how the left plays tough: "I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump — I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point and then it would be very bad, very bad."

momadance wrote:Daniel Dale
@ddale
Trump to Breitbart on how the left plays tough: "I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump — I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point and then it would be very bad, very bad."

WTF

Bikers meaning cyclists or biker gangs? Need a follow up

joe table wrote:Bikers meaning cyclists or biker gangs? Need a follow up

Don't know about you, but I want no part of this guy:

Tucker Carlson says he’s the victim of a powerful bully.

The credit for finding the tapes goesto Madeline Peltz, a 24 year old with her first adult job. She rents a basement of a D.C. house that she shares "with five other people, a few cats and a dog named Noodles."

In January she published her research on Carlson who she thinks fronts for white nationalist groups.

Tucker is pulling out all the stops. Media Matters funded by Soros (not true), and other play book page 1 stuff.

Poor gal has to watch Carlson, then listen to 10 hours of Bubba the Love Sponge

Looks like Trump at 6 y/o, especially around the mid section.

momadance wrote:Daniel Dale
@ddale
Trump to Breitbart on how the left plays tough: "I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump — I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point and then it would be very bad, very bad."

Oh

Tom Tillis went from a Rebuke, including an OpEd in the WaPo about this being an overstep and a violation of the constitution,to a NO. He talked to the WH and now he is convinced that he is wrong, so he votes no. He also said that after this one Trump will never ever do it again because some left winger could do this, so this hole will be closed.

#Spineless

thephan wrote:Tom Tillis went from a Rebuke, including an OpEd in the WaPo about this being an overstep and a violation of the constitution,to a NO. He talked to the WH and now he is convinced that he is wrong, so he votes no. He also said that after this one Trump will never ever do it again because some left winger could do this, so this hole will be closed.

#Spineless

12 GOP Senators did however, vote YES (Alexander, Blunt, Collins, Lee, Moran, Murkowski, Paul, Portman Romney, Rubio, Toomey, Wicker). Which is alot.

Beto says term limits for SCOTUS and to increase the number of seats on the court.

maybe that is policy prescription pacino can get behind

"Today, I come to the floor to say that I do not intend to vote for the resolution of disapproval," the senator said, adding "The White House has been very gracious and I should say very patient given my initial position in working with us."

Jesus. Somebody get a tissue so Tillis can wipe his chin.

CalvinBall wrote:Beto says term limits for SCOTUS and to increase the number of seats on the court.

maybe that is policy prescription pacino can get behind

Yeah, good luck with getting an amendment through.

SCOTUS would take a constitutional change, right? That is a big enchilada. I agree with that however. This is a little obsolete, no disrespect to RBG, because people use to live less long (enter social Security that was pegged at average age of death, and was to take care of widows and orphans).

How to Spot a Jew’: Polish Newspaper Front Page Gives Readers Anti-Semitic Advice. Suddenly I can get behind restricting the press.

thephan wrote:SCOTUS would take a constitutional change, right? That is a big enchilada. I agree with that however. This is a little obsolete, no disrespect to RBG, because people use to live less long (enter social Security that was pegged at average age of death, and was to take care of widows and orphans).

No, Congress can increase the number of seats and determine the structure of lower courts. Term limits for justices would require an amendment.

momadance wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:Beto says term limits for SCOTUS and to increase the number of seats on the court.

maybe that is policy prescription pacino can get behind

Yeah, good luck with getting an amendment through.

basically resigned to any progressive idea never coming to fruition so