Supreme Court to Trump on census: NOPE, LOL

[RoryN]

Breaking.

 

[Adre]

On gerrymandering Roberts writes that the Supreme Court is not equipped to rule on political issues, then all four of the other Republicans agree with him. Seriously.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Kavanaugh's Kangaroo Kourt will permit gerrymandering in North Carolina though. Something for everybody.

I'm sure the Racial Wetwipes of Lit will celebrate the fact that 53% of the popular vote in NC will be Democratic, but 10 out of 13 congressional seats will be Republican.

As Halfbreed halfwit Sensei Shitforbrains sez "tee hee".

 

[BotanyBoy]

Kavanaugh's Kangaroo Kourt will permit gerrymandering in North Carolina though. Something for everybody.

I'm sure the Racial Wetwipes of Lit will celebrate the fact that 53% of the popular vote in NC will be Democratic, but 10 out of 13 congressional seats will be Republican.

As Halfbreed halfwit Sensei Shitforbrains sez "tee hee".

Says one of the most overt racist on the board LOL.

Still haven't figured out that we are a representative democracy in these United States have you RacistDownSouth?

It's ok...the other anti-American mob rule shitforbrains lefties and racist are still in denial about it too.

Butt the popular vote!!!
https://media.giphy.com/media/TNX7zcSNWMqS4/giphy-downsized-large.gif

 

[Matthew Craig]

Says one of the most overt racist on the board LOL.

Hey now Kikelbergman, proxy glass houses...

 

[RobDownSouth]

Says one of the most overt racist on the board LOL.

Still haven't figured out that we are a representative democracy in these United States have you RacistDownSouth?

It's ok...the other anti-American mob rule shitforbrains lefties and racist are still in denial about it too.

Butt the popular vote!!!

https://i.imgur.com/IVzFck5.jpg

 

[Rightguide]

On gerrymandering Roberts writes that the Supreme Court is not equipped to rule on political issues, then all four of the other Republicans agree with him. Seriously.

It's called the "Political Question Doctrine," look it up. It's the reason why that federal judge threw out the House suit against Trump using DOD funds to fund the border wall the other day.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Hey now Kikelbergman, proxy glass houses...

What glass houses??? Grow a pair and cite it directly son...

https://i.imgur.com/IVzFck5.jpg

No I call people who use racial slurs against others when they can't or won't argue their anti-Americna political positions to feel better about themselves...racist.

Plenty of folks disagree with me and I don't consider them racist because they don't go around casually using racial slurs against folks who disagree with them. You know, like you do on a regular basis Rob.

Ogg, Liar, SilverGirl, Adrina, Aglo....plenty more but the point has been made.

Have a great day Rob

 

[RobDownSouth]

https://i.imgur.com/byzJQ3k.jpg

 

[OldJourno]

So does this mean the census will definitely NOT include a query on citizenship?
No, it doesn't.

 

[Rightguide]

So does this mean the census will definitely NOT include a query on citizenship?
No, it doesn't.

Correct. Some say the real deadline in Oct.1.

 

[BotanyBoy]

https://i.imgur.com/byzJQ3k.jpg

A need to reply to the lies you make up, not the last word.

How are you this broken Rob?? There isn't the slightest shred of honesty in you is there?

*here come some more lies from the Anti-American RacistDownSouth*

 

[Wrong Element]

The gerrymandering cases were a real dilemma. I have a lot of sympathy for the view that Roberts expressed, which is that it's a political question best handled by the political branches. But whether the current members of the political branches were decided fairly is the very thing being questioned. It's a Catch-22. Simply saying "Congress can deal with this" is disingenuous when so many of them benefit from the current system and will never change it. Local idiot Jim Jordan tweeted out his support for the ruling, which makes sense since his district, like all of Ohio's districts, is hilariously gerrymandered.

And of course, when Arizona came up with a (pretty successful) system to take the drawing of district lines out of the hands of politicians, Roberts bitched and moaned about that too. He lost that day, but I expect it's going to come up again now that Suds Kavanaugh is on the Court (though with Arizona getting more purple, Republicans might actually be in the mood to begin supporting more fair districts there).

I've been saying it for years: Conservatives hate democracy and are obsessed with finding new and creative ways to ensure they just keep on running the country regardless of what most people think. North Carolina, one of the states at issue in this case, does not allow ballot initiatives (so you can forget the people voting to outlaw gerrymandering) and does not allow the (Democratic) governor to veto district maps written by legislators. And the deciding votes in this case came from two justices appointed by a minority president who was gifted a stolen Court seat.

The rigging of the game can only go on for so long.

 

[Adre]

So does this mean the census will definitely NOT include a query on citizenship?
No, it doesn't.

Depends on whether the proponents can produce a justification that isn’t a blatant lie.

 

[Que]

The gerrymandering cases were a real dilemma. I have a lot of sympathy for the view that Roberts expressed, which is that it's a political question best handled by the political branches. But whether the current members of the political branches were decided fairly is the very thing being questioned. It's a Catch-22. Simply saying "Congress can deal with this" is disingenuous when so many of them benefit from the current system and will never change it. Local idiot Jim Jordan tweeted out his support for the ruling, which makes sense since his district, like all of Ohio's districts, is hilariously gerrymandered.

And of course, when Arizona came up with a (pretty successful) system to take the drawing of district lines out of the hands of politicians, Roberts bitched and moaned about that too. He lost that day, but I expect it's going to come up again now that Suds Kavanaugh is on the Court (though with Arizona getting more purple, Republicans might actually be in the mood to begin supporting more fair districts there).

I've been saying it for years: Conservatives hate democracy and are obsessed with finding new and creative ways to ensure they just keep on running the country regardless of what most people think. North Carolina, one of the states at issue in this case, does not allow ballot initiatives (so you can forget the people voting to outlaw gerrymandering) and does not allow the (Democratic) governor to veto district maps written by legislators. And the deciding votes in this case came from two justices appointed by a minority president who was gifted a stolen Court seat.

The rigging of the game can only go on for so long.

Of COURSE "conservatives hate democracy." You're saying this like you've had some sort of revelation. This country was founded on the idea of hating democracy. All of the mechanisms in our Constitution and our branches of government were set up specifically to twart the pernicious evils of democracy. Just because everyone votes to do something doesn't make it fair, moral or justifiable

This is exactly why Democrats support unlimited immigration from the third world. Bigger impoverished mob yields more support for mob rule. It is also why Obama assured Hispanic illegals that 'voting is a part of citizenship" and that nobody in the Federal government would be coming after them because of concerns about citizenship status.

All if the Dems power comes from legal immigration, illegal immigration turned legal through amnesty, the birthrates in those groups, ballot harvesting, and "get out the vite" voter fraud including illegals.

Quelle surprise that they want to make sure every illegal is counted for apportioning and Federal grants.

 

[Dribble]

Who has the House in 2020 is more important. Because no matter what, the Democrats can flip the tables and give the Republicans a taste of what they did....redistrict with bias. Supreme Court says it is ok. So fuck it...redistricting it is. Next decade is ours fuckwits

 

[Wrong Element]

Of COURSE "conservatives hate democracy." You're saying this like you've had some sort of revelation. This country was founded on the idea of hating democracy. All of the mechanisms in our Constitution and our branches of government were set up specifically to twart the pernicious evils of democracy. Just because everyone votes to do something doesn't make it fair, moral or justifiable

Yes, the rebellion against noted community activist and Saul Alinsky acolyte George III.

Depends on whether the proponents can produce a justification that isn’t a blatant lie.

I'm sure they can, like they did in the Muslim ban case (still a blatant lie, but maybe 1% more plausible). Difference this time is that there's an actual deadline.

Why are they SO determined to get this citizenship question onto this census, to the point where Trump wants to delay it (even though it's a constitutional mandate and Lord knows conservatives supposedly luv them some Constitution)? It's almost like there's some agenda other than simple fact-finding...

 

[Que]

Who has the House in 2020 is more important. Because no matter what, the Democrats can flip the tables and give the Republicans a taste of what they did....redistrict with bias. Supreme Court says it is ok. So fuck it...redistricting it is. Next decade is ours fuckwits

"The House" does not decide districting. Individual State legislatures do.

You act like Democrats may FINALLY have a chance to gerrymander. They INVENTED gerrymandering. "Gerry" was a Democrat.

 

[Que]

Yes, the rebellion against noted community activist and Saul Alinsky acolyte George III.





I'm sure they can, like they did in the Muslim ban case (still a blatant lie, but maybe 1% more plausible). Difference this time is that there's an actual deadline.

Why are they SO determined to get this citizenship question onto this census, to the point where Trump wants to delay it (even though it's a constitutional mandate and Lord knows conservatives supposedly luv them some Constitution)? It's almost like there's some agenda other than simple fact-finding...

. . .and to prevent going from a King to what they viewed as a worse form of government, a democracy, they gave us a republic. If we can keep it against the onslaught of your kind.

Because the next time you lot whine that your girl or guy got the "popular vote" we want to know if that number us even possible using only citizens. Pretty simple, really. Also would be nice to have some data on what the actual net financial cost is to our country to import indigent voters and placeholders for such things as apportionment of representation and federal funds for the sole benefit of Democrats.

The entire ARGUMENT before SCOTUS is will discouraging the counting of ILLEGALS harm Democrats generally and big blue States funding.

Why are you in any way puzzled about what this is about? It is the only reason it was sent back to the lower courts. Will discouraging ILLEGALS from being counted harm the plaintiffs.

 

[Wrong Element]

Who has the House in 2020 is more important. Because no matter what, the Democrats can flip the tables and give the Republicans a taste of what they did....redistrict with bias. Supreme Court says it is ok. So fuck it...redistricting it is. Next decade is ours fuckwits

Districts are drawn at the state level. Change has to start there. And give them credit: Republicans had a plan to win big in the state legislative elections of 2010; while on the other side, for all of Obama's talents, he was never one to care much about the institutional health of the Democratic Party at the state and local level.

Different ideologies tend to have different blind spots. The big ones for liberals have been 1) being too overly focused on presidential elections to the exclusion of everything else (the fact that there are 25 people running for president is proof of that); 2) believing politics is above all else a way to express your specialness as a person with things like voting for Ralph Nader and Jill Stein; and 3) not caring enough about the makeup of the federal courts.

 

[Wrong Element]

Quelle surprise that they want to make sure every illegal is counted for apportioning and Federal grants.

I've made this point before: just because someone isn't a citizen doesn't mean they're illegally in the country.

And the census has always counted noncitizens, which was the whole point of the infamous three-fifths rule.

But why would anyone would want a question on the form that they know for a fact will lead to a less accurate count of who's here? I notice nobody is actually saying they believe the Trump Administration's fig leaf rationale (that it's about enforcing the Voting Rights Act). Dead men don't lie, and thanks to the deceased GOP redistricting expert and his hard drives, we know exactly why this is so important to so many of you.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Different ideologies tend to have different blind spots. The big ones for liberals have been 1) being too overly focused on presidential elections to the exclusion of everything else (the fact that there are 25 people running for president is proof of that); 2) believing politics is above all else a way to express your specialness as a person with things like voting for Ralph Nader and Jill Stein; and 3) not caring enough about the makeup of the federal courts.

That's because they aren't liberals but authoritarian leftist looking for their god king.

They are desperate for a Kim, Castro or Mao to bring about the utopian social revolution they are pining for.

 

[nowisthetime]

The authoritarian man child needs to go. He's not even smart enough to be a dictator.

 

[Adre]

That's because they aren't liberals but authoritarian leftist looking for their god king.

They are desperate for a Kim, Castro or Mao to bring about the utopian social revolution they are pining for.

We have a Kim, but leftists didn’t elect him.

 

[Dribble]

Districts are drawn at the state level. Change has to start there. And give them credit: Republicans had a plan to win big in the state legislative elections of 2010; while on the other side, for all of Obama's talents, he was never one to care much about the institutional health of the Democratic Party at the state and local level.

Different ideologies tend to have different blind spots. The big ones for liberals have been 1) being too overly focused on presidential elections to the exclusion of everything else (the fact that there are 25 people running for president is proof of that); 2) believing politics is above all else a way to express your specialness as a person with things like voting for Ralph Nader and Jill Stein; and 3) not caring enough about the makeup of the federal courts.

Yes...but the House gets to approve or reject them...a little known fact.