Politics Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbiemcgee

Gaetz? Really? Murdoch? Ailes? O'Reilly? C'mon.

---

Love the old 'but look at those guys!" response. Friggin classic..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArizonaXUGrad

Good to know, your standards are quite low.

---

It's very easy to play this game and there is no moral high ground when it comes to politics. Would you like people to judge your standards based on who you support politically and the subsequent missteps of those players? Not sure that's a hole you want to go down.

Well, well even the NYT admits police were ordered to stand down on Jan 6th.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smails

It's very easy to play this game and there is no moral high ground when it comes to politics. Would you like people to judge your standards based on who you support politically and the subsequent missteps of those players? Not sure that's a hole you want to go down.

---

It’s actually easy, you vote for someone and hope for the best. If that person turns out to be committing crimes, it’s time to resign and face the music. Their sins aren’t visited upon you. You shouldn’t think they are good for the highest court in the land or their enablers. Again, in the late 80s we knew exactly what he did and how awful it was. An individual on this board thought Bork got a bad deal. Strange has to own that judgement even with the power of hindsight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArizonaXUGrad

It’s actually easy, you vote for someone and hope for the best. If that person turns out to be committing crimes, it’s time to resign and face the music. Their sins aren’t visited upon you. You shouldn’t think they are good for the highest court in the land or their enablers. Again, in the late 80s we knew exactly what he did and how awful it was. An individual on this board thought Bork got a bad deal. Strange has to own that judgement even with the power of hindsight.

---

Let’s be real. The opposition to Bork was his Pro Life views. The above are bs justifications to insulate the Left from a Pro Abortion litmus test for their picks. Take it elsewhere.

And here I thought the litmus test was no new SC justices in an election year. Let the people decide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulxu

And here I thought the litmus test was no new SC justices in an election year. Let the people decide.

---

Unless a Dem is President. Then we’re ok with it but whine because we don’t have the votes in the Senate.

Edit: If that really was a true and accepted litmus test held by the Senate why would a former Senator have nominated a potential Justice in an election year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Russian bounties? Oopsie again NY Times.

---

Looks like the Dems colluded with the Times to interfere with an election...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArizonaXUGrad

It’s actually easy, you vote for someone and hope for the best. If that person turns out to be committing crimes, it’s time to resign and face the music. Their sins aren’t visited upon you. You shouldn’t think they are good for the highest court in the land or their enablers. Again, in the late 80s we knew exactly what he did and how awful it was. An individual on this board thought Bork got a bad deal. Strange has to own that judgement even with the power of hindsight.

---

Did you vote for Hillary Clinton?

Now a resolution to abolish the EC.