Quote:
Let's say SCOTUS shoots down the insurrection
Time will tell, but I think you're giving at least a couple of justices credit that they don't deserve. Wouldn't surprise me at all to see a 6-3 decision, which is all the Dems need for the above scenario to play out.twk said:Much more likely that we get a 9-0 opinion from the court slapping down the ballot disqualification strategy. Then the talking point is that it was unanimous that Dems were trying to thwart democracy.jrdaustin said:Let's say SCOTUS shoots down the insurrection narrative and allows Trump on the ballot; but, he STILL loses. (Either due to simply getting beat - unlikely - or with an indeterminate amount of game playing with respect to mail in ballots, following the 2020 playbook - much more likely)twk said:I don't see how this move is helping them in the long run. In fact, it seems certain to do the opposite.JamesE4 said:
Dems are good at the long game, and often what appears to be the objective is not the real objective.
They make these moves, to keep the focus on trump instead of slow Joe, and to get the SC to overturn it. That can be a rally for their base, and further the (false) argument that SC is biased for Trump, and needs justices replaced and/or nullified by expansion.
From every minute after the SCOTUS decision, the narrative will be that SCOTUS is biased, and at least 4 seats must be added to the court to "correct" that bias. If somehow Dems hold the presidency and both houses of Congress, a bill will be passed and signed. And voila! We now have a left-leaning SCOTUS that will enshrine unaccountable voting processes, including nationwide 100% mail in balloting, elimination of Voter ID, and allowing the 10 million "new" arrivals amnesty and the right to vote.
Game over.
I agree. Brown Jackson and Sotomayor are too agenda driven but Kagan can be reasonable on occasion.Im Gipper said:
7-2. Mark it down!
As soon as you show us where the 14th requires a "conviction."1991sir said:
Show me the conviction,
Congress has failed to address that issue as only they are empowered to do under Section 5 of the 14th.Antoninus said:As soon as you show us where the 14th requires a "conviction."1991sir said:
Show me the conviction,
TIA
'The power," is exclusive. State of CO has no authority to do squat.Quote:
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
So...conjecture is all that is needed?Antoninus said:As soon as you show us where the 14th requires a "conviction."1991sir said:
Show me the conviction,
TIA
How do you define inclusion as related to elections? Let non-citizens vote? Let 16 year olds vote? The only interest groups the Democrats build are DEI related and the focus is to hate America.Bill Clinternet said:
This is a silly comment and incongruous talking point.
Voter fraud is practically non existent. We have laws in place to mitigate it. Republicans cannot believe they are losing the battle of ideas so they conjured this out of thin air to justify election losses.
Republicans lose elections because they continue to be a party focused on radical ideology as opposed to inclusion and building coalitions across interest groups.
