- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Populism (and Dobbs) is the basis for "muh democracy" rants and ravings from the DEMs
Posted on 11/5/22 at 3:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 11/5/22 at 3:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Just to be clear, negatively impact.
I don’t care if you add “negative”. It may impact them but it does not restrict them, which was what you tried to claim earlier.
1
Posted on 11/5/22 at 3:38 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:
Actually, it is your acceptance that judicial error = constituonal that is the epitome of a "subjective" definition of the term.
We are a nation build on laws and institutions creating faith in those laws. Your argument invalidates the USSC entirely. If what they say isn't the law, then we have no law.
No. It doesn't.
I am a textualist when it comes to the Constitution. It is why easily 80% of what the FedGov does is unconstitutional.
The fact that the SCOTUS has not held that Social Security or Medicare are unconstitutional does not make them constitutional - nor would they be constitutional if the SCOTUS did find they were. As Dred Scott, Plessy, Roe, etc. demonstrate, the SCOTUS gets it wrong. Those decisions are not any less wrong while they are controlling precedent.
The Constitution makes something constitutional, NOT the Supreme Court.
This post was edited on 11/5/22 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 11/5/22 at 3:39 pm to Flats
Well the impact is restriction
Posted on 11/5/22 at 3:40 pm to udtiger
quote:
I am a textualist when it comes to the Constitution.
I said you're allowed your subjective views.
But the issue is your system permits everyone's subjective view to be equal, which means there are no rules.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 4:32 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This is exactly why I've tried to keep the discussion on point (to your chagrin, I might add
No you haven't. When I say that by definition secure elections are the goal. You say I only think that because it helps my side. You're being f****** absurd
quote:except you haven't. Every time somebody wants to discuss the basic concept you immediately point out that the concept happens to help a particular side and dismiss it as partisan. You're not nearly as slick as you think you are
This is exactly why you have to completely separate the concept for discussion. Thank you for proving my point
Posted on 11/5/22 at 4:35 pm to NM Tiger 67
quote:
Every time somebody wants to discuss the basic concept you immediately point out that the concept happens to help a particular side and dismiss it as partisan.
Well duh. That’s why you’re only allowed to discuss abortion in this thread that totally isn’t about abortion.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 4:49 pm to NM Tiger 67
quote:
No you haven't.
Yes, I have, even when it was too focused on abortion and not right-populism.
quote:
When I say that by definition secure elections are the goal. You say I only think that because it helps my side
No I said that's discussing the merits of the policy, which is separate from a discussion of partisanship.
This inability to separate ideas is EXACTLY why I try so hard to keep the discussion on point. That discussion (partisanship) is 2 whole degrees away from the original point (which in itself was a diversion from the original topic).
quote:
Every time somebody wants to discuss the basic concept you immediately point out that the concept happens to help a particular side and dismiss it as partisan.
I'm literally trying to avoid meandering to this very discussion which, again, is EXACTLY why I tried to keep the discussion on point.
I know what y'all are trying to do.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 4:50 pm to Open Your Eyes
quote:
That’s why you’re only allowed to discuss abortion in this thread that totally isn’t about abortion.
Early on I made it pretty clear I did not want to discuss abortion in this thread.
Looking at these last few pages and you can see just how far the discussion has gotten off topic because people refuse to stay on point.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 4:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Early on I made it pretty clear I did not want to discuss abortion in this thread.
And yet that’s what you did in the first post of this thread, and in numerous replies after. But you made sure to tell people they’re not supposed to be talking about abortion in here after each time you did it, in a failing attempt to make sure only your view is used. Obviously everyone that didn’t follow those super important rules needs to be put in timeout and then sent to bed with no dinner.
quote:
Looking at these last few pages and you can see just how far the discussion has gotten off topic because people refuse to stay on point.
And you get offended when people accurately point out that you believe you’re the arbiter of discussion, then act as if that’s not what you’re trying to do
Posted on 11/5/22 at 5:03 pm to Open Your Eyes
quote:
And yet that’s what you did in the first post of this thread,
No, I discussed topics related to abortion, like support, policy, Supreme Court decisions, and the impact on all of the above on our political climate.
Abortion itself was not relevant at all.
quote:
And you get offended
I don't get offended.
quote:
you believe you’re the arbiter of discussion, then act as if that’s not what you’re trying to do
I've never once said anyone was, or should be, precluded from making their own threads on here.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 5:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No, I discussed topics related to abortion
quote:
like support, policy, Supreme Court decisions
So you discussed abortion.
quote:
Abortion itself was not relevant at all.
It really is amazing how much smarter you think you are than literally everyone else. As if nobody is capable of seeing through your semantic bullshite.
quote:
I don't get offended
Your constant whining about people not talking about the things in the manner you think they should be talking about them proves otherwise.
quote:
I've never once said anyone was, or should be, precluded from making their own threads on here.
That is in no way a response to what you quoted. I’ll repost so you can fail at trying again:
“And you get offended when people accurately point out that you believe you’re the arbiter of discussion, then act as if that’s not what you’re trying to do
”Posted on 11/5/22 at 5:26 pm to Open Your Eyes
quote:
So you discussed abortion.
No. Other people did.
I kept trying to avoid the topic.
quote:
It really is amazing how much smarter you think you are than literally everyone else. As if nobody is capable of seeing through your semantic bullshite.
Can't admit I'm right. Go to ad hom attacks.
quote:
Your constant whining about people not talking about the things in the manner you think they should be talking about them proves otherwise.
I'm not offended. I'm trying to keep things on topic.
quote:
And you get offended when people accurately point out that you believe you’re the arbiter of discussion, then act as if that’s not what you’re trying to do
I'm not the arbiter of discussion. People are free to post their own threads to discuss topics that don't fall within the subject of mine.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 5:54 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:That’s nice. But outside of Trump, Republicans are as open-border, cheap-labor, free-trade, do-what-the-chamber of commerce tells us as they’ve ever been.
Um, investing government power and regulation in the market to protect unions or industry classes is literally leftist intervention.
The GOPe hasn’t embraced those policies. It’s one of the reasons they hate Trump.
This post was edited on 11/5/22 at 5:57 pm
Posted on 11/5/22 at 5:59 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I know what y'all are trying to do
It's perfectly normal to observe which party opposes the literal #1 goal of ANY election.
It's actually pretty partisan to avoid that reality
Posted on 11/5/22 at 6:02 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
That’s nice. But outside of Trump, Republicans are as open-border, cheap-labor, free-trade, do-what-the-chamber of commerce tells us as they’ve ever been.
This thread is about the policies of right-populism, not traditional GOP standards.
quote:
The GOPe hasn’t embraced those policies
This thread isn't about the GOPe. It's about right-populism.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 6:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:??????
It's about right-populism
Posted on 11/5/22 at 7:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Says the person who just attempted an emotional diversion to avoid answering simple questions. I'll get back on track:
Not a chance clown. It's the absolute crux of the issue and mentioning one side of an issue is only an emotional diversion to you because it crushes your stupid argument.
quote:
Did people across the United States have a right to an abortion before Dobbs? Do people across the United States have a right to an abortion today?
Yes (although only clowns ever called it a right"
Then NO
Did babies across the United States have a right to live in many states before Dobbs?
Did Babies across the United States have a right to live in many states after dobbs?
No
Then Yes
So the only question is whether this exchange of rights is a growth in rights or reduction. Because I'm a serious human being I'll say Life outweighs convenience.
So dobbs expanded rights.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 7:20 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No. Other people did.
quote:
Dobbs is the backbone of this argument today for the Left.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 7:41 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No I'm discussing the impacts of the policy, not the policy itself.
No your trying to identify some authoritarian trend through these policies, and embarrassing yourself trying to defend it.
quote:
You won't even admit the competing policies are partisan, which is astounding
I fully admit functioning elections is a partisan issue. Democrats don't want them.
Posted on 11/5/22 at 9:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
can add in an even more hot topic area: I bet you DO support expansive government when it comes to regulating trans people, gay marriage, and other cultural hot button issues (which, again, is where right-populism is focused).
To the contrary…I dont care how other people live their life. The only govt interference I would support is protecting children from being mutilated by whacko parents.
The authoritarian push in these areas is again from the left in forcing people to accommodate these individuals in any matter they can dream up. You can cut off your genitalia , wear yoga pants and call yourself Shirley…just don’t force me to refer to you as she, be cool with you using the same bathroom as my daughter and competing against girls on the volleyball team. I don’t have to accommodate your sickness.
Page 16 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News