What is this thread all about?
Just a place for general discussion. A place to unload whats on your mind and talk about anything - personal, health, help needed, achievements, daily highs and daily lows, theories, predictions and what have you.
D̶o̶e̶s̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶n̶e̶e̶d̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶b̶e̶ ̶Q̶ ̶r̶e̶l̶a̶t̶e̶d̶.
“If Bernie did not run do you think all the libertarians would have blindly voted for Hillary? Not even a chance.”
Libertarians have never had anything to do with Bernie Sanders. Libertarian candidates have been Ron Paul (awesome) and Gary Johnson (just ok). Think of how different Ron Paul is from Bernie. That’s how different libertarians are from Bernie.
The DNC’s problem with Bernie was that he was more popular than Hillary among Democrat voters. Bernie won the nomination and forced the DNC to steal it with their superdelegates. This obvious theft enraged the Bernie Bros into boycotting the DNC in the general election more than they would’ve if Bernie had never ran for the nomination. So the twatters have a point that the Bernie distraction ended up peeling votes from Hillary, but in their twisted logic they blame Bernie for being popular and running, rather than blaming Hillary for stealing the nomination from Bernie. Bernie would’ve done better in the general election than Hillary did. I still think Trump would’ve won if the white hats were able to block the cheating.
“even if something is codified in law (whatever that means) it can still be overturned by the SCOTUS if its unconstitutional!”
What they mean by “codified in law” is that with enough support in both legislative houses and with the President’s approval, they can make an amendment to the Constitution. Therefore, their new legislation couldn’t be unconstitutional, by definition. That’s why the framers made amendments somewhat difficult to achieve, and why we’ve only had a few dozen of them in 240 years.
I don’t think the process of amending the Constitution is onerous enough. The Constitution should’ve included a Declaration of Principles that are not amendable. These would be like Hayek’s “hard and fast” rules that protect individual life, liberty, and property not only from other citizens, but also from political processes including even those in the articles and amendments to follow in the Constitution. That would’ve precluded the part of the Commerce Clause that gives Congress the “right” of taxation, and therefore would’ve nipped in the bud much of the impetus for lobbying and special interests.
I may be mistaken but I thought amendments to the constitution had to be ratified by 3/4 of the states.
Yes. Since it goes through the state houses it’s voted on by reps still, rather than by the people directly
I wasn't thinking the people would have a direct move but rather our reps from Each state house would vote. And 3/4 of the states need to pass it. That can be rather difficult. Doable but NO guarantee.
thanks much for the response.
Didn't Bernie get a fat payoff? Seem to remember something about his buying a holiday home after all this.
Yes, he did. I also recall he had a black eye the night they stole it from him or the day after. But he got his new house.
It was the Shadow app that they used to steal the nomination from Bernie IIRC right?
You might know more about it than me. I just remember the superdelegate switcheroos being blatant. But like in the general election, they probably used multiple methods of fraud. Thanks
Thought he got a book deal.
Yes. A "Best Seller" as he put it when challenged about his Audi R8 (~$180K)
That too, probably.
Man, this is why I love this site. Even flippant comments get very thoughtful responses. So now I understand. Bernie was too popular, so they had to steal for Hillary, and they got caught, but that thats obviously fault of Bernie for being too popular, and hence he is responsible for all the abortion mess.
I guess when their 2020 fraud gets convicted, they will use the same logic against Trump. Obviously Trump's fault for being more popular and forcing them to steal the election, right?
Haha, funny how they never mention the constitutional amendment in their discussions. But wouldnt that require people voting for it? And not just the legislative houses and President's approval?
And I agree, there should have be some fundamental principles that can never be amended.