Jump to content

Democrats take the "L" on a gerrymandering case


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, West said:

You're a sucker if you STILL believe FOS LIES.

1 hour ago, West said:

Looks as if Democrats LIED yet again

Nothing in your cite about "Democrats LIED."

Quote

The case stems from a challenge by the ACLU and the NAACP

YOU WIN AGAIN in your contest over who tells the BIGGEST LIE. 🤮

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You're a sucker if you STILL believe FOS LIES.

Nothing in your cite about "Democrats LIED."

YOU WIN AGAIN in your contest over who tells the BIGGEST LIE. 🤮

The ACLU is full on WOKE and just and extention of the Dumpocrap party 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The ACLU is NOT related to the Democratic Party; they take donations from ANYONE.

Thanks for proving your dishonesty AGAIN.

They are further left than Stalin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The ACLU is NOT related to the Democratic Party; they take donations from ANYONE.

Thanks for proving your dishonesty AGAIN.

Lololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

It is dishonest.

Quote

As a matter of organizational policy, the ACLU does not endorse or oppose any candidate for office, nor does it provide funding to candidates or parties directly. The ACLU does actively educate supporters about the civil rights and civil liberties records of candidates, and works to inform and increase election turnout. The ACLU also works to expand voting rights through policy change. In 2018, the ACLU sponsored three ballot referenda in Florida, Michigan, and Nevada, with over $11 million in investments, which re-enfranchised over 2 million new voters eligible for the 2020 election. It is the most significant re-enfanchisement since 18 year olds became eligible to vote.

Who'd a thunk that the ACLU backs Parties which STRONGLY SUPPORT CIVIL LIBERTIES? LMAO

Maybe the RepubliCONS would get more of their money IF they supported civil liberties instead of OPPOSING THEM. Duh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

It is dishonest.

Who'd a thunk that the ACLU backs Parties which STRONGLY SUPPORT CIVIL LIBERTIES? LMAO

Maybe the RepubliCONS would get more of their money IF they supported civil liberties instead of OPPOSING THEM. Duh

I find it fascinating how you are either a) wilfully dishonest of b) have drunk the kool-aid that the Demoshits are the defenders of democracy and freedom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, West said:

I find it fascinating how you are either a) wilfully dishonest of b) have drunk the kool-aid that the Demoshits are the defenders of democracy and freedom

Democrats are certainly more credible on both. At some point Republicans became obsessed with legislating morality. And they'll use any anti-democratic tactic to get the votes to make it happen. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Democrats are certainly more credible on both. At some point Republicans became obsessed with legislating morality. And they'll use any anti-democratic tactic to get the votes to make it happen. 

 

Demoshits are not good people and have proven time and time again they are willing to abuse the judicial system for politics. This case is just one of many

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Democrats are certainly more credible on both. At some point Republicans became obsessed with legislating morality. And they'll use any anti-democratic tactic to get the votes to make it happen. 

 

But they are not. Their legal antics over the last year or so are seen by many people as being an attempt to use the courts to interfere with the political process. Recently the supreme court ruled that the judges who tried to keep trump from the ballots or behaving against the interest of democracy. Frequently the democrats say that trump was illegitimately elected, and they created fake dossiers to try and smear him early on and then spent years claiming he was a Russian agent when the proof suggests otherwise.

I cannot imagine why you would think that the democrats are in any way shape or form credible in any fashion on the question of protecting democracy. They are literally using any anti-democratic tactic to get the votes and to repress others. And have done so for years and now people have no faith in them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, West said:

I find it fascinating how you are either a) wilfully dishonest of b) have drunk the kool-aid that the Demoshits are the defenders of democracy and freedom

I find it fascinating that your believe YOUR OPINIONS have any relationship to REALITY.

Esp after another thread which you kick off with LIES of your own and cite FOS LIES.

40 minutes ago, West said:

Demoshits are not good people and have proven time and time again they are willing to abuse the judicial system for politics. This case is just one of many

No evidence of "abuse the judicial system" in this thread.

There IS evidence of your LIES.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, robosmith said:

I find it fascinating that your believe YOUR OPINIONS have any relationship to REALITY.

Esp after another thread which you kick off with LIES of your own and cite FOS LIES.

No evidence of "abuse the judicial system" in this thread.

There IS evidence of your LIES.

THIS OPINION Is useless WITHOUT FACTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Although if we're being fair robosmith is useless whether he has facts or not

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, West said:

Demoshits are not good people and have proven time and time again they are willing to abuse the judicial system for politics. This case is just one of many

I don't think you have any idea what this case is about. You simply root for your team. Gerry mandering is an anti-democratic practice. This was a suit to reverse that situation. If you were worried about democracy, you wouldn't be cheering.

Edited by Hodad
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, robosmith said:

I find it fascinating that your believe YOUR OPINIONS have any relationship to REALITY.

Esp after another thread which you kick off with LIES of your own and cite FOS LIES.

No evidence of "abuse the judicial system" in this thread.

There IS evidence of your LIES.

Yes there is. The far lefties tried to claim Republicans are gerrymandering, brought forward a frivolous case and got it tossed. 

This nonsense should result in prison time as it's giving the illusion that Republicans are guilty of crimes when they are not. Interference in the democratic process

1 minute ago, Hodad said:

I don't think you have any idea what this case is about. You simply root for your team. Gerry mandering is an anti-democratic practice. This was a suit to reverse that situation. If you were worried about democracy, you wouldn't be cheering.

It was a frivolous case brought to give an illusion of wrongdoing and should result in jail time for the lawyer who brought such filth before the courts 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, West said:

Yes there is. The far lefties tried to claim Republicans are gerrymandering, brought forward a frivolous case and got it tossed. 

That it had to go to the SCOTUS PROVES it was NOT FRIVOLOUS.

Apparently you don't understand that means that one or more courts ruled FOR the Democrats.

AKA it was a close call AT LEAST.

1 minute ago, West said:

This nonsense should result in prison time as it's giving the illusion that Republicans are guilty of crimes when they are not. Interference in the democratic process

If SCOTUS were not so corrupt these days, they would have upheld the lower court ruling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, West said:

Yes there is. The far lefties tried to claim Republicans are gerrymandering, brought forward a frivolous case and got it tossed. 

This nonsense should result in prison time as it's giving the illusion that Republicans are guilty of crimes when they are not. Interference in the democratic process

It was a frivolous case brought to give an illusion of wrongdoing and should result in jail time for the lawyer who brought such filth before the courts 

As I indicated, you clearly didn't know what this case is even about. There isn't really a question of whether the SC map was gerrymandered. That wasn't at question. 

It's legal in SC to Gerry mander on a partisan basis. And there is no federal law against it. But there is a federal law against drawing the map to disadvantage minorities--which is still a sore point in the South especially. 

Other courts acknowledged that race was a factor in the Republican SC redistricting process. This decidedly partial SCOTUS moved the goal post in an improbable way to issue this majority opinion. 

Whether you can rationalize that decision or not, isn't really relevant. The fact is that the gerrymandered (anti-democratic) may remains in place.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With increasing number of decisions split on the partisan lines, the U.S. is edging dangerously close to the erosion of an objective and impartial justice system: the last major institution not yet contaminated by extreme and irreversible partisanship. Further down this path lies politically motivated pseudo-justice whose decisions are dictated by political views and loyalties ahead of the principles of justice and law. Authoritarian states and the third world are teeming with "justice" of that kind.

And as in many other instances, some Republicans seem to not understand what is at stake here. A troubling and dangerous times in the history of a great democracy. And I see no obvious path back.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also only to remember: it wouldn't be a prized place in the history for this SCOTUS, if it would mark, clearly the beginning of the era of partisan pseudo-justice. It will remember all. Names, traditions, institutions: those are only words, once the essence is gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, myata said:

With increasing number of decisions split on the partisan lines, the U.S. is edging dangerously close to the erosion of an objective and impartial justice system: the last major institution not yet contaminated by extreme and irreversible partisanship. Further down this path lies politically motivated pseudo-justice whose decisions are dictated by political views and loyalties ahead of the principles of justice and law. Authoritarian states and the third world are teeming with "justice" of that kind.

And as in many other instances, some Republicans seem to not understand what is at stake here. A troubling and dangerous times in the history of a great democracy. And I see no obvious path back.

It's been contaminated for several years now. 

When President Clinton was allowed to get away with getting BJs in his office by an intern yet the same leftards are now politicizing it against Christian ministers with the Southern Baptist Convention because they want to break up the conservative base utilizing lawfare to do so, then you realize America is a messed up place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,750
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Betsy Smith
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...