2024 Presidential Election Thread

[LVAllen]

Yeah, that is exactly the point I was making. Which is why it was a dumb thing to shout at the justices.

Your point was that it makes no sense for Biden to say something that he wasn't saying? Now I'm If you think it doesn't make sense for him to shout something shaming the judges, it's a good thing he wasn't shouting something shaming the judges.

At no point was he shouting at the justices. The only time he ever addressed them was to say "with all due respect." (Which, by the way, means "screw you, your Honor" in lawyer, but that's beside the issue.)

[Jeff Lebowski]

Your point was that it makes no sense for Biden to say something that he wasn't saying? Now I'm If you think it doesn't make sense for him to shout something shaming the judges, it's a good thing he wasn't shouting something shaming the judges.

EDIT: I am saying it was dumb to shout ("say" if you like) to the judges that the people are going to do exactly what the judges said they should do. Decide the matter.

At no point was he shouting at the justices. The only time he ever addressed them was to say "with all due respect." (Which, by the way, means "screw you, your Honor" in lawyer, but that's beside the issue.)

"YOU SAID IT SHOULD BE DECIDED BY THE PEOPLE! THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO DECIDE!"

"OK, old man. Calm down."

Come on. He shouted the entire address. And yes, "will all due respect" means exactly that. Obviously.

[Copelius]

I suspect the speech content and tone were very much about shoring up and even motivating his Dem base (which is unhappy he is the nominee) and reaching out to independent swing voters by showing that while old, he is still a fighter, supports issues about which they care, and can put together 1) complete sentences and 2) coherent thoughts over the course of hour long presentation (two things The Dump cannot do).

On Dobbs, I take issue with the fact that everyone of The Dump's nominees went before the Senate and said that Roe was settled law. Bunch of liars. They should be scolded for their misrepresentations. That said, in doing what they did, they handed the Dems an issue that the Dems have for years said will bring out the base. That scares The Dump. We'll see if it is really that big of a motivator.

With all due respect to the more accomplished and educated out there, There are different kinds of settled law. There is the black and white of the Constitution and there is the settled law of stare decisis. Both can be amended and the procedure for doing so is well established. So, during the confirmation hearings, when they said Roe was settled law, they were absolutely right. However that statement did not obligate them to follow Roe when the case came before them to give it a look. I don't recall what specifically they were asked, but unless one of them said, "Roe is settled law and I commit not to revisit it if asked," it is not lying to do their job when a case comes before them. And such a statement as the previous one about any matter would show a prejudice in any case that would disqualify them from the bench.

But I am just a transactional hack that vaguely remembers the 1st week of law school when they taught stare decisis.

[beefytee]

Also, why should fundamental rights be decided at the ballot box? Is an unpopular opinion any less protected by the First Amendment after a ballot initiative bans it?

Not following your logic here. The First Amendment establishes rights in the constitution. That amendment came to be thanks to the popular process and persuasion, i.e. approval in the state and federal legislatures.

So yeah, it does come back to the ballot box.

If reproductive rights should be a fundamental right, it needs to go through the process used to get those other rights. Otherwise, it is up to standard legislation. Definitely shouldn't be left to 9 people to decide.

[frank ryan]

It's funny you think it's a conservative problem when SCOTUS nominees have to play the game to get confirmed, as if the progressive nominees are open and honest about their judicial philosophy. The whole process is a clown show in large part because the progressive shenanigans played by members of the Senate. Let's not forget that Biden himself was one of the most egregious game player on the judiciary committee in the 80s.

The justices shouldn't have lied when asked about that. It is a major concern that they should have addressed honestly.

[Shaka]

LOL your response reminds me of some of the MAGA reactions on CSPAN from random callers after the address-- big shocker, eh? I think you all are being fed such a steady diet of 'Biden is feeble' that you area actually surprised when he doesn't come in on a walker. (WOW WHAT DRUGS IS HE ON TO FORM WORDS???) Mitt Romney I think had a pretty measured response: he liked the foreign policy bits with the urging to support Ukraine, stop Putin, support Israel's sovereignty while facilitating and accelerating humanitarian aid to Palestine since nobody else seems particularly worried about the tens of thousands of women and children being extinguished for no reason. Of course Mitt took issue with some of the domestic agenda set forth and the national debt solutions, but honestly it's kind of nice to not have a whole ass ad hominem response for once. Too bad Republicans are not capable of governing, generally speaking. The whole thing is kind of a pony show anyway, with Mike Johnson not applauding the call for humanitarian aid to Gaza (lol). My favorite part was when Republicans started booing mention of the bipartisan border bill, written by Republicans, that Republicans blocked bc Trump called an audible. Biden's reaction was hilarious-- 'oh you disagree? look it up, bitches' or something like that.

I didn't watch CSPAN and other than the rebuttal (which also sucked), I didn't watch any of the post-SOTU commentary on any of the news stations. I watched BBT instead. So you're wrong. I did watch Mitt's remarks on Threads today while I was driving to St. George.

Biden was awful. If the pundits remarked about some of the same stuff and had a similar reaction, then maybe, just maybe, there's a point to be had.

[falafel]

I liked the speech. I like seeing Biden a little upset. People should be more upset about the condition of our country right now. This shouldn't be a difficult choice.

[Commando]

I didn't watch CSPAN and other than the rebuttal (which also sucked), I didn't watch any of the post-SOTU commentary on any of the news stations. I watched BBT instead. So you're wrong. I did watch Mitt's remarks on Threads today while I was driving to St. George.

Biden was awful. If the pundits remarked about some of the same stuff and had a similar reaction, then maybe, just maybe, there's a point to be had.

The pundits seemed to like the speech. It’s the maga weirdos calling in who really were upset by it, which made me happy. One lady called in to say Joe Biden is a liar and she really wishes the military would step in and take control of the country. Live on CSPAN. That’s what we’re up against, folks…

[Moliere]

That was awful. He came across as an angry old man and gave a stump speech instead of a SOTU. I kept wondering if they purposely gave him the advice (and possibly some stimulants) to act pissed off for the whole speech so that he would drop in the polls. Then he could be forced to drop out. It will be interesting to see if he gets a bump in the polls.

I didn't watch it but MJ did and I could hear him yelling from the other side of the house. I walked in once and his squinting and scowling looked a bit frightening. He probably had a good message but he looked and sounded like an angry old man.

[Moliere]

The justices shouldn't have lied when asked about that. It is a major concern that they should have addressed honestly.

Well, just like liberals believe the Constitution should be interpreted and applied in a modern fashion instead of its plain text...maybe the justices believe the same with Roe and stare decisis

[Non Sequitur]

I watched a clip. Holy cow, that was bad.

I hope Sarah Sherman does the SNL sketch. Watching Katie Britt's response reminded me of this:

[Shaka]

I didn't watch it but MJ did and I could hear him yelling from the other side of the house. I walked in once and his squinting and scowling looked a bit frightening. He probably had a good message but he looked and sounded like an angry old man.

Honestly, I kept envisioning Grandpa Simpson while Biden was talking.

[Non Sequitur]

Honestly, I kept envisioning Grandpa Simpson while Biden was talking.

Imagine my surprise when I woke up the day after the SOTU to discover that MAGA was the new champion of polite, non-confrontational political discourse. Does it not even occur to you how ridiculous your fake outrage sounds?

[Northwestcoug]

In the perverse manufactured dichotomy of US politics, I'll go with the screaming octagenarian over the twice impeached indicted insurrectionist demagogic septaugenarian, even if I were to trend right. Biden is a decent person. That used to mean something in our political discourse.

[Shaka]

Imagine my surprise when I woke up the day after the SOTU to discover that MAGA was the new champion of polite, non-confrontational political discourse. Does it not even occur to you how ridiculous your fake outrage sounds?

Fake? I wasn't outraged. It wasn't what SOTU has. historically been. It was an awkward speech that was more about campaigning and trying to show that Biden hasn't lost his marbles.