Kavanaugh

Options
1…99101103104105

Comments

  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,644
    pjl44 said:
    brianlux said:
    When Nixon ran for president, I registered Republican so I could vote against him in the primaries.  I never thought Trump had a chance or I would have done that in 2016.
    I've often wondered about that in 2020. There's at least a decent chance Trump gets primaried. What's the strategy if your politics are left-of-center? Take the R ballot and vote for a challenger or choose among the D candidates?
    Good question.  I think a lot depends on who the dems come up with.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni











  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,805
    pjl44 said:
    cincybearcat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mace1229 said:
    josevolution said:
    mickeyrat said:
    josevolution said:
    Had to register for either Rep or Dem to be eligible to vote in November here in NY ...
    what? I can understand about primaries but an actual election? wtf?
    I was wrong i thought i couldn't vote in midterm elections i just went back and looked and i can but now i registered as a democrat i'm just gonna leave it and change it back to Independent after November , i know for sure i was turned away from the primaries a couple of yrs back as i was not registered as a D or R ...
    Does that not make perfect sense though?
    Why should someone not in the party get to vote who is that party's representative? 
    Everyone gets to vote in the final election. 
    so you are saying those unaffiliated with a particular party should only be allowed in half the process? fuck that.
    Well yeah. If you aren’t apart of the party you shouldn’t be picking their candidate. I understand what you are saying but it’s really not that big of a deal to register and re-register party affiliate. 

    I personally would prefer it if independents could vote in 1 primary of their choosing though.
    That's how it works in Massachusetts. I'm registered Independent and can choose my ballot in a primary. If you're registered with a party, you're locked into that party's ballot.
    I’ve seen that in a few states. Don’t know which ones. When I was in Iowa you had to be registered for a party. 
    hippiemom = goodness
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,805
    mickeyrat said:
    cincybearcat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mace1229 said:
    josevolution said:
    mickeyrat said:
    josevolution said:
    Had to register for either Rep or Dem to be eligible to vote in November here in NY ...
    what? I can understand about primaries but an actual election? wtf?
    I was wrong i thought i couldn't vote in midterm elections i just went back and looked and i can but now i registered as a democrat i'm just gonna leave it and change it back to Independent after November , i know for sure i was turned away from the primaries a couple of yrs back as i was not registered as a D or R ...
    Does that not make perfect sense though?
    Why should someone not in the party get to vote who is that party's representative? 
    Everyone gets to vote in the final election. 
    so you are saying those unaffiliated with a particular party should only be allowed in half the process? fuck that.
    Well yeah. If you aren’t apart of the party you shouldn’t be picking their candidate. I understand what you are saying but it’s really not that big of a deal to register and re-register party affiliate. 

    I personally would prefer it if independents could vote in 1 primary of their choosing though.
    well we do have that in Ohio. no need to change registration.
    Yup, I shoulda said some states had that. 
    hippiemom = goodness
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,823
    mickeyrat said:
    mace1229 said:
    josevolution said:
    mickeyrat said:
    josevolution said:
    Had to register for either Rep or Dem to be eligible to vote in November here in NY ...
    what? I can understand about primaries but an actual election? wtf?
    I was wrong i thought i couldn't vote in midterm elections i just went back and looked and i can but now i registered as a democrat i'm just gonna leave it and change it back to Independent after November , i know for sure i was turned away from the primaries a couple of yrs back as i was not registered as a D or R ...
    Does that not make perfect sense though?
    Why should someone not in the party get to vote who is that party's representative? 
    Everyone gets to vote in the final election. 
    so you are saying those unaffiliated with a particular party should only be allowed in half the process? fuck that.
    If that process is to put forward a nomination, yes.
    Why should someone who is not affiliated with any group have a say who their nominee is?
    You can still vote, no one is saying if you aren't part of a party you can't vote. But why should a democrat help decide who the republicans put forward as a nominee?
    Most people who do just vote for the worse candidate just to make their look better anyway.
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,288
    I think you should be registered to a party to vote in that primary.  Perhaps in days past there was a gentlecarbonbasedlifeform's agreement that you would not interfere with a party you don't plan on voting for, but those days are long gone.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,823
    Jason P said:
    I think you should be registered to a party to vote in that primary.  Perhaps in days past there was a gentlecarbonbasedlifeform's agreement that you would not interfere with a party you don't plan on voting for, but those days are long gone.
    Exactly. Those who vote outside their party aren't voting for someone, they are really voting against someone else. Interfere was a good word, they are attempting to put someone else on the ballot than who they believe the party will vote for.
  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 7,773
    mace1229 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mace1229 said:
    josevolution said:
    mickeyrat said:
    josevolution said:
    Had to register for either Rep or Dem to be eligible to vote in November here in NY ...
    what? I can understand about primaries but an actual election? wtf?
    I was wrong i thought i couldn't vote in midterm elections i just went back and looked and i can but now i registered as a democrat i'm just gonna leave it and change it back to Independent after November , i know for sure i was turned away from the primaries a couple of yrs back as i was not registered as a D or R ...
    Does that not make perfect sense though?
    Why should someone not in the party get to vote who is that party's representative? 
    Everyone gets to vote in the final election. 
    so you are saying those unaffiliated with a particular party should only be allowed in half the process? fuck that.
    If that process is to put forward a nomination, yes.
    Why should someone who is not affiliated with any group have a say who their nominee is?
    You can still vote, no one is saying if you aren't part of a party you can't vote. But why should a democrat help decide who the republicans put forward as a nominee?
    Most people who do just vote for the worse candidate just to make their look better anyway.


    If that's so bad, then why is it ok to donate money to a party then run against that party at a later date? Certainly big money has more impact than a single vote?

    Trump gave tons of money to the dems and Clintons when he believed it could help him out when they were in power. Then he switched to GOP when he realized he could con them to vote for him by attacking Obama's citizenship

    Seems to me if I am an independent and want to cast a single vote in either  of the primaries, that would be far less damaging to our country 
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,823
    edited October 2018
    Lerxst1992 said:
    mace1229 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mace1229 said:
    josevolution said:
    mickeyrat said:
    josevolution said:
    Had to register for either Rep or Dem to be eligible to vote in November here in NY ...
    what? I can understand about primaries but an actual election? wtf?
    I was wrong i thought i couldn't vote in midterm elections i just went back and looked and i can but now i registered as a democrat i'm just gonna leave it and change it back to Independent after November , i know for sure i was turned away from the primaries a couple of yrs back as i was not registered as a D or R ...
    Does that not make perfect sense though?
    Why should someone not in the party get to vote who is that party's representative? 
    Everyone gets to vote in the final election. 
    so you are saying those unaffiliated with a particular party should only be allowed in half the process? fuck that.
    If that process is to put forward a nomination, yes.
    Why should someone who is not affiliated with any group have a say who their nominee is?
    You can still vote, no one is saying if you aren't part of a party you can't vote. But why should a democrat help decide who the republicans put forward as a nominee?
    Most people who do just vote for the worse candidate just to make their look better anyway.


    If that's so bad, then why is it ok to donate money to a party then run against that party at a later date? Certainly big money has more impact than a single vote?

    Trump gave tons of money to the dems and Clintons when he believed it could help him out when they were in power. Then he switched to GOP when he realized he could con them to vote for him by attacking Obama's citizenship

    Seems to me if I am an independent and want to cast a single vote in either  of the primaries, that would be far less damaging to our country 
    It was just explained. 
    Those who vote in the primaries in another party usually have no intent on voting for that person again. It is to sabotage the other party's nominee, so they put forth a less qualified one.
    And that is the purpose of such voting laws, to prevent that. So that registered repubs don;t go vote Bernie Sanders in believe they have a better chance beating him, they should be allowed to vote on who they think is best, not who the other party thinks is worse. 
    Why shouldn't the dems and repubs have their own say in who they nominate?
    Post edited by mace1229 on
  • pjl44
    pjl44 Posts: 10,519
    mace1229 said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    mace1229 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mace1229 said:
    josevolution said:
    mickeyrat said:
    josevolution said:
    Had to register for either Rep or Dem to be eligible to vote in November here in NY ...
    what? I can understand about primaries but an actual election? wtf?
    I was wrong i thought i couldn't vote in midterm elections i just went back and looked and i can but now i registered as a democrat i'm just gonna leave it and change it back to Independent after November , i know for sure i was turned away from the primaries a couple of yrs back as i was not registered as a D or R ...
    Does that not make perfect sense though?
    Why should someone not in the party get to vote who is that party's representative? 
    Everyone gets to vote in the final election. 
    so you are saying those unaffiliated with a particular party should only be allowed in half the process? fuck that.
    If that process is to put forward a nomination, yes.
    Why should someone who is not affiliated with any group have a say who their nominee is?
    You can still vote, no one is saying if you aren't part of a party you can't vote. But why should a democrat help decide who the republicans put forward as a nominee?
    Most people who do just vote for the worse candidate just to make their look better anyway.


    If that's so bad, then why is it ok to donate money to a party then run against that party at a later date? Certainly big money has more impact than a single vote?

    Trump gave tons of money to the dems and Clintons when he believed it could help him out when they were in power. Then he switched to GOP when he realized he could con them to vote for him by attacking Obama's citizenship

    Seems to me if I am an independent and want to cast a single vote in either  of the primaries, that would be far less damaging to our country 
    It was just explained. 
    Those who vote in the primaries in another party usually have no intent on voting for that person again. It is to sabotage the other party's nominee, so they put forth a less qualified one.
    And that is the purpose of such voting laws, to prevent that. So that registered repubs don;t go vote Bernie Sanders in believe they have a better chance beating him, they should be allowed to vote on who they think is best, not who the other party thinks is worse. 
    Why shouldn't the dems and repubs have their own say in who they nominate?
    I suspect someone intent on showing up to vote against a candidate would just switch their party affiliation ahead of time. It's not difficult.

    I really like having the option as an Independent. Especially in a Presidential primary - by the time Massachusetts' was held in 2016 several candidates had dropped out. I took the D ballot but probably would have taken the R if it was a couple months earlier.
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,823
    pjl44 said:
    mace1229 said:
    Lerxst1992 said:
    mace1229 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mace1229 said:
    josevolution said:
    mickeyrat said:
    josevolution said:
    Had to register for either Rep or Dem to be eligible to vote in November here in NY ...
    what? I can understand about primaries but an actual election? wtf?
    I was wrong i thought i couldn't vote in midterm elections i just went back and looked and i can but now i registered as a democrat i'm just gonna leave it and change it back to Independent after November , i know for sure i was turned away from the primaries a couple of yrs back as i was not registered as a D or R ...
    Does that not make perfect sense though?
    Why should someone not in the party get to vote who is that party's representative? 
    Everyone gets to vote in the final election. 
    so you are saying those unaffiliated with a particular party should only be allowed in half the process? fuck that.
    If that process is to put forward a nomination, yes.
    Why should someone who is not affiliated with any group have a say who their nominee is?
    You can still vote, no one is saying if you aren't part of a party you can't vote. But why should a democrat help decide who the republicans put forward as a nominee?
    Most people who do just vote for the worse candidate just to make their look better anyway.


    If that's so bad, then why is it ok to donate money to a party then run against that party at a later date? Certainly big money has more impact than a single vote?

    Trump gave tons of money to the dems and Clintons when he believed it could help him out when they were in power. Then he switched to GOP when he realized he could con them to vote for him by attacking Obama's citizenship

    Seems to me if I am an independent and want to cast a single vote in either  of the primaries, that would be far less damaging to our country 
    It was just explained. 
    Those who vote in the primaries in another party usually have no intent on voting for that person again. It is to sabotage the other party's nominee, so they put forth a less qualified one.
    And that is the purpose of such voting laws, to prevent that. So that registered repubs don;t go vote Bernie Sanders in believe they have a better chance beating him, they should be allowed to vote on who they think is best, not who the other party thinks is worse. 
    Why shouldn't the dems and repubs have their own say in who they nominate?
    I suspect someone intent on showing up to vote against a candidate would just switch their party affiliation ahead of time. It's not difficult.

    I really like having the option as an Independent. Especially in a Presidential primary - by the time Massachusetts' was held in 2016 several candidates had dropped out. I took the D ballot but probably would have taken the R if it was a couple months earlier.
    Thats true, it really isnt difficult. But the intent of the rule is still the same. Its to keep the integrity of the election. Yes, some will always find ways around it. 
    Its like all the senior class voting for the ugly girl for prom nominee for the jr class, so their senior girl can easily win in the final vote.
  • Spiritual_Chaos
    Spiritual_Chaos Posts: 31,437
    mcgruff10 said:
    I am definitely pro choice but I do believe that there should be some sort of limits. Maybe beginning of the third trimester?
    he... he.........he....
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • njnancy
    njnancy Posts: 5,096
    mickeyrat said:
    stuckinline said:


    Steve King's post has really got me fired up. He annoys me already but this was just unnecessary. And the sad truth is that in about 10 or so years, King would force that little angel to have a baby - 10, 11, 12, 13 years old, doesn't matter. Once that little angel hits puberty she no longer is an angel, she is an incubator.
  • stuckinline
    stuckinline Posts: 3,406
    njnancy said:
    mickeyrat said:
    stuckinline said:


    Steve King's post has really got me fired up. He annoys me already but this was just unnecessary. And the sad truth is that in about 10 or so years, King would force that little angel to have a baby - 10, 11, 12, 13 years old, doesn't matter. Once that little angel hits puberty she no longer is an angel, she is an incubator.
    njnancy, his post annoyed me as well. I previously posted that the Republicans want a Hand Maid's Tale type society, but got flamed for it.
    Some republicans think women are put on this earth to serve their needs and have babies.


  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,642
    mcgruff10 said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    my2hands said:
    I love people when people get offended by a rock gig poster lol

    But had no issue with children in cages
    Or children who are likely to never see their parents again. Ever. And yet consider themselves “Christian.” Can I get a praise be the lord?
    So I haven’t seen anywhere in the news but has illegal crossings gone down since this policy was implemented?
    If they did are you implying that separating children from their parents, losing track of them and knowing a percentage will never see their parents again is an effective and acceptable illegal immigration enforcement strategy that you can support?
    You must have the best dinner conversations with your wife lol. 
    And to answer your question, of course not. 
    Never once have I thought you might conditionally support such things, FWIW.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,642
    edited October 2018
    mickeyrat said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    I am definitely pro choice but I do believe that there should be some sort of limits. Maybe beginning of the third trimester?
    pretty sure thats the current standard most everywhere except in cases where the woman life is in jeooardy.
    Agreed. Trump and a whole bunch of actual anti-abotionists (which Trump is not btw, IMO) like to pretend that non-medically necessary late term abortions are a real thing to worry about, but they are not.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • mcgruff10
    mcgruff10 New Jersey Posts: 29,111
    PJ_Soul said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    my2hands said:
    I love people when people get offended by a rock gig poster lol

    But had no issue with children in cages
    Or children who are likely to never see their parents again. Ever. And yet consider themselves “Christian.” Can I get a praise be the lord?
    So I haven’t seen anywhere in the news but has illegal crossings gone down since this policy was implemented?
    If they did are you implying that separating children from their parents, losing track of them and knowing a percentage will never see their parents again is an effective and acceptable illegal immigration enforcement strategy that you can support?
    You must have the best dinner conversations with your wife lol. 
    And to answer your question, of course not. 
    Never once have I thought you might conditionally support such things, FWIW.
    Thank you, I appreciate that. 
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • njnancy
    njnancy Posts: 5,096
    PJ_Soul said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mcgruff10 said:
    I am definitely pro choice but I do believe that there should be some sort of limits. Maybe beginning of the third trimester?
    pretty sure thats the current standard most everywhere except in cases where the woman life is in jeooardy.
    Agreed. Trump and a whole bunch of actual anti-abotionists (which Trump is not btw, IMO) like to pretend that non-medically necessary late term abortions are a real thing to worry about, but they are not.
    He uses his 'I have a friend' excuse about his change in his view. He has lots of anonymous 'friends' to whom he refers. It's delusional. 
    And the extreme majority of third trimester abortions are heartbreaking for the mother. I have a friend who had one at 6 months and was a mess about it. She had to give birth to her still born child - that really messes someone up. There aren't lines of women deciding that it wasn't such a good idea at that point in their pregnancy and opting to just abort. It's a horrible decision and using it for political reasons is truly a sickening, but effective, tactic.
  • eddiec
    eddiec Posts: 3,959
    edited October 2018
    This swearing-in is a Republican circle jerk.
  • njnancy
    njnancy Posts: 5,096
    eddiec said:
    This swearing-in is a Republican circle jerk.
    Kavanaugh is saying how independent he will be as a judge; immediately after Trump just reminded the country that he is only the president for those who worship him. 
  • Renfield
    Renfield NYC NY Posts: 1,054
    edited October 2018
    mickeyrat said:
    First official picture of the new court...LMFAO =)
    Post edited by Renfield on

Categories