Dem Defense Strategies

4,020 Views | 68 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by Jack and DP
Jack and DP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Whiskey Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack and DP said:


Scorched America has been their plan for quite awhile when they don't get their way.

One reason why Trump got elected.
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Impeach for what?

Never take a bow and some arrows to a gunfight.

#AvengeBKavanaugh
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I know it is bad for the country but I hope that if Cadaver Biden wins that the Republicans give the Democrats even more hell back as return favor time.

I'd like to see the Democrat response if the conservatives started rioting, looting and beating in those hellhole cities the Dems created. I'd pay to watch a few hundred Proud Boys get bussed into Portland and let them camp out in the streets and wreak havoc for 100 days or more.
"The education of a man is never completed until he dies." - General Robert E. Lee
greatdivide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So basically status quo for the Dems.
STxBear81
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unleash that demon Schiff one more time .... Pelosi is a wind bag. Their only hope is if republicans fail to take advantage of this.
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BornAgain said:

Unleash that demon Schiff one more time .... Pelosi is a wind bag. Their only hope is if republicans fail to take advantage of this.
The three spineless wafflers (Murkowski/ Collins/ Romney) could be bigly problematic. They blow whichever way the political winds blow. At least if they vote against the pick or if they do not vote, they will be finished.
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Collins is toast as is. Romney is untouchable in Mormon Utah. Murkowski kept her seat in 2010 by winning against a party endorsed Republican as a write in, so she's not going anywhere either. The math gets even tighter sometime in late November when Mark Kelly takes Arizona's junior Senate seat from McSally.
STxBear81
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There could also be some democrats who vote against their party.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

Collins is toast as is. Romney is untouchable in Mormon Utah. Murkowski kept her seat in 2010 by winning against a party endorsed Republican as a write in, so she's not going anywhere either. The math gets even tighter sometime in late November when Mark Kelly takes Arizona's junior Senate seat from McSally.
What are your thoughts on using impeachment as a political weapon to stall a Supreme Court nomination?

Same question to any other Trump critic here.
Jack and DP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
STxBear81
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Didn't the Dems do that with Kavannaugh? Trump was being impeached during that process wasnt he
fubar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Collins is toast as is. Romney is untouchable in Mormon Utah. Murkowski kept her seat in 2010 by winning against a party endorsed Republican as a write in, so she's not going anywhere either. The math gets even tighter sometime in late November when Mark Kelly takes Arizona's junior Senate seat from McSally.
What are your thoughts on using impeachment as a political weapon to stall a Supreme Court nomination?

Same question to any other Trump critic here.
Against it, dumb idea.
riflebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack and DP said:




I am a robot....

Jack and DP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/flashback-in-2016-ginsburg-senate-election-year-vacancy
Johnny Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

I know it is bad for the country but I hope that if Cadaver Biden wins that the Republicans give the Democrats even more hell back as return favor time.

I'd like to see the Democrat response if the conservatives started rioting, looting and beating in those hellhole cities the Dems created. I'd pay to watch a few hundred Proud Boys get bussed into Portland and let them camp out in the streets and wreak havoc for 100 days or more.
That would never happen because conservatives and Republicans simply don't think or act that way. Not saying there couldn't be some (truly) peaceful demonstrations, and/or some random people that act out, but there is no counterpart or equivalency on the right/conservative side to BLM or ANTIFA or their sympathizers. Whatever one off type screwballs out there that really are "white supremacists" or KKK members, etc. constitute a miniscule number of disorganized disturbed people that by comparison pose a minimal threat at most.
HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Collins is toast as is. Romney is untouchable in Mormon Utah. Murkowski kept her seat in 2010 by winning against a party endorsed Republican as a write in, so she's not going anywhere either. The math gets even tighter sometime in late November when Mark Kelly takes Arizona's junior Senate seat from McSally.
What are your thoughts on using impeachment as a political weapon to stall a Supreme Court nomination?

Same question to any other Trump critic here.

Barr should have been impeached the moment the first prosecutor resigned in protest on Stone's case, doubly so after Flynn, and that's independent of this latest standoff. DeJoy also arguably has some exposure for his handling of the USPS. I actually don't think Pelosi will do that now though to tie up the Senate.

That said, I'm fine with it if she does. After listening to all the self righteous "might makes right" sentiments lately from Republicans in re RBG, I just don't have any appetite for Dems rolling over and doing nothing. The House has some might too, might be time to wield it.

This is what y'all wanted. Y'all were warned again and again that what McConnell did to Garland would escalate things, and now you have most of that same GOP Senate putting their bad faith on full display and saying "so what". Antagonism has consequences, and if y'all want to turn the court into a nakedly partisan instrument (which McConnell has made loud and clear), that has consequences to.
Whiskey Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Collins is toast as is. Romney is untouchable in Mormon Utah. Murkowski kept her seat in 2010 by winning against a party endorsed Republican as a write in, so she's not going anywhere either. The math gets even tighter sometime in late November when Mark Kelly takes Arizona's junior Senate seat from McSally.
What are your thoughts on using impeachment as a political weapon to stall a Supreme Court nomination?

Same question to any other Trump critic here.

Barr should have been impeached the moment the first prosecutor resigned in protest on Stone's case, doubly so after Flynn, and that's independent of this latest standoff. DeJoy also arguably has some exposure for his handling of the USPS. I actually don't think Pelosi will do that now though to tie up the Senate.

That said, I'm fine with it if she does. After listening to all the self righteous "might makes right" sentiments lately from Republicans in re RBG, I just don't have any appetite for Dems rolling over and doing nothing. The House has some might too, might be time to wield it.

This is what y'all wanted. Y'all were warned again and again that what McConnell did to Garland would escalate things, and now you have most of that same GOP Senate putting their bad faith on full display and saying "so what". Antagonism has consequences, and if y'all want to turn the court into a nakedly partisan instrument (which McConnell has made loud and clear), that has consequences to.
SHOCKER!

One of the most triggered TDSers on this board isn't happy with the Republicans (again).

Let me guess.... it's all Trump's fault (again)?
Jack and DP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lmao

Jack and DP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fubar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HashTag said:

HuMcK said:



Barr should have been impeached the moment the first prosecutor resigned in protest on Stone's case, doubly so after Flynn, and that's independent of this latest standoff. DeJoy also arguably has some exposure for his handling of the USPS. I actually don't think Pelosi will do that now though to tie up the Senate.

That said, I'm fine with it if she does. After listening to all the self righteous "might makes right" sentiments lately from Republicans in re RBG, I just don't have any appetite for Dems rolling over and doing nothing. The House has some might too, might be time to wield it.

This is what y'all wanted. Y'all were warned again and again that what McConnell did to Garland would escalate things, and now you have most of that same GOP Senate putting their bad faith on full display and saying "so what". Antagonism has consequences, and if y'all want to turn the court into a nakedly partisan instrument (which McConnell has made loud and clear), that has consequences to.
SHOCKER!

One of the most triggered TDSers on this board isn't happy with the Republicans (again).

Let me guess.... it's all Trump's fault (again)?
I won't try to speak for Huey, but this is on Mitch McConnell and any Senate Republican who was in the Senate in 2016. I'll give a partial pass to those who took a seat for the first time after 2016 ... they weren't in on the game in 2016.

By the way, why in the world are you guys worried about this? The consensus from the Trumpty Dumpts is that we're headed for a landslide.
riflebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fubar said:

HashTag said:

HuMcK said:



Barr should have been impeached the moment the first prosecutor resigned in protest on Stone's case, doubly so after Flynn, and that's independent of this latest standoff. DeJoy also arguably has some exposure for his handling of the USPS. I actually don't think Pelosi will do that now though to tie up the Senate.

That said, I'm fine with it if she does. After listening to all the self righteous "might makes right" sentiments lately from Republicans in re RBG, I just don't have any appetite for Dems rolling over and doing nothing. The House has some might too, might be time to wield it.

This is what y'all wanted. Y'all were warned again and again that what McConnell did to Garland would escalate things, and now you have most of that same GOP Senate putting their bad faith on full display and saying "so what". Antagonism has consequences, and if y'all want to turn the court into a nakedly partisan instrument (which McConnell has made loud and clear), that has consequences to.
SHOCKER!

One of the most triggered TDSers on this board isn't happy with the Republicans (again).

Let me guess.... it's all Trump's fault (again)?
I won't try to speak for Huey, but this is on Mitch McConnell and any Senate Republican who was in the Senate in 2016. I'll give a partial pass to those who took a seat for the first time after 2016 ... they weren't in on the game in 2016.

By the way, why in the world are you guys worried about this? The consensus from the Trumpty Dumpts is that we're headed for a landslide.


Because we don't want to see thousands of innocent businesses burned against and billions of $$ worth of damage.

If GOP voters get mad they might shout but they go vote to change things.

When Dems get mad they want to burn everything down and it doesn't matter what corrupt or illegal things they do to win back power.

Which party do you want to support?
Whiskey Pete
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fubar said:

HashTag said:

HuMcK said:



Barr should have been impeached the moment the first prosecutor resigned in protest on Stone's case, doubly so after Flynn, and that's independent of this latest standoff. DeJoy also arguably has some exposure for his handling of the USPS. I actually don't think Pelosi will do that now though to tie up the Senate.

That said, I'm fine with it if she does. After listening to all the self righteous "might makes right" sentiments lately from Republicans in re RBG, I just don't have any appetite for Dems rolling over and doing nothing. The House has some might too, might be time to wield it.

This is what y'all wanted. Y'all were warned again and again that what McConnell did to Garland would escalate things, and now you have most of that same GOP Senate putting their bad faith on full display and saying "so what". Antagonism has consequences, and if y'all want to turn the court into a nakedly partisan instrument (which McConnell has made loud and clear), that has consequences to.
SHOCKER!

One of the most triggered TDSers on this board isn't happy with the Republicans (again).

Let me guess.... it's all Trump's fault (again)?
I won't try to speak for Huey, but this is on Mitch McConnell and any Senate Republican who was in the Senate in 2016. I'll give a partial pass to those who took a seat for the first time after 2016 ... they weren't in on the game in 2016.

By the way, why in the world are you guys worried about this? The consensus from the Trumpty Dumpts is that we're headed for a landslide.
So you want McConnell to follow what he said in 2016, but the those that demanded for a floor vote, it's okay for them to change their mind now? - okay.

I would think those dems that demanded a floor vote then would be demanding a floor vote now - hypocrites.

By the way, don't know why you think we're worried, RBG passing benefits the GOP and Trump.

Democrats will overplay what ever hand they think they have and turn off many Americans by making threats about packing the court, impeaching Trump to stall confirmation, etc.....

In 2016, over 25% of Trump voters said the Supreme Court was the most important factor in their decision to support him. Potential justice appointments was shaping up to be la less powerful argument this time around. Not anymore.
Forest Bueller_bf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BornAgain said:

Unleash that demon Schiff one more time .... Pelosi is a wind bag. Their only hope is if republicans fail to take advantage of this.
Republicans would be absolute morons to not vote in a Conservative Justice. The way our country is falling, the majority will be communist/socialist leaning within a decade. They have already determine Biden is a lock, it will be absolute foolishness not to nominate, then vote in a conservative Justice, because this might be the last chance for a generation of voters.

Forest Bueller_bf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:

Lmao


There are simply too many democratic leaders on the verge of dementia.

Look at the eyes, that's were you first see it. The look of vacancy.

Not their fault, but they should be forced to step down.
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Forest Bueller_bf said:

Doc Holliday said:

Lmao


There are simply too many democratic leaders on the verge of dementia.

Look at the eyes, that's were you first see it. The look of vacancy.

Not their fault, but they should be forced to step down.
And her colleague from California, Diane Feinstein, is.....HOLY ****....87 years old.
fubar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
riflebear said:

fubar said:

HashTag said:

HuMcK said:



Barr should have been impeached the moment the first prosecutor resigned in protest on Stone's case, doubly so after Flynn, and that's independent of this latest standoff. DeJoy also arguably has some exposure for his handling of the USPS. I actually don't think Pelosi will do that now though to tie up the Senate.

That said, I'm fine with it if she does. After listening to all the self righteous "might makes right" sentiments lately from Republicans in re RBG, I just don't have any appetite for Dems rolling over and doing nothing. The House has some might too, might be time to wield it.

This is what y'all wanted. Y'all were warned again and again that what McConnell did to Garland would escalate things, and now you have most of that same GOP Senate putting their bad faith on full display and saying "so what". Antagonism has consequences, and if y'all want to turn the court into a nakedly partisan instrument (which McConnell has made loud and clear), that has consequences to.
SHOCKER!

One of the most triggered TDSers on this board isn't happy with the Republicans (again).

Let me guess.... it's all Trump's fault (again)?
I won't try to speak for Huey, but this is on Mitch McConnell and any Senate Republican who was in the Senate in 2016. I'll give a partial pass to those who took a seat for the first time after 2016 ... they weren't in on the game in 2016.

By the way, why in the world are you guys worried about this? The consensus from the Trumpty Dumpts is that we're headed for a landslide.


Because we don't want to see thousands of innocent businesses burned against and billions of $$ worth of damage.

If GOP voters get mad they might shout but they go vote to change things.

When Dems get mad they want to burn everything down and it doesn't matter what corrupt or illegal things they do to win back power.

Which party do you want to support?
Fear. That's what you got. Apparently you're not as confident in your boy as you project. Fear.

I've said many times on this site that I will be voting for Joe Biden, and I've explained why. Not going to do that again here. I'll be voting Democrat in the U.S. Senate and House races as well. (The House race isn't competitive.) Locally, I'll stick with what I usually do, which is vote Republican for the partisan jobs.

Hopefully the GOP brings me back in 2024.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Collins is toast as is. Romney is untouchable in Mormon Utah. Murkowski kept her seat in 2010 by winning against a party endorsed Republican as a write in, so she's not going anywhere either. The math gets even tighter sometime in late November when Mark Kelly takes Arizona's junior Senate seat from McSally.
What are your thoughts on using impeachment as a political weapon to stall a Supreme Court nomination?

Same question to any other Trump critic here.

Barr should have been impeached the moment the first prosecutor resigned in protest on Stone's case, doubly so after Flynn, and that's independent of this latest standoff. DeJoy also arguably has some exposure for his handling of the USPS. I actually don't think Pelosi will do that now though to tie up the Senate.

That said, I'm fine with it if she does. After listening to all the self righteous "might makes right" sentiments lately from Republicans in re RBG, I just don't have any appetite for Dems rolling over and doing nothing. The House has some might too, might be time to wield it.

This is what y'all wanted. Y'all were warned again and again that what McConnell did to Garland would escalate things, and now you have most of that same GOP Senate putting their bad faith on full display and saying "so what". Antagonism has consequences, and if y'all want to turn the court into a nakedly partisan instrument (which McConnell has made loud and clear), that has consequences to.
You didn't address the question as to Trump. He's already been impeached and investigated. Now they're talking about impeaching him again just to stop a Supreme Court nomination. You're okay with that?
George Truett
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack and DP said:


This is deceptive.

He didn't "float" the idea. He was legitimately asking her about something he had heard.

I'm against these ideas.

But this is what happens when you commit two bald-faced power grabs on SCOTUS.

I think Dems should operate morally and ethically even when Reps don't, but that's me.
George Truett
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

Collins is toast as is. Romney is untouchable in Mormon Utah. Murkowski kept her seat in 2010 by winning against a party endorsed Republican as a write in, so she's not going anywhere either. The math gets even tighter sometime in late November when Mark Kelly takes Arizona's junior Senate seat from McSally.
They'll definitely try to shove it through before the election because Kelly is way ahead of McSally, and he'll take that seat immediately.

They'll get it through, but it will degrade our politics and our country.

I knew McConnell was lying in 2016 and now he's lying again.
fubar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HashTag said:

fubar said:

HashTag said:

HuMcK said:



Barr should have been impeached the moment the first prosecutor resigned in protest on Stone's case, doubly so after Flynn, and that's independent of this latest standoff. DeJoy also arguably has some exposure for his handling of the USPS. I actually don't think Pelosi will do that now though to tie up the Senate.

That said, I'm fine with it if she does. After listening to all the self righteous "might makes right" sentiments lately from Republicans in re RBG, I just don't have any appetite for Dems rolling over and doing nothing. The House has some might too, might be time to wield it.

This is what y'all wanted. Y'all were warned again and again that what McConnell did to Garland would escalate things, and now you have most of that same GOP Senate putting their bad faith on full display and saying "so what". Antagonism has consequences, and if y'all want to turn the court into a nakedly partisan instrument (which McConnell has made loud and clear), that has consequences to.
SHOCKER!

One of the most triggered TDSers on this board isn't happy with the Republicans (again).

Let me guess.... it's all Trump's fault (again)?
I won't try to speak for Huey, but this is on Mitch McConnell and any Senate Republican who was in the Senate in 2016. I'll give a partial pass to those who took a seat for the first time after 2016 ... they weren't in on the game in 2016.

By the way, why in the world are you guys worried about this? The consensus from the Trumpty Dumpts is that we're headed for a landslide.
So you want McConnell to follow what he said in 2016, but the those that demanded for a floor vote, it's okay for them to change their mind now? - okay.

I would think those dems that demanded a floor vote then would be demanding a floor vote now - hypocrites.

By the way, don't know why you think we're worried, RBG passing benefits the GOP and Trump.

Democrats will overplay what ever hand they think they have and turn off many Americans by making threats about packing the court, impeaching Trump to stall confirmation, etc.....

In 2016, over 25% of Trump voters said the Supreme Court was the most important factor in their decision to support him. Potential justice appointments was shaping up to be la less powerful argument this time around. Not anymore.
If you change the rules, play by the rules you made. Calling the other side -- the one without power to do anything of substance -- hypocritical, while you're Grand Marshal of the Hypocrite Parade, is asinine. Nobody outside of the True Believers in the echo chamber buys it.

You know what could've avoided this whole sorry spectacle? Holding hearings and a vote on Merrick Garland in 2016. You vote him down, you can explain why and move on.
HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They're talking about an impeachment, I haven't seen that it has to or would be Trump specifically. He could get swept up in a Barr impeachment though. If interference in judicial processes for Trump's cronies is the underlying conduct being examined, I imagine his name would at least come up.
George Truett
How long do you want to ignore this user?
riflebear said:

fubar said:

HashTag said:

HuMcK said:



Barr should have been impeached the moment the first prosecutor resigned in protest on Stone's case, doubly so after Flynn, and that's independent of this latest standoff. DeJoy also arguably has some exposure for his handling of the USPS. I actually don't think Pelosi will do that now though to tie up the Senate.

That said, I'm fine with it if she does. After listening to all the self righteous "might makes right" sentiments lately from Republicans in re RBG, I just don't have any appetite for Dems rolling over and doing nothing. The House has some might too, might be time to wield it.

This is what y'all wanted. Y'all were warned again and again that what McConnell did to Garland would escalate things, and now you have most of that same GOP Senate putting their bad faith on full display and saying "so what". Antagonism has consequences, and if y'all want to turn the court into a nakedly partisan instrument (which McConnell has made loud and clear), that has consequences to.
SHOCKER!

One of the most triggered TDSers on this board isn't happy with the Republicans (again).

Let me guess.... it's all Trump's fault (again)?
I won't try to speak for Huey, but this is on Mitch McConnell and any Senate Republican who was in the Senate in 2016. I'll give a partial pass to those who took a seat for the first time after 2016 ... they weren't in on the game in 2016.

By the way, why in the world are you guys worried about this? The consensus from the Trumpty Dumpts is that we're headed for a landslide.


Because we don't want to see thousands of innocent businesses burned against and billions of $$ worth of damage.

If GOP voters get mad they might shout but they go vote to change things.

When Dems get mad they want to burn everything down and it doesn't matter what corrupt or illegal things they do to win back power.

Which party do you want to support?
So you're concerned about looting and damage?

As I recall, there was no looting and rioting during the last Democratic administration.

And now, under Trump, there's looting and rioting.

Using your criteria, the choice is clear.
643 Bears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GOP--nominate a justice and vote to confirm according to Constitution

Dems--We will pack the court, add new states, impeach people and eliminate the filibuster.

Media--GOP is violating norms.

People seem to have forgotten that there was zero chance Garland was ever going to be confirmed by the GOP controlled Senate. The fight was whether to bring it up for a vote and force certain senators to vote no officially. The push for a vote and the refusal to allow it were both COMPLETELY POLITICAL.

It's revisionist history to act like Garland would be on the court if there had been a vote.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.