If the argument against Democrats is going to be illegal health care and unlimited abortion, the alternative would need to be no illegal health care and limited abortion.

First, and please stop pretending to be obtuse on purpose, the judiciary is working very slowly. Overturning a landmark decision by the highest court in the country takes its time. The only realistic path to getting abortion limited is to overturn Roe v. Wade, and you know that. And the only possible path to this is nominating a sufficient number of conservative federal judges. And guess what? Of all the fields, judicial nominations is the one where Trump has the best track record. Objectively, the judges are the biggest success of his presidency so far. Getting him reelected would all but guarantee the necessary conservative majorities on the Supreme Court and the circuit courts.

Second, the choice to be made is not between Trump and the status quo, it is a choice between Trump and the changes his Democratic challenger would implement. When it comes to healthcare for illegals, Trump might not be able to change the status quo - but he can and will at least preserve it. The Democrats, on the other hand, want to expand healthcare expenditures on illegals even further. On this issue, the choice for a conservative voters is between keeping an unsatisfying status quo with Trump, or seeing the situation getting even worse than it is right now under a Democrat.

"at least we have conservative justices to protect 2a and go after abortion" said trump supporters increasingly frustrated with a lack of legislative wins.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/supreme-court-lets-sandy-hook-143642777.html

oh right now you're saying these parameters exist solely due to Trump winning the presidency, so anything ongoing before that was due to him?
if you want to vote for politicians who run on further taxing the middle-class and working-class under the guise of 'taxing the rich', all so that the government can use more taxpayer funds for policies such as more free healthcare for all illegal immigrants be my guest.

What's so bad about allowing a court case against a gun-maker? Either the case will be lost, or it will be won on the grounds that the plaintiffs can prove that the gun-maker violated existing laws. Due to the 2nd amendment, I highly doubt that the fact that they manufactured/sold these guns will be enough for the victim families to win the case. I really see no reason why the Supreme Court should have jumped in and prevented this court case - whose outcome is far from certain - from taking place.

in reality i tend to agree. in hyperbole land the reeeeeeepublicans would say allowing victims to sue manufacturers sets a dangerous precedent. yada yada yada.

and that's half of what i was talking about, the other half being scotus movement on Rowe which hasn't even come close.

honestly tho, i was just making a joke about how far expectations of Trump have fallen that people are cheering at judge appointments, when this was supposed to be the presidency of walls, fixing the middle east, bringing china to it's knees, putting HRC in jail, etc.

I'm supposed to be super nuanced responding to a dumb troll?

Trump will never build the wall, working Americans will continue to cover the costs of illegal care, and Roe will never be overturned.

Or, you can elect Elizabeth Warren. And the same basic facts will apply. She won't have the votes to fund more illegal healthcare.

Here's another win. One of his appointees threw out the lawsuit he had against new york. Said that if he wants to block the release he has to sue in new york, not D.C.

Fair enough. Didnt really read the post you were replying to.



If policies will never change and the outcome of elections is irrelevant - why even bother with all of this and post in this sub? I really dont mean this as an offense, I'm genuinely curious: if you have such a hyper-fatalistic view on current politics, why even waste time and energy thinking and posting about it?





Now you guys are complaining about Trump nominated judges doing their job instead of being crooked cultists?!?

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Nov 12 2019 11:55am

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/icig-complaint-ukraine-whistleblower

EXCLUSIVE: A newly filed complaint to the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) alleges that the whistleblower whose allegations touched off House Democrats' impeachment inquiry may have violated federal law by indirectly soliciting more than a quarter-million dollars from mostly anonymous sources via a GoFundMe page.

The complaint, which was filed last week and obtained by Fox News, alleged the donations from roughly 6,000 individuals "clearly constitute" gifts to a current intelligence official that may be restricted because of the employee's official position pursuant to 5 CFR 2635.203 and other statutes. To date, the GoFundMe has raised over $227,000.

READ THE COMPLAINT

The complaint also raised the possibility that some of the donations may have come from prohibited sources, and asked the ICIG to look into whether any "foreign citizen or agent of a foreign government" contributed.

Tully Rinckey PLLC, the law firm representing the individual reporting the allegations, is closely guarding the identity of their client, though Fox News is told the individual is the holder of a top-secret SCI security clearance and has served in government.

"I have not seen anything on this scale," Anthony Gallo, the managing partner of Tully Rinckey PLLC, told Fox News, referring to the fundraising. "It's not about politics for my client -- it's whistleblower-on-whistleblower, and [my client's] only interest is to see the government ethics rules are being complied with government-wide."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/read-complaint-to-icig-regarding-ukraine-whistleblower