maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Sun Sep 15, 2019 6:49 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: SCOTUS rulings
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 12:44 pm 
Offline
Hair in the soap
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:46 am
Posts: 19715
Reputation points: 19776
jwilkerson wrote:
Quote:
... I don't think they "have the numbers ...


Well they had the numbers in 2016 ... 65.8 million votes versus 62.9 million.

Nominee Donald Trump Hillary Clinton
Party Republican Democratic
Home state New York New York
Running mate Mike Pence Tim Kaine
Electoral vote 304[a] 227[a]
States carried 30 + ME-02 20 + DC
Popular vote 62,984,828 65,853,514
Percentage 46.1% 48.2%

--
And in 2016 they had two things going against them ... a lousey candidate (which might still be true in 2020) and a surprise result. In other words, the voters expected hilary to win easily so might have stayed home. That probably will not repeat in 2020. So I would expect them to have the numbers in 2020 again as well. Due to the continuing "butt-hurt" over the loss in 2016.


We hear talk of Hillary voters staying home, but what about those who had doubts about Trump and either stayed home or voted third party? The ones who've now been reassured?

I wonder about the comparison between those two sides' numbers.

The 2020 election is already ramping up to be nuts. Between wall-to-wall media propaganda and globalist tech companies (i.e. the wealthy metro class) blatantly interfering in the public political discussion, and the publicly vicious back & forth not only in DC but in the streets, this one is ripe for drama and endless accusation. We live in interesting times, unfortunately.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SCOTUS rulings
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:01 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 31260
Reputation points: 19875
Yes. One cannot really handicap the horse race yet but if you think about states that Trump "stole" like Michigan and Wisconsin, I can imagine a big Dem effort taking them back. On the other hand, Trump's approval numbers are up compared to after his victory. Also, I think he has delivered on judges and a tax cut and economic growth above what was deemed possible. Also, I think a lot of white voters are growing tired of being called racists.

Then you have stories emerging now with doomsayers predicting a recession by 2020

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: SCOTUS rulings
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:03 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 31260
Reputation points: 19875
If Biden is the candidate I think there is dry powder in the horn on these Ukraine and Chicom business deals. I doubt 1% of voters have heard about that yet

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: SCOTUS rulings
PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:08 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 12146
Reputation points: 16552
Quote:
... white voters are growing tired of being called racist ...


I might have been a few years ago ... but these days not any more bothered by it than I am hearing the bees buzzing around ... just keep focused on what I'm doin' ... which is working on repairing main water barrier in home pasture after last noah's rain ... need more materials ! but I've freed up the materials that can be salvaged from the WRECK mother nature made of the barrier that was there ...

sierra hotel ... roll with it !!! :)

(I couldn't do that when I lived in the city ... but out here, you adapt ... )

_________________
Ugum Bugum Uber Alles - Iddi Ut Amine Dada !!


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: SCOTUS rulings
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 9:59 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 35318
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
Quote:
https://apnews.com/a817cf3affb04f3d8ad3c4940366a5fe

Supreme Court allows broad enforcement of asylum limits

By MARK SHERMAN
11 minutes ago


WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is allowing nationwide enforcement of a new Trump administration rule that prevents most Central American immigrants from seeking asylum in the United States.

The justices’ order late Wednesday temporarily undoes a lower-court ruling that had blocked the new asylum policy in some states along the southern border. The policy is meant to deny asylum to anyone who passes through another country on the way to the U.S. without seeking protection there.

Most people crossing the southern border are Central Americans fleeing violence and poverty. They are largely ineligible under the new rule, as are asylum seekers from Africa, Asia and South America who arrive regularly at the southern border.

The shift reverses decades of U.S. policy. The administration has said that it wants to close the gap between an initial asylum screening that most people pass and a final decision on asylum that most people do not win.

“BIG United States Supreme Court WIN for the Border on Asylum!” President Donald Trump tweeted.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the high-court’s order. “Once again, the Executive Branch has issued a rule that seeks to upend longstanding practices regarding refugees who seek shelter from persecution,” Sotomayor wrote.

The legal challenge to the new policy has a brief but somewhat convoluted history. U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco blocked the new policy from taking effect in late July. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals narrowed Tigar’s order so that it applied only in Arizona and California, states that are within the 9th Circuit.

That left the administration free to enforce the policy on asylum seekers arriving in New Mexico and Texas. Tigar issued a new order on Monday that reimposed a nationwide hold on asylum policy. The 9th Circuit again narrowed his order on Tuesday.

The high-court action allows the administration to impose the new policy everywhere while the court case against it continues.

It’s not clear how quickly the policy will be rolled out, and how exactly it fits in with the other efforts by the administration to restrict border crossings and tighten asylum rules.

For example, thousands of people are waiting on lists at border crossings in Mexico to claim asylum in the U.S. And more than 30,000 people have been turned back to Mexico to wait out their asylum claims.

Asylum seekers must pass an initial screening called a “credible fear” interview, a hurdle that a vast majority clear. Under the new policy, they would fail the test unless they sought asylum in at least one country they traveled through and were denied. They would be placed in fast-track deportation proceedings and flown to their home countries at U.S. expense.

Lee Gelernt, the American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who is representing immigrant advocacy groups in the case, said: “This is just a temporary step, and we’re hopeful we’ll prevail at the end of the day. The lives of thousands of families are at stake.”

Justice Department spokesperson Alexei Woltornist said the agency was “pleased that the Supreme Court intervened in this case,” adding, “This action will assist the Administration in its objectives to bring order to the crisis at the southern border, close loopholes in our immigration system, and discourage frivolous claims.”
__
Associated Press writer Colleen Long contributed to this report.



U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco Twice blocked the rule from going into effect.

I wonder if he has the balls to overrule the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES?

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: SCOTUS rulings
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:06 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 35318
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
In a surprise to no one, Judge Tigar was appointed to the federal bench by Pres. Obama.
Also not surprising is that he Went to UC Berkeley School of Law (J.D.)

Now what is surprising is that he was born in London, UK.

His ruling blocking the Trump immigration policy was not his first “notable” decision.

Quote:
Judge orders California to pay for gender realignment surgery (2015)
In a first-of-its-kind ruling for the state of California, a federal judge held the state must pay for an inmate's gender realignment surgery because denying her that surgery violates her constitutional rights.

Michelle-Lael Norsworthy, born Jeffrey Bryan Norsworthy, was convicted in 1987 of murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole. Norsworthy is a transgender woman. She received hormone therapy while in prison and requested gender realignment surgery, which the state initially refused. Judge Jon S. Tigar of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that denying Norsworthy the surgery violated her constitutional right to receive proper medical care.[15] Judge Tigar ordered the state to schedule the surgery as soon as possible.


_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: SCOTUS rulings
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:11 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 31260
Reputation points: 19875
chijohnaok wrote:
Quote:
https://apnews.com/a817cf3affb04f3d8ad3c4940366a5fe

Supreme Court allows broad enforcement of asylum limits

By MARK SHERMAN
11 minutes ago


WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is allowing nationwide enforcement of a new Trump administration rule that prevents most Central American immigrants from seeking asylum in the United States.

The justices’ order late Wednesday temporarily undoes a lower-court ruling that had blocked the new asylum policy in some states along the southern border. The policy is meant to deny asylum to anyone who passes through another country on the way to the U.S. without seeking protection there.

Most people crossing the southern border are Central Americans fleeing violence and poverty. They are largely ineligible under the new rule, as are asylum seekers from Africa, Asia and South America who arrive regularly at the southern border.

The shift reverses decades of U.S. policy. The administration has said that it wants to close the gap between an initial asylum screening that most people pass and a final decision on asylum that most people do not win.

“BIG United States Supreme Court WIN for the Border on Asylum!” President Donald Trump tweeted.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the high-court’s order. “Once again, the Executive Branch has issued a rule that seeks to upend longstanding practices regarding refugees who seek shelter from persecution,” Sotomayor wrote.

The legal challenge to the new policy has a brief but somewhat convoluted history. U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco blocked the new policy from taking effect in late July. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals narrowed Tigar’s order so that it applied only in Arizona and California, states that are within the 9th Circuit.

That left the administration free to enforce the policy on asylum seekers arriving in New Mexico and Texas. Tigar issued a new order on Monday that reimposed a nationwide hold on asylum policy. The 9th Circuit again narrowed his order on Tuesday.

The high-court action allows the administration to impose the new policy everywhere while the court case against it continues.

It’s not clear how quickly the policy will be rolled out, and how exactly it fits in with the other efforts by the administration to restrict border crossings and tighten asylum rules.

For example, thousands of people are waiting on lists at border crossings in Mexico to claim asylum in the U.S. And more than 30,000 people have been turned back to Mexico to wait out their asylum claims.

Asylum seekers must pass an initial screening called a “credible fear” interview, a hurdle that a vast majority clear. Under the new policy, they would fail the test unless they sought asylum in at least one country they traveled through and were denied. They would be placed in fast-track deportation proceedings and flown to their home countries at U.S. expense.

Lee Gelernt, the American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who is representing immigrant advocacy groups in the case, said: “This is just a temporary step, and we’re hopeful we’ll prevail at the end of the day. The lives of thousands of families are at stake.”

Justice Department spokesperson Alexei Woltornist said the agency was “pleased that the Supreme Court intervened in this case,” adding, “This action will assist the Administration in its objectives to bring order to the crisis at the southern border, close loopholes in our immigration system, and discourage frivolous claims.”
__
Associated Press writer Colleen Long contributed to this report.



U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco Twice blocked the rule from going into effect.

I wonder if he has the balls to overrule the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES?


He was right that immigration law has to be enforced equally across the US border....but the SCOTUS told him to fuck off 7-2 on the merits of his decision. 7-2 means you are a piece of advocate dog shit on Fisherman's Wharf.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: SCOTUS rulings
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:18 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 31260
Reputation points: 19875
They guy is a c***-s****** nose-ring-wearing POS. 1 guy, who never got elected to student council affected immigration policy for 330 million Americans for 2 months

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: SCOTUS rulings
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:43 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 35318
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
jack t ripper wrote:
They guy is a c***-s****** nose-ring-wearing POS. 1 guy, who never got elected to student council affected immigration policy for 330 million Americans for 2 months



Actually, longer than 2 months:

Quote:
On November 19, 2018 Tigar issued a nationwide restraining order, later overturned by a higher court, that barred the Trump administration from denying asylum to immigrants who crossed over the southern border illegally from Mexico...Supreme Court smacked him down again on 9/11/2019


That from his Wikipedia profile

So he delayed this almost 10 months.

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group