Talking Politics

[Willo]

New York Times: Trump made offensive remark about Harris’ mental acuity at dinner with donors | CNN Politics

Former President Donald Trump made an offensive remark about Vice President Kamala Harris while attempting to convince top GOP donors to pour more money in his campaign, The New York Times reported Saturday.

amp.cnn.com

Trump Used Racial Slur During ‘Celebrity Apprentice,’ Former White House Aide Says (Published 2018)

Omarosa Manigault Newman writes in a new memoir that she never heard President Trump use the slur, but says there are tapes to prove it.

www.nytimes.com

Trump often speculated about the sexuality of staffers and mocked gay men, book says

NYT reporter Maggie Haberman's upcoming book "Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America" will be released next week.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Willo]

Maybe some tit for tat a bit closer to home.
Good old Paul Keating wasn’t adverse to handing out “compliments” to all and sundry. Neither was Mark Latham when he was Labor leader.
Maybe for the sake of fairness and not to be seen as hypocrites, some of their utterings can be posted here seeing it’s all the rage

Or maybe it’s a TDS double standard thing. It only applies to Trump of course.

 

[TigerMasochist]

The less oxygen it gets, the better. Complete garbage from any politician. I thought there were laws against it. If so, he should be prosecuted.

Bingo. Unfortunately there's bugger all chance of that happening, prick should at the least simply be expelled from politics completely.

 

[TigerMasochist]

Going back to Australian politics I notice there is a report of a large drop in support for the Greens.
There have always been supporters of the Greens who do so because they are concerned about climate change and they see it as a key issue of our time but they have been increasingly concerned with some of the extreme views on other issues. They also lose support when they block sensible policy for an unachievable principle as they have recently done on housing and did years ago on climate policy.
I’ve never been a greens supporter but I do support some of the positions they take from time to time. For instance they have been the only party to challenge our Government stance on Gaza and Israel and they also have been the only party to denounce Babet’s disgusting X post. But I don’t support many of the policies they have.
To me the key change is the emergence of the Teal independents who have climate change action as a key component of their platforms but have views on other policies that are far more main stream and (to me) practical. Lots of people have moved their support from Green to teal.
Not sure how the Greens remain relevant tbh.

Dark green no longer fashionable, light green's the in thing now.

 

[Big Tiger]

You are kidding - that is what the anti-woke lobby is all about - sick of lefty, softo, pinko garbage. The right want the ability to "call it as they see it" is as they say.

The outcry when they changed the cheese name from coon came from one side of politics only.

The outcry about welcome to country ceremonies comes from one side.

The outcry when Goodes called out racism came from one side.

The outcry about changing the day to celebrate Australia Day comes from one side.

Anything that involves diversity & inclusion is usually opposed by the right.

Are all as extreme as Babet - no, not yet. But insecure men are easily influenced by the likes of Tate, Babet, Trump etc, seeing them almost as role models. And the less repercussions there are for their behaviour and transgressions, the more emboldenned the behaviour will become.

The outrage and vote against the voice, the one thing actually tested in a singular voting environment, came from, oh hang on just a lazy 61% of the population. You’ve no idea of the average person’s thinking.

 

[DavidSSS]

Nonsensical, but you found enough sense in it to reply

It never made them invalid. Some states rescinded their law in favour of Roe vs Wade.
Most states kept those laws intact.
13 states rescinded those laws and made abortion illegal. That was the whole point of Roe being overturned, it determined it should never have been a constitutional right but left up to the states. As it was prior.
(The issue came about because Mississippi law banned abortions after 15 weeks)


Doubt bother spelling anything out. States have had since June 2022 to have legislation enacted to protect the right to abortion.some states simply reverted to the existing laws, others are repealing old laws and legislating new laws.

Did Trump ring every state governor and legislature and tell them not to pass any abortion laws? Hardly.

No straw man. So if SCOTUS overturned Wade it could hardly be because a private citizen, Trump rang the Chief Justice Robert’s to tell him to have Roe overturned as some would have you believe. What a joke.

So following on that it was SCOTUS who overturned Roe, to blame Trump “for women losing their rights”was incorrect. He doesn’t tell them how to operate the Supreme Court. Which is what I replied to another poster. Before you jumped in with your own opinion.


So Trump organised Roe to be overturned..

It was actually the Dobbs decision, not Dodds.
There would be a lot of people against terminating a foetus after 15 weeks. Not just anti choice, religions etc. but even a lot of pro choice adherents
That is what brought about overturning Roe. There was no Constitutional right to cover abortions after 15 weeks.

Why then did it take those judges until 2022 to make that decision?
Stacked with anti choice judges?

Yes Trump rang them up and said “overturn Roe you owe me” just for the hell of it.
Here you are again acting as an expert on jurisprudence. Justices are nominated, but have to be confirmed by the senate.They aren’t a presidential appointment.
But we’re going around in circles.
All the TDS little Ruddites believe what they like, even the lies they tell themselves and keep repeating. Nothing will sway them from that.

Maybe they should spend some time debating why Trump was the people’s choice in an absolute bloodbath for the Democrats.
The American people know all about him, and yet still overwhelmingly decided he was a better choice as President. That Republicans in the Senate was a better deal for them. And looking exceedingly likely that the House will go that way too.
Maybe stop your bleating, whinging and whining leftie sooking and look at the reasons why.
But it’s far easier to say “it’s all Trumps fault” rather than being honest and asking why?

I'm not going to go line by line through your post as . . . well, you know . . . I have a life.

But I have to say, you really are priceless.

Some states did leave their anti-choice laws on the books, but they were over-ridden by the Supreme Court decision in Roe v Wade, ie: invalid.

Do you actually know how these things work? It seems not. Trump appointed judges he knew were anti-choice, who would overturn Roe v Wade once they got the chance. He hardly needs to ring them up to tell them what to do. Trump is obnoxious but he's not stupid. If you think he just appoints the judges without knowing their position on various issues, of which abortion was one of the biggest issues which was likely to end up at the Supreme Court, then you have no idea, He appointed specific judges with their position on Roe v Wade as one of the main deciding factors as to who would be appointed. And, yes, the President does appoint them as it is the President, and only the President, who can nominate a Supreme Court judge. The Senate must confirm them but it isn't as if the Senate can reject a nominee and then substitute someone else - only the President can nominate which gives the Pres the power over the appointment.

This isn't about jurisprudence, it is about politics, it is about power. Who gets appointed to the Supreme Court is a political decision based on the way they are likely to rule on various issues which are within the scope of the Supreme Court.

Why did it take until 2022? Again you show your complete ignorance. The original case was brought in 2018 and it took until 2022 to get to the Supreme Court. You think they can stack the court and then just produce a case at the Supreme Court? FFS, the legal system doesn't work that way.

Nothing sways you from your naive ideas about how these things work.

DS

 

[Harry]

 

[Sintiger]

You are kidding - that is what the anti-woke lobby is all about - sick of lefty, softo, pinko garbage. The right want the ability to "call it as they see it" is as they say.

The outcry when they changed the cheese name from coon came from one side of politics only.

The outcry about welcome to country ceremonies comes from one side.

The outcry when Goodes called out racism came from one side.

The outcry about changing the day to celebrate Australia Day comes from one side.

Anything that involves diversity & inclusion is usually opposed by the right.

Are all as extreme as Babet - no, not yet. But insecure men are easily influenced by the likes of Tate, Babet, Trump etc, seeing them almost as role models. And the less repercussions there are for their behaviour and transgressions, the more emboldenned the behaviour will become.

One thing that I think is now categorising the right wing of politics is the labelling of everyone who is not in their camp as one amorphous group. We are all woke, bleeding heart, lefty socialists.
I've always been of the view that individuals have varied views on things and labelling and boxing people into categories is wrong. My view on politics and the world is really just built on fairness and a belief that an advanced society should look after those who have disadvantage and if that makes me woke to some then so be it.
The other thing I believe in strongly is that if something is important to someone else and it doesn't affect me then it is the right thing to support. How does welcome to country, the Voice and not referring to disadvantaged people by names that symbolise their disadvantage affect me?
The thing that worries me more than anything else is that human decency has become woke.
It is very concerning to me

 

[K3]

I'm not going to go line by line through your post as . . . well, you know . . . I have a life.

But I have to say, you really are priceless.

Some states did leave their anti-choice laws on the books, but they were over-ridden by the Supreme Court decision in Roe v Wade, ie: invalid.

Do you actually know how these things work? It seems not. Trump appointed judges he knew were anti-choice, who would overturn Roe v Wade once they got the chance. He hardly needs to ring them up to tell them what to do. Trump is obnoxious but he's not stupid. If you think he just appoints the judges without knowing their position on various issues, of which abortion was one of the biggest issues which was likely to end up at the Supreme Court, then you have no idea, He appointed specific judges with their position on Roe v Wade as one of the main deciding factors as to who would be appointed. And, yes, the President does appoint them as it is the President, and only the President, who can nominate a Supreme Court judge. The Senate must confirm them but it isn't as if the Senate can reject a nominee and then substitute someone else - only the President can nominate which gives the Pres the power over the appointment.

This isn't about jurisprudence, it is about politics, it is about power. Who gets appointed to the Supreme Court is a political decision based on the way they are likely to rule on various issues which are within the scope of the Supreme Court.

Why did it take until 2022? Again you show your complete ignorance. The original case was brought in 2018 and it took until 2022 to get to the Supreme Court. You think they can stack the court and then just produce a case at the Supreme Court? FFS, the legal system doesn't work that way.

Nothing sways you from your naive ideas about how these things work.

DS

You wouldn't think it would be that hard, would you.

But here we are...

 

[Baloo]

The other thing I believe in strongly is that if something is important to someone else and it doesn't affect me then it is the right thing to support. How does welcome to country, the Voice and not referring to disadvantaged people by names that symbolise their disadvantage affect me?
The thing that worries me more than anything else is that human decency has become woke.
It is very concerning to me

Yes. Empathy has gone out the window.

 

[bengal tigers]

Got to love the leftys and wokes ,Logic/Rationale/Commonsense betrays them.

 

[Tigaman]

Got to love the leftys and wokes ,Logic/Rationale/Commonsense betrays them.

We live in a generation of emotionally weak people. Everything has to be watered down because it is offensive including the truth.

 

[TigerMasochist]

One thing that I think is now categorising the right wing of politics is the labelling of everyone who is not in their camp as one amorphous group. We are all woke, bleeding heart, lefty socialists.

Are we forgetting that them woke, lefty, bleeding heart, pinkos are constantly labeling the RWNJ's as sexist, racist, homophobes?

 

[Brodders17]

One thing that I think is now categorising the right wing of politics is the labelling of everyone who is not in their camp as one amorphous group. We are all woke, bleeding heart, lefty socialists.
I've always been of the view that individuals have varied views on things and labelling and boxing people into categories is wrong. My view on politics and the world is really just built on fairness and a belief that an advanced society should look after those who have disadvantage and if that makes me woke to some then so be it.
The other thing I believe in strongly is that if something is important to someone else and it doesn't affect me then it is the right thing to support. How does welcome to country, the Voice and not referring to disadvantaged people by names that symbolise their disadvantage affect me?
The thing that worries me more than anything else is that human decency has become woke.
It is very concerning to me

Got to love the leftys and wokes ,Logic/Rationale/Commonsense betrays them.

 

[Brodders17]

We live in a generation of emotionally weak people. Everything has to be watered down because it is offensive including the truth.

Your best post ever. It is crazy how conservative politicians in this country keep tying up our courts suing people for defamation.

 

[Brodders17]

Are we forgetting that them woke, lefty, bleeding heart, pinkos are constantly labeling the RWNJ's as sexist, racist, homophobes?

Not all conservatives/right wingers are RWNJ's. But most RWNJ's are by definition sexist, racist homophobes. And America just voted one to be their next President.

 

[Sintiger]

Got to love the leftys and wokes ,Logic/Rationale/Commonsense betrays them.

Such a incisive post.

What you don't realise of course is that you are simply reinforcing a stereotype

 

[Sintiger]

Are we forgetting that them woke, lefty, bleeding heart, pinkos are constantly labeling the RWNJ's as sexist, racist, homophobes?

Many of them are, that's why they are called RWNJ, but not everyone who leans towards the conservative side of politics and social values is a RWNJ.

 

[Willo]

I'm not going to go line by line through your post as . . . well, you know . . . I have a life.

To be expected. When you know..you don’t want to answer anything

But I have to say, you really are priceless.

Thank you

Some states did leave their anti-choice laws on the books, but they were over-ridden by the Supreme Court decision in Roe v Wade, ie: invalid.

Roe vs Wade allowed the right for woman to abortion. Under the 14th Amendment. “A persons right to privacy…”
That is all. Roe vs Wade didn’t make that invalid, only the right to abortion.

Do you actually know how these things work? It seems not.

Well you powers of perception fail you again. You couldn’t even get the name of the case correct.

Trump appointed judges he knew were anti-choice, who would overturn Roe v Wade once they got the chance.

So he was Nostradamus. He knew a state was going to appeal it. He knew that during that time the status quo would remain. No judge would die and be replaced. You know like Ketanji Jackson who was just appointed.

He hardly needs to ring them up to tell them what to do.

Yeah, it’s not like he set all this up in 2017 when appointed.

Horus h wasTrump is obnoxious but he's not stupid. If you think he just appoints the judges without knowing their position on various issues,

Well here’s the thing. You think Trump appoints the Justices to the Supreme Court.
I have a news flash for you. A President doesn’t appoint a judge. He can only nominate them. That nomination is then submitted to the Senate. They comfirm or reject the nomination.

of which abortion was one of the biggest issues which was likely to end up at the Supreme Court, then you have no idea, He appointed specific judges with their position on Roe v Wade as one of the main deciding factors as to who would be appointed. And, yes, the President does appoint them as it is the President, and only the President, who can nominate a Supreme Court judge.

Nominate. A President doesn’t appoint a judge.

The Senate must confirm them but it isn't as if the Senate can reject a nominee and then substitute someone else - only the President can nominate which gives the Pres the power over the appointment.

No. Talk about writing double Dutch then contradicting yourself.

This isn't about jurisprudence, it is about politics, it is about power. Who gets appointed to the Supreme Court is a political decision based on the way they are likely to rule on various issues which are within the scope of the Supreme Court.

Nonsense. That’s why they have separation of powers. Read the constitution.

Why did it take until 2022? Again you show your complete ignorance.

You didn’t even know the name of the case. I already stated when it started and why it went before the Supreme Court

The original case was brought in 2018

To Mississippi courts
It went before the Supreme Court Dec 2021 (I believe)

and it took until 2022 to get to the Supreme Court.

I already stated this earlier

You think they can stack the court and then just produce a case at the Supreme Court? FFS, the legal system doesn't work that way.

I’m glad you now agree with me. Talk about contradicting yourself, again

Nothing sways you from your naive ideas about how these things work.

Especially when I have to keep educating you.

DS

A lot of waffle there without actually answering anything. As per usual. The number of words you use doesn’t strengthen your point.
You keep going backwards. You don’t realise how much you e just backtracked and agreed with what I have already stated.
. Try throwing in a few more insults. Thats good indicator of you losing the plot again.

 

[DavidSSS]

Haha, Willo really believes that no-one knew that states would challenge Roe v Wade when the numbers on the Supreme Court were tipped in favour of the anti-choice lobby.

He also seems to think you have to be Nostradamus to predict how potential judges would vote on a case when brought.

Yes, along with everyone else with an IQ higher than their shoe size, Trump knew certain states would bring a case and try to get it to the Supreme Court and he knew (because he appointed them) how the new judges would rule on a case to overturn Roe v Wade.

As I said: priceless.

DS