Let's talk about Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis

[Reacher]

 

[Reacher]

Hey Nebulous.

I appreciate the informative.

mmp is really informative. I will start a thread tomorrow and post what he writes on his Twitter daily.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

Hey Nebulous.

I appreciate the informative.

mmp is really informative. I will start a thread tomorrow and post what he writes on his Twitter daily.

Sounds good.

 

[Dee]

I have a hard time believing he'd win enough votes to become president, but the fact that he's passing the kind of laws he is right now in Florida is disgusting and terrifying. People should be worried.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

I have a hard time believing he'd win enough votes to become president, but the fact that he's passing the kind of laws he is right now in Florida is disgusting and terrifying. People should be worried.

I am

 

[Dee]

I am

I think he's just running a little too far right at this point, and after Trump, people are nervous.

 

[Reacher]

Good morning and Happy Wednesday to everyone who agrees that after Ron DeSantis announces his run today, Republicans will be choosing between a shit sandwich, shit pudding, and a dozen little turds.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

Good morning and Happy Wednesday

 

[Kale]

Republicans will be choosing between a shit sandwich, shit pudding, and a dozen little turds.

 

[Reacher]

 

[DrLeftover]

A lesson in politics from way up in the press booth.

Trump won because he WASN'T Hillary Clinton.

Biden won because he WASN'T Trump.

Following the trend you end up with:

WHATEVERINTHEHELLITIS will win because it ISN'T Biden.

 

[Webster]

but the fact that he's passing the kind of laws he is right now in Florida is disgusting and terrifying.

Tell it to the NAACP's boss who apparently lives in the very state he's slagging, the hypocrite....


I'll say this: if it comes down to Biden vs. DeSantis, I'll walk into that voting booth and vote for DeSantis because Biden's a mushbrained, dementia-ridden, pudding-eating old guy who should've never run in 2020. Even Trump would be better than Biden and I hate that mother ....

 

[Doc Nova]

I'll say this: if it comes down to Biden vs. DeSantis, I'll walk into that voting booth and vote for DeSantis because Biden's a mushbrained, dementia-ridden, pudding-eating old guy who should've never run in 2020. Even Trump would be better than Biden and I hate that mother ....

You do realize DeSantis would probably criminalize gay marriage again, right? Biden might be senile as fuck, but at least he's not making it his entire life's mission to screw over everyone. DeSantis as president would be worse than Trump, because Trump was mentally challenged. DeSantis is - and I hate to say this - smart. He knows he's being a bigot, and he's fine with it. Here's a thought Americans: How about y'all nominate YOUNGER people as presidents instead of old fucks who either are senile and going to die in a few years and are bigots.

 

[Webster]

DeSantis as president would be worse than Trump, because Trump was mentally challenged. DeSantis is - and I hate to say this - smart.

Which is why he'd be a lot better than either Biden or Trump; unlike Biden, he at least has his mental faculties. Unlike Trump, he doesn't go off on wild tangents and sticks to the business at hand.

You do realize DeSantis would probably criminalize gay marriage again, right?

Or return it to its' proper forum, which is amongst the states. Put simply, it is the height of hypocrisy for the Left to preach that we should let the people decide certain things, then turn around as they did with Obergefell and throw out 30+ states' collective voices on the issue; to quote Justice Thomas' dissent in the Arizona Redistricting Commission's case,

Reading today’s opinion, one would think the Court is a great defender of direct democracy in the States. As it reads “the Legislature” out of the Times, Places and Manner Clause, U. S. Const., Art. I, §4, the majority offers a paean to the ballot initiative. It speaks in glowing terms of the “characteristic of our federal system that States retain autonomy to establish their own governmental processes.” Ante, at 27. And it urges “[d]eference to state lawmaking” so that States may perform their vital function as “ ‘laboratories’ ”of democracy. Ante, at 28.

These sentiments are difficult to accept. The conduct of the Court in so many other cases reveals a different attitude toward the States in general and ballot initiatives in particular. Just last week, in the antithesis of deference to state lawmaking through direct democracy, the Court cast aside state laws across the country—many of which were enacted through ballot initiative—that reflected the traditional definition of marriage. See Obergefell v. Hodges, ante, p. ___.

--- --- ---

And how striking that it changed here. The ballot initiative in this case, unlike those that the Court has previously treated so dismissively, was unusually democracy-reducing. It did not ask the people to approve a particular redistricting plan through direct democracy, but instead to take districting away from the people’s representatives and give it to an unelected committee, thereby reducing democratic control over the process in the future. The Court’s characterization of this as direct democracy at its best is rather like praising a plebiscite in a “banana republic” that installs a strongman as President for Life. And wrapping the analysis in a cloak of federalism does little to conceal the flaws in the Court’s reasoning.

I would dispense with the faux federalism and would instead treat the States in an evenhanded manner. That means applying the Constitution as written. Although the straightforward text of Article I, §4, prohibits redistricting by an unelected, independent commission, Article III limits our power to deciding cases or controversies. Because I agree with Justice Scalia that the Arizona Legislature lacks Article III standing to assert an institutional injury against another entity of state government, I would dismiss its suit. I respectfully dissent.

In other words, what Justice Thomas is saying there, Reddington, is you cannot say that we'll accept the voice of the people on certain issues, then turn around as they did in Obergefell (which I suspect is going to end up being on par with Roe in terms of constitutional cases) and strip the people of their right to speak on other issues, either through the ballot directly or through their elected representatives.

 

[Dee]

Which is why he'd be a lot better than either Biden or Trump; unlike Biden, he at least has his mental faculties. Unlike Trump, he doesn't go off on wild tangents and sticks to the business at hand.

Or return it to its' proper forum, which is amongst the states. Put simply, it is the height of hypocrisy for the Left to preach that we should let the people decide certain things, then turn around as they did with Obergefell and throw out 30+ states' collective voices on the issue; to quote Justice Thomas' dissent in the Arizona Redistricting Commission's case,In other words, what Justice Thomas is saying there, Reddington, is you cannot say that we'll accept the voice of the people on certain issues, then turn around as they did in Obergefell (which I suspect is going to end up being on par with Roe in terms of constitutional cases) and strip the people of their right to speak on other issues, either through the ballot directly or through their elected representatives.

Yikes. I'm really glad to not be related to you.

 

[Ravenfreak]

I'll say this: if it comes down to Biden vs. DeSantis, I'll walk into that voting booth and vote for DeSantis because Biden's a mushbrained, dementia-ridden, pudding-eating old guy who should've never run in 2020. Even Trump would be better than Biden and I hate that mother ....

I don't get how any member of the LGBTQ community could even think about voting for DeSantis. It's like a person of color teaming up with the KKK. He's way more dangerous than Trump or any other Republican in office to our community.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

You do realize DeSantis would probably criminalize gay marriage again, right?

Thankfully a president cannot decide things like this himself, it has to go through all the proper channels first.

A lesson in politics from way up in the press booth.

Trump won because he WASN'T Hillary Clinton.

Biden won because he WASN'T Trump.

Following the trend you end up with:

WHATEVERINTHEHELLITIS will win because it ISN'T Biden.

Sounds accurate to me

 

[MrDawn]

because Biden's a mushbrained, dementia-ridden, pudding-eating old guy

And he's gotten worse. Much worse.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

I wonder why his VP isn't running? Maybe she wants him to win because he probably wont live through another presidency and she gets the job by default.

 

[passenger]

I wonder why his VP isn't running? Maybe she wants him to win because he probably wont live through another presidency and she gets the job by default.

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Vice President Kamala Harris has developed a bad habit, which White House staffers are trying to train her to not do. Any time the phone rings in her office in the West Wing, Harris immediately scrambles for it and answers it with an expectant, "Did he die?!"
"That's just not a professional way to answer the phone," Ronald Klain, President Joe Biden's Chief of Staff, told her.