Discussion: The REPUBLICAN Party - - Part 17

[DarthSkywalker]

And why has no one been arrested yet exactly?

 

[Marvolo]

The Daily Beast - GOP Mailer: We’ll Tell Your Neighbors If You Vote Democratic
The New Mexico Republican Party admits sending fliers to residents warning them that when “Democrats win the election and you didn’t do your part… your neighbors will know.”



http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ll-your-neighbors-if-you-vote-democratic.html

Look at all the ****s I give, GOP.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

And why has no one been arrested yet exactly?

For real. That smacks of intimidation and it's not even subtle.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Kasich: GOP must evolve or it will die

Ohio Gov. John Kasich has a grave warning for the GOP.

"If the Republican Party does not evolve, the Republican Party is going to die," Kasich said in an interview with Business Insider published Saturday.
"The Republican Party cannot be anti-trade, anti-immigrant, not out there practicing the politics of people, you know, the issues surrounding drug addiction and mental illness and the cost of prescription drugs and healthcare and student debt and all of these things are very personal to people now."

"So I do believe that the party needs to evolve, or I won't be a part of it," he said.

Kasich has been a critic of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, whom he clashed with during the GOP primary.

Last week, Kasich chastised Republicans who have not yet condemned Trump's lewd comments and urged them to "lead by example."

"I don't have any more words," he said.

"I've tried to do the best I can to lead by my actions in an appropriate way without recrimination or anything like that, because I ... I'm a very happy person. I don't think I need to say any more than what I've demonstrated.”

The comments came after the release of a 2005 tape in which Trump talks about how he can grope and kiss women without their consent because of his celebrity status.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/301174-kasich-gop-must-evolve-or-it-will-die

I'm fairly certain this party is already too far down the rabbit hole.

 

[Sithborg]

Notice that there is a fairly large issue that he doesn't mention.

 

[SV Fan]

The establishment should just reorganize and call themselves the Whigs.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

CNN - John McCain: 'I don't know' if Trump will be better for Supreme Court than Clinton

McCain promised that Republicans would be "united against any Supreme Court nominee" put forth by Clinton.

"I promise you that we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up," McCain said. "I promise you. This is where we need the majority and Pat Toomey is probably as articulate and effective on the floor of the Senate as anyone I have encountered."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/17/politics/mccain-clinton-trump-supreme-court/index.html

 

[chamber-music]

Kasich: GOP must evolve or it will die



http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/301174-kasich-gop-must-evolve-or-it-will-die

I'm fairly certain this party is already too far down the rabbit hole.

Some republicans have been saying this for years. They won't change. Every election cycle they go back to appealing to the extreme fringe over the centre and alienate people with narrow ideology driven policies. They seem more interested in opposing things than offering solutions. Trumps whole campaign platform is that America is terrible now and some vague unworkable policies that probably aren't going to improve things.

 

[Orba]

CNN - John McCain: 'I don't know' if Trump will be better for Supreme Court than Clinton



http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/17/politics/mccain-clinton-trump-supreme-court/index.html

So they are admitting their reasons for not confirming Garland is complete BS, its just pure obstructionism.

 

[Sithborg]

And the Republicans have resolved to let the Supreme Court die off.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

So they are admitting their reasons for not confirming Garland is complete BS, its just pure obstructionism.

I believe the American people must have a voice in the direction of the Supreme Court by electing a new president.

http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=247D68C9-1D4E-4BE3-B987-E29478BE46A3 (March 2016)

Which is not how the system is supposed to work in the first place, but as shown he's just full of crap and moving the goalposts as the mask drops. Garland should have had a fair hearing and they never gave it to him because Oooh the Democrats must be destroyed.

 

[Marvolo]

North Carolina Governor On Transgender Bathroom Law: The Liberals Made Me Do It

In a gubernatorial debate Tuesday night, North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) defended his signing of House Bill 2 earlier this year, which included a ban on transgender individuals using the bathroom of the gender with which they identify.

McCrory blamed liberals for the law, saying that he was forced to sign it after the city of Charlotte had updated its non-discrimination ordinance in February to add sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression to its list of protected characteristics.

“The left brought this issue up, not the right,” he said.

McCrory said the state bill was meant to deal with the “concept of gender identity, which was a radical concept.” He blamed his Democratic opponent for governor, state Attorney General Roy Cooper, and Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts specifically.

“Do y’all even know what the penalty was in Charlotte for someone that did not accept gender identity as the new requirement in identifying if you’re a boy or girl? It was a fine of $500 and/or a 30-day jail sentence,” said a heated McCrory. “This is what we overturned. That’s why we took action.”

“I will not accept the radical changes that Roy Cooper and Jennifer Roberts have brought to North Carolina,” said McCrory. “Had that not been there, I don’t think we would have had a problem. Because I don’t believe in any kind of discrimination.”

The law McCrory signed in March doesn’t just block transgender people from using the bathroom of their choice. It blocks cities and towns in the state from implementing any local measures to expand protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals.

The Obama administration Department of Justice has filed suit against the state over the law, which it says “stigmatizes and singles out transgender employees, results in their isolation and exclusion, and perpetuates a sense that they are not worthy of equal treatment and respect.” The law has hurt the state’s reputation and caused it to lose business opportunities.

“This is all he can talk about,” Cooper responded at the debate Tuesday. “This is why North Carolina is having a problem with its reputation.”

“If a local government wants to protect people from being fired because they’re gay, HB 2 says you can’t do that,” Cooper continued. He added that it would also block local governments from raising the minimum wage, or implementing protection for veterans as well.

McCrory maintained that he has “been looking for a compromise for months” and could support protections for LGBT rights in employment if they didn’t include gender identity or gender expression. But he would not “support this concept … where we’re going to identify gender based on what you think you are.”

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5806d82ee4b0dd54ce363a84

I despise this filth on a cellular level.

 

[Clark-Kent]

I think Trump either destroyed the Republican party forever

 

[mclay18]

And all the GOP politicians who are sticking with Trump's bandwagon (like McCrory) will only have themselves to blame if their (re)election chances plunge south.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I think Trump either destroyed the Republican party forever

We'll see. Wanna bet just like 2008 and 2012 that the party leaders will commission a study whose findings will be that, surprise, surprise, the party should stop going out of it's way to alienate non-whites, people of other faiths other than Evangelical Christians, women, young people ect. ect.? Wanna bet they double down AGAIN, in the next election on doing exactly the opposite?

 

[Anita18]

And all the GOP politicians who are sticking with Drumpf's bandwagon (like McCrory) will only have themselves to blame if their (re)election chances plunge south.

It's total schadenfreude to watch Paul Ryan's fall from grace.

 

[mclay18]

Same for Pat McCrory. The idiot deserves the flack thrown his way, and then some.

 

[SV Fan]

Same for Pat McCrory. The idiot deserves the flack thrown his way, and then some.

More then the bathroom bill or trying to screw over Democrats from voting bills, McCrory should be voted out for him basically slapping his former employer Duke Energy on the wrist for polluting his state. Probably the worst case of crony capitalism I have seen in years

 

[Schlosser85]

The Daily Beast - GOP Mailer: We’ll Tell Your Neighbors If You Vote Democratic
The New Mexico Republican Party admits sending fliers to residents warning them that when “Democrats win the election and you didn’t do your part… your neighbors will know.”



http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ll-your-neighbors-if-you-vote-democratic.html

Uh.....who cares?

 

[Anita18]

The schadenfreude continues.

Attempting To Woo Latino Voters, Marco Rubio Gets Booed At Orlando Festival

...When he took the stage, there was spattering of boos from the crowd. And when the emcee introduced the senator, they grew louder.

"I'm going to introduce a man who represents Latinos, no matter where you're from," the emcee boomed in Spanish. The boos grew louder still. "Ladies and gentlemen, the senator for the state of Florida, a Latino like you and me ... his name is Marco Rubio! Applaud!"

Instead, the boos rained down on the senator, drowning out what appeared to be a handful of supporters in the crowd.

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/25/49930...ampaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=2051

 

[The Incredible Hulk]

It's going to be amusing watching all of Trump's primary opponents who decided to side with him afterwards (Rubio, Christie, Cruz, Carson) have their political careers completely implode.

Jeb! and Kasich at least had the balls to stand up to him....

Fiorina was just....no

 

[Sithborg]

It is always fun to watch a clown car crash.

 

[mclay18]

More then the bathroom bill or trying to screw over Democrats from voting bills, McCrory should be voted out for him basically slapping his former employer Duke Energy on the wrist for polluting his state. Probably the worst case of crony capitalism I have seen in years

He deserves to be whipped for that. His election campaign painted him as a moderate Republican. When he moved into the governor's mansion, he became a puppet for his super PACs and the GOP House and Senate.

It's not just the big issues like HB2, the odious voter ID law or him being soft on his former employers for the coal ash spill. It's the smaller things, like the extra taxes on movie tickets and labor. And removing a net positive, like the tax-free back-to-school shopping weekend. And him declining to renew the film tax credit program, which can gain money from tourism dollars. Say what you want about 2013's Safe Haven, but the town featured in the film (Southport) experienced a big bump in tourism thanks to that film.

His approval ratings are going up due to his response to Hurricane Matthew, so that has me worried.

 

[Marvolo]

This Could Be The Beginning Of The End Of The Supreme Court As We Know It

Conservatives lay the groundwork for blocking all of Hillary Clinton’s nominees.

Maybe Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had the right idea after all. Maybe Republicans are willing to trigger a constitutional crisis over the Supreme Court.

Some conservatives certainly seem to be warming up to McCain’s controversial suggestion last week that Senate Republicans should dig in their heels and block any and all Supreme Court nominees put forth by a future President Hillary Clinton.

Who needs a fully functioning Supreme Court after all?

“As a matter of constitutional law, the Senate is fully within its powers to let the Supreme Court die out, literally,” wrote the Cato Institute’s Ilya Shapiro in a column Wednesday on The Federalist.

Shapiro is well-versed in constitutional issues, and his argument has a legal, if contorted, basis. Nothing in the Constitution explicitly stands in the way of senators who would be willing to destroy the nation’s highest court ― if not an entire branch of the federal government ― to stop Clinton from selecting judges who share her views.

But McCain’s comments suggesting a total blockade initially faced opposition, even from some members of his own party. “We can’t just simply stonewall” those hypothetical Clinton nominees, said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

Of course, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Grassley is doing exactly that to Merrick Garland, President Barack Obama’s choice to fill the vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.

To Shapiro, there’s nothing wrong with even more Senate obstructionism because “the Constitution is completely silent” on how the upper chamber provides its “advice and consent” on the president’s nominees.

Legal scholars across the ideological spectrum have agreed that’s true. But they’ve also concluded that the Republicans’ no-hearings-no-votes posture on Garland is unprecedented in American history. And many deplore the partisanship that has overwhelmed the judicial confirmation process over the last few decades.

Not Shapiro. “I simply can’t blame politicians who follow their convictions,” he wrote. “If you truly believe that a particular nominee would wreak havoc on America, why not do everything you can to stop him?”

Shapiro noted that senators may pay a political price for refusing to work with a president from the other party. More importantly, the justice system pays a price.

Even those now on the Supreme Court have lamented that a shorthanded court can’t operate as it should.

“It’s much more difficult for us to do our job if we are not what we’re intended to be ― a court of nine,” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor during a recent appearance in Minnesota. She added that 4-to-4 rulings can leave the law unsettled and justice across the country “administered in an unequal way.”

In other words, when lower courts disagree on how to interpret a particular law or how to apply the Constitution to new problems ― and they do regularly ― the justices are supposed to step in and resolve that disagreement. When an equally divided Supreme Court can’t do that, the meaning of congressional statutes and the Constitution may vary from state to state ― which isn’t just or fair.

This didn’t seem to be a concern to Shapiro.

“So when you get past the gotcha headlines, breathless reportage, and Inauguration Day, if Hillary Clinton is president it would be completely decent, honorable, and in keeping with the Senate’s constitutional duty to vote against essentially every judicial nominee she names,” he concluded.

If Clinton wins and the Republicans retain control of the Senate, this argument could serve as the groundwork for their next play in Congress — even though they’ve spent most of 2016 insisting that the people’s choice for the next president should get to pick Scalia’s replacement.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) signaled on Wednesday that he may be a convert to this vision of a new normal — a Supreme Court not at full steam for a very long time:

Dave Weigel
@daveweigel

I asked Cruz if there should be votes on Clinton court nominees if GOP holds Senate. He said there's plenty of precedent for <9 justices.

Of course, none of this likely matters if Democrats regain the Senate, which HuffPost Pollster projections say is not beyond the realm of the possible.

The Constitution may give the president the power to nominate justices and the Senate the power to vote them up or down. But in the end it’s the voters who choose.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...-clinton-nominees_us_580fed9ae4b08582f88cb00c

 

[souvlaki]

This is so upsetting. When I read stuff like this it makes me really hope Clinton wins by such an overwhelming amount that the Senate is lost to Republicans by a clear mandate. Hypothetically if Republicans retain control of the Senate how on earth can they justify holding up a SC nominee without massive outrage? Is this just going to be the new norm until one by one each SC justice dies or retires? This is so embarrassing.