Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Dipanker » 18 Nov 2016 01:22

LokeshC wrote:Dipankerji,

That means that people do not agree with the constitution that set up these rules. If they do agree with it, then Trump won by the will of the people by following the agreed upon process laid down by the constitution.


Let me ask you this, theoretically it is possible to win electoral college with under 25% of the popular vote, will that be considered "will of the people", after all it will be completely under the the provision of constitution?

So constitutional does not mean not up for contention or debate, otherwise there won't be any constitutional amendments and constitution will become Koran!

As long as the popular and electoral vote go to the same person there is no issue, but when that does not happen questions will be raised. Historically that has happened only 4 times, twice in last 17 years.

MurthyB
BRFite
Posts: 704
Joined: 18 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: "Visa Officer", Indian Consulate #13,451, Khost Province, Afghanistan

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby MurthyB » 18 Nov 2016 01:23


FYI, there is strong reason to believe that IAs are one segment who may very well have provide the crucial swing vote. When the margin between total victory and total defeat is 0.6% of the vote, IOW 0.3% of registered voters, hey, your vote IS the one that makes the difference.


Republican Hindu Coalition: We Swung 25,000 Indian-American Votes

Shalibh Kumar of the Republican Hindu Coalition told Breitbart News at the victory party for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump that his organization swung 25,000 votes for Trump in Florida, Ohio, and other swing states.
“The Republican Hindu Coalition was given charge of delivering the maximum number of votes in Florida, North Carolina, and Ohio … Out of the three, Florida had the maximum number of votes.”

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5361
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby SBajwa » 18 Nov 2016 01:38

The funny thing is that Democrats went this way
1. A Liberal lying president like Clinton.
2. A black president
3. A woman president
...
People logically assumed that next will be Gay, Transexuals, and so forth with some other combination of black/woman/liberal.
Thus majority of people voted for Trump!! Democrats need to come back to the middle ground like "Democrats that supported Reagan"

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3524
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Rudradev » 18 Nov 2016 01:39

Bajwa ji,

What are the sentiments in US Sikh community? Unfortunately you guys seem to get the worst of it from riled-up yahoos, for no fault of your own (other than observing 5 Ks).

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Dipanker » 18 Nov 2016 01:57

SBajwa wrote:The funny thing is that Democrats went this way
1. A Liberal lying president like Clinton.
2. A black president
3. A woman president
...
People logically assumed that next will be Gay, Transexuals, and so forth with some other combination of black/woman/liberal.
Thus majority of people voted for Trump!! Democrats need to come back to the middle ground like "Democrats that supported Reagan"


By that kind of logic if republicans keep winning elections after elections then it will be back to pre 1865 days!

Clinton was hardly a liberal president. He was more like a moderate republican in governing. He took credit for reforming welfare as we know it by cutting it down! His foreign policy was continuation of Reagan/Bush-Sr. policy.

American system of politics does not allow for left liberal party. Obama was completely stymied in the congress/senate.

Up until 2000 America was ruled by two right wing parties, republican and democrat.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby UlanBatori » 18 Nov 2016 02:00

Back to the "Russians" claim. I am sure there is a lot being written on it, most of it garbage. Changes nothing. Since the early 1980s, US has had a widening lead over the Russians/Soviets in war and information related technologies. The Russians basically collapsed in the 1990s, and are barely managing to keep their heads above water today. To claim that the Russians were able to subvert the entire democratic process in the USA in 2016, is to say that the MASSIVE investment in the various 3-letter agencies is all wasted. Need a whole lot of imported Japanese hara kiri sets.

As for all the rest, the tennis analogy that someone posted, holds:
Suppose the final score was 6-0, 6-0, 4-6, 4-6, 4-6, who won? The one who won the most sets, or the one who won the most points? The rules are established, and surely neither side was unaware.

Re: desi contribution. I heard a distinguished bropejar say that
U know, some RSS types conducted a PRAYER because Trump is going to kill all Muslims?
Trump claimed that he loves Hindoos, which he thinks is everyone in India!


The disinformation campaign is huge, and the number of gullible dummies guarantees a strong customer base.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5361
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby SBajwa » 18 Nov 2016 02:16

by Rudradev
What are the sentiments in US Sikh community? Unfortunately you guys seem to get the worst of it from riled-up yahoos, for no fault of your own (other than observing 5 Ks).


US sikh community is divided over which side to support. Naturally the one's making more than 100,000 and living in suburbs and not in big cities in CA and NY are supporting Trump., rest are democrats.

Trump did pointed at some Sikh supporters in his rally and told people "look even muslims are supporting me., oh you are not muslim! well close enough". It is good to admit that you do not know rather than lying like Clinton.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/10/1 ... -supporter
Last edited by SBajwa on 18 Nov 2016 02:18, edited 1 time in total.

ssundar
BRFite
Posts: 653
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 02:33

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby ssundar » 18 Nov 2016 02:17

Dipanker wrote:Let me ask you this, theoretically it is possible to win electoral college with under 25% of the popular vote, will that be considered "will of the people", after all it will be completely under the the provision of constitution?


This is interesting. Please share your math.

Dipanker wrote:So constitutional does not mean not up for contention or debate, otherwise there won't be any constitutional amendments and constitution will become Koran!


Constitutional amendments are fine. They do need to be properly proposed in a legislative body and get the proper votes/signatures before they are official policy.

Has there been any constitutional amendment that applied retroactively to past events? Trump vs. Clinton is now in the past.


SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5361
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby SBajwa » 18 Nov 2016 02:25

by Dipankar
Let me ask you this, theoretically it is possible to win electoral college with under 25% of the popular vote


Theoretically it is possible that the electoral college makes the decision to declare whoever the winner is from their state without considering any type of elections. In past they have split their votes. President is only 1/3rd of the power where people "Sort of " vote. The real power of the people is Congress and Supreme Court. The President is a person who is given the job for 4 years with foreign affairs, defense, economy, etc decisions which sometimes have to be ratified by other top powers (legislature and supreme court).

1. Legislative <-- Congress (Senate and House of Reps)
2. Judicial <-- Supreme court top judge and his 8 judges
3. Executive <--- President

What's going to be interesting is that all three are under Republicans.
The supreme court judge John G Roberts was appointed by George W Bush.

John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States,
was born in Buffalo, New York, January 27, 1955. He married Jane Marie Sullivan in 1996 and they have two children - Josephine and Jack. He received an A.B. from Harvard College in 1976 and a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1979. He served as a law clerk for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit from 1979–1980 and as a law clerk for then-Associate Justice William H. Rehnquist of the Supreme Court of the United States during the 1980 Term. He was Special Assistant to the Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice from 1981–1982, Associate Counsel to President Ronald Reagan, White House Counsel’s Office from 1982–1986, and Principal Deputy Solicitor General, U.S. Department of Justice from 1989–1993. From 1986–1989 and 1993–2003, he practiced law in Washington, D.C. He was appointed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2003. President George W. Bush nominated him as Chief Justice of the United States, and he took his seat September 29, 2005.
Last edited by SBajwa on 18 Nov 2016 02:48, edited 1 time in total.

bharotshontan
BRFite
Posts: 322
Joined: 19 Oct 2016 00:19

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby bharotshontan » 18 Nov 2016 02:29

What's the difference between the top judge and the rest? I thought final judicial decision is based around the breakdown among the 9 total.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5361
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby SBajwa » 18 Nov 2016 02:47

In that case all 9 judges vote., Justice Scalia passed away and new one has not been appointed yet. This makes 8 judges.

4 Appointed by Democrat presidents (obama 2, clinton 2. Oldest Judge is Ruth Bader Ginsburg aged 83 appointed by Bill clinton the ones appointed by Obama are very young)
4 Appointed by Republican presidents (1 Reagan, 1 George Bush, 2 George W Bush)

So! now one of the first jobs of Trump will be to appoint a new judge to replace Scalia., and senate will have to pass it. Which will make 5 Republican appointed Judges and 4 Democrat appointed Judges., usually based on their political agenda (family rights, human rights, gun rights, immigration rights, public choices, so forth).

The current Chief Justice actually represented Microsoft when there was a case against them for monopoly

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... osoft_Corp.

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby TSJones » 18 Nov 2016 04:33

ssundar wrote:
Dipanker wrote:Let me ask you this, theoretically it is possible to win electoral college with under 25% of the popular vote, will that be considered "will of the people", after all it will be completely under the the provision of constitution?


This is interesting. Please share your math.

Dipanker wrote:So constitutional does not mean not up for contention or debate, otherwise there won't be any constitutional amendments and constitution will become Koran!


Constitutional amendments are fine. They do need to be properly proposed in a legislative body and get the proper votes/signatures before they are official policy.

Has there been any constitutional amendment that applied retroactively to past events? Trump vs. Clinton is now in the past.


ah, a subject near and dear to my heart.......

an amendment can be initiated by 2/3 vote in congress -or- by a constitution convention of the states with a 2/3 vote majority. so it doesn't positively *have to* come from congress. *then* it must be ratified by a 3/4 majority vote of the states' legislatures.

can you see why the electoral college will never go to majority vote in an amendment to the constitution?

and you heard it from TSJ........

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Dipanker » 18 Nov 2016 05:10

Mort Walker wrote:
Dipanker wrote:

He also worked for Reagan and Bush Senior, two Republican president not particularly favorably disposed towards India. More recently he has been an advisor to Trump and before that was involved with John McCain campaign. I would tend to think he is leaning republican.


Wrong again.
He held low level positions under republican admins. He is a neocon of the highest order that gained promotion with neocon democrats like Carter who created the NSG specifically against India, and BC who had people like Robin Raphel directing South Asia policy.


How exactly your response makes my post wrong when you agree that he worked for Republicans admins ( rank of the post notwithstanding ) ?
You are calling him a newcon of the highest order and I will agree, but aren't the necons now associated with the Republican party (refer to to Bush Jr. neocons) ? Beside Woolsey has worked with McCain and Trump campaign too. These are all matter of fact and therefore can't be labeled wrong.

So the only matter of contention could be that you find Carter and Clinton, two democrats presidents more harmful than the two republican president Reagan and Bush Sr.

Now that is just matter of opinion and I disagree with you. IMO even though Bush Sr. did not cause much damage to India, Reagan alone was much more harmful than the combined effect of BC+Carter.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Dipanker » 18 Nov 2016 05:22

TSJones wrote:ah, a subject near and dear to my heart.......

an amendment can be initiated by 2/3 vote in congress -or- by a constitution convention of the states with a 2/3 vote majority. so it doesn't positively *have to* come from congress. *then* it must be ratified by a 3/4 majority vote of the states' legislatures.

can you see why the electoral college will never go to majority vote in an amendment to the constitution?

and you heard it from TSJ........


Don't be so sure, all the red states which are now against, will run for a Electoral college reform as soon as Texas turns blue, which is only a matter of time. Already 23 states are in favor.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7650
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby nachiket » 18 Nov 2016 05:45

Dipanker wrote:Don't be so sure, all the red states which are now against, will run for a Electoral college reform as soon as Texas turns blue, which is only a matter of time. Already 23 states are in favor.

But if that happens, the Democrats will then oppose them and stop EC reform. And you're back to square one.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Singha » 18 Nov 2016 05:59

CJs who vote only on carefully vetted party line .. isnt that a mockery of the 'fair n balanced' concept of the justice system where nothing matters but the public welfare.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby UlanBatori » 18 Nov 2016 06:21

Dipanker wrote:Let me ask you this, theoretically it is possible to win electoral college with under 25% of the popular vote, will that be considered "will of the people", after all it will be completely under the the provision of constitution?
So constitutional does not mean not up for contention or debate, otherwise there won't be any constitutional amendments and constitution will become Koran! As long as the popular and electoral vote go to the same person there is no issue, but when that does not happen questions will be raised. Historically that has happened only 4 times, twice in last 17 years.


Someone explained to me early on that
The USA is not a "popular democracy". It is a Republic (whatever that means)*. The United *****STATES**** of America: a federation of States. So each State has a sets of votes to cast in the federation, related in some form to their population. It is the States that elect the leader of the federation of States.

The important thing, as was found out at great cost, is to keep the STATES together. The Popular Democracy part is limited to the Governor of each State: that has to be over 50% IIRC.

*****Definition of Republic vs. Democracy****
In a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a "pure democracy," the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority.


IOW, good ol' red-blooded "Americans" do not recognize the right of The Majority to take away rights - mainly the Rite 2 Bare Arms and Backsides.

All this other stuff is so much :(( :(( :(( . People THINK they are the ones electing the Supreme Leader of the States, but that is not the important aspect, and was never intended to be. IOW, Abdul bin Lincoln was selling Snake Oil when he proclaimed
So that the Guvrmand Of Da Beebal, Py da Beebal, Of da Beebal, shall Nevah Berish From da Duniya!
[/quote]

It was **NEVER** that: it was always Guvrmand Of The States By the States, Of the States. Otherwise they would have called it something like UPA (United People of America). So let's pls put to rest this agony column about Popular Vote etc.
Last edited by UlanBatori on 18 Nov 2016 06:29, edited 2 times in total.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Arjun » 18 Nov 2016 06:23

Singha wrote:CJs who vote only on carefully vetted party line .. isnt that a mockery of the 'fair n balanced' concept of the justice system where nothing matters but the public welfare.

Dunno...Indians tend to take a more idealistic view that there is one single way of determining what is 'public welfare'. Americans have tended to be more practical and recognize that ideological differences will lead you to different conclusions on the issue....I rather think India needs to copy the US model than the other way around.

Look at the mandate that Trump won - FAR bigger in its implications than what Modi obtained ! Trump will get to control the executive, legislature and judiciary- and makes his whole job of aligning the country much, much easier...in India Modi has only the first - while second and third are still in the hands of the Alt-Left.

Raja Bose
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19478
Joined: 18 Oct 2005 01:38

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Raja Bose » 18 Nov 2016 06:51

I like the word Alt-Left. We need to propagate use of this word more. Alt left is as vicious as the Alt right.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7650
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby nachiket » 18 Nov 2016 06:56

Arjun wrote:Look at the mandate that Trump won - FAR bigger in its implications than what Modi obtained ! Trump will get to control the executive, legislature and judiciary- and makes his whole job of aligning the country much, much easier...in India Modi has only the first - while second and third are still in the hands of the Alt-Left.

Modi controls the lower house of the legislature as well. Only the upper house is controlled by the alt-left. I'm not sure we should go the US way of appointing supreme court justices. If Trump is able to appoint 2-3 judges in his tenure, the conservatives will control the SCOTUS for decades. Imagine if Pappu or his mother got that kind of power in India.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22485
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby chetak » 18 Nov 2016 07:39

Singha wrote:CJs who vote only on carefully vetted party line .. isnt that a mockery of the 'fair n balanced' concept of the justice system where nothing matters but the public welfare.


and how does it play out in "democratic" India??

haven't the lootyens gang slyly set up the "party line" system for decades to come??

with carefully planned succession and continued dominance of judicial coolies, all beholden and clearly appreciative of the quid pro quo involved

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Singha » 18 Nov 2016 07:41

Very true but saar i thought yeeusa 》india ... so dared to ask

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22485
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby chetak » 18 Nov 2016 07:48

nachiket wrote:
Arjun wrote:Look at the mandate that Trump won - FAR bigger in its implications than what Modi obtained ! Trump will get to control the executive, legislature and judiciary- and makes his whole job of aligning the country much, much easier...in India Modi has only the first - while second and third are still in the hands of the Alt-Left.

Modi controls the lower house of the legislature as well. Only the upper house is controlled by the alt-left. I'm not sure we should go the US way of appointing supreme court justices. If Trump is able to appoint 2-3 judges in his tenure, the conservatives will control the SCOTUS for decades. Imagine if Pappu or his mother got that kind of power in India.


pappu's mother did have that kind of power and she damn well made use of it to stymie the system, sort of a scorched earth policy where the new dispensation was horribly handicapped and would therefore be forced to follow the pre ordained party line.

That is, until they ran into Damodardas.

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby TSJones » 18 Nov 2016 08:07

Unfortunately, the Republic is comprised of humans that err. From time to time hysteria does sweep the nation, much like what is presently happening on today's college campuses. They are a PC cesspool where the first amendment is trampled upon regularly. This has happened in the past with the prohibition of alcohol. And it is happening with marijuana although fissures are appearing in that particular hysteria. So it is safe to say that mass hysteria can sweep an amendment into the constitution. Very easily.

But for a majority vote of the president? That would mean the mountain states, the great plains states, and the southern states would have to say yes, we will let New York and California and Texas decide who will be president for the rest of history.

and folks, that just plain old ain't happening.

end. of. story.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17003
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Rahul M » 18 Nov 2016 08:27

nachiket wrote:
Arjun wrote:Look at the mandate that Trump won - FAR bigger in its implications than what Modi obtained ! Trump will get to control the executive, legislature and judiciary- and makes his whole job of aligning the country much, much easier...in India Modi has only the first - while second and third are still in the hands of the Alt-Left.

Modi controls the lower house of the legislature as well. Only the upper house is controlled by the alt-left. I'm not sure we should go the US way of appointing supreme court justices. If Trump is able to appoint 2-3 judges in his tenure, the conservatives will control the SCOTUS for decades. Imagine if Pappu or his mother got that kind of power in India.

In India SC judges retire at 65. big difference.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17003
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Rahul M » 18 Nov 2016 08:29

Singha wrote:CJs who vote only on carefully vetted party line .. isnt that a mockery of the 'fair n balanced' concept of the justice system where nothing matters but the public welfare.

it's a distortion of 'separation of powers'.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby hnair » 18 Nov 2016 08:49

Arjun wrote:I rather think India needs to copy the US model than the other way around.


Arjun, please consider this an informal warning: this is not the thread for putting down India's judiciary, while using US as a role model. REALLY dont want this thread to go down further.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby hnair » 18 Nov 2016 09:01

chetak, fyi, please dont continue posting about Indian judiciary here!

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22485
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby chetak » 18 Nov 2016 09:26

hnair wrote:chetak, fyi, please dont continue posting about Indian judiciary here!


:oops:

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Arjun » 18 Nov 2016 09:29

hnair wrote:Arjun, please consider this an informal warning: this is not the thread for putting down India's judiciary, while using US as a role model. REALLY dont want this thread to go down further.

There are a number of areas where the US can learn from India and there are some where its the reverse...so I really don't see what the problem is. Anyways, will comply with your warning.

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8216
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Gus » 18 Nov 2016 09:39

Filibuster is still possible in Senate no? Gop has established that there is no political backlash for obstructionism.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8422
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Mort Walker » 18 Nov 2016 10:30

Gus wrote:Filibuster is still possible in Senate no? Gop has established that there is no political backlash for obstructionism.


Yes, but the Democrats simply don't have the stamina of Republicans and will most likely be unable to sustain a filibuster. Wrongly or rightly those like Ted Cruz are driven by ideology which is less seen by Democrats.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Austin » 18 Nov 2016 10:36

Hillary Became "Physically Violent" After She Had Lost Election, Had To Be Restrained


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54390
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby ramana » 18 Nov 2016 11:08

GD, I note you brought in CJs in this thread and Arjun and Chetak got cautioned.
Please don't do that.

raamana

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54390
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby ramana » 18 Nov 2016 11:16

Mort

Donald trump is doing a great job of engaging all the Republicans on Cabinet formation. All politicians are aghast.

In last 16 years many fortunes were made on China trade.
He needs to corral them before acting on any thing.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3524
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Rudradev » 18 Nov 2016 11:45

Singha wrote:CJs who vote only on carefully vetted party line .. isnt that a mockery of the 'fair n balanced' concept of the justice system where nothing matters but the public welfare.


Not necessarily. Current SCOTUS justice Anthony Kennedy, for example, was a Reagan appointee but is not a Republican idrologue at all. His votes on various decisions have benefited either conservative or liberal causes at different times, based on his professional interpretation of the constitution and the law in each case.

Rammpal
BRFite
Posts: 290
Joined: 23 Sep 2016 12:21

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Rammpal » 18 Nov 2016 11:57

Austin wrote:Hillary Became "Physically Violent" After She Had Lost Election, Had To Be Restrained



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWdJZh7Nz4g

:eek: :shock:

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8216
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby Gus » 18 Nov 2016 13:03

Is that the same Hilary who had no stamina and could not walk 5 steps without help? :D

LokeshC
BRFite
Posts: 696
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 04:36

Re: Understanding the United States of America (USA) - IV

Postby LokeshC » 18 Nov 2016 13:10

There are so many CTs on youtube on Hillary that its mind boggling. Democrats could not have chosen a more controversial candidate.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests