US Politics Megathread

This is for discussions about news, politics, sports, other games, culture, philosophy etc.
User avatar
Great Britain chris1089
Retired Contributor
Posts: 2651
Joined: Feb 11, 2017
ESO: chris1089

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by chris1089 »

Dolan wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 08:13
ImageImage
ImageImage
ImageImage
ImageImage
So there are crazy violent people supporting one side. It doesn't necessarily say anything though as people could find similar statements about almost any political position. You'd have to show this is mainstream or necessarily flowing from the ideology for it to make a point surely?
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by Dolan »

You'd have to show this is mainstream or necessarily flowing from the ideology for it to make a point surely?
It's usually well-organised agitation groups that create events. Majorities are passive and silent.

We'll see what comes out of this. This isn't like the Floyd/BLM protests, because this time they have the federal government on their side. There isn't any big, visible target to riot against.
They could just take it to the streets to project force and to validate their own anger by seeing other protesters do the same.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by Goodspeed »

Dolan wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:54
This abortion decision works in the same direction of pushing issues back to the states. Then Biden's admin will try to regain it with federal law, then they'll fight him in courts again, defying any federal laws.
Whether or not the government will try to legislate their way around this ruling is an interesting question. I think it might be a non-starter. The court's argument will likely be that the right to abortion is not in the constitution, which makes it hard to get around with legislation that doesn't amend the constitution, right? How would you word said law? You have to enshrine it as a right, which I would think requires a constitutional amendment though IANAL. @Mr_Bramboy

In Roe v Wade they tried to use the 14th amendment to argue for a constitutional right to privacy, but if that is now struck down, what kind of law could you write that fixes this and doesn't need a supermajority?

So I wonder what these people from your Twitter screenshots are going to be protesting for. What are their demands, exactly?
User avatar
Kiribati princeofcarthage
Retired Contributor
Posts: 8861
Joined: Aug 28, 2015
Location: Milky Way!

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by princeofcarthage »

Surely some republicans would also support right to abortion? With some negotiating and concessions in other laws supermajority might be possible. Maybe some kind of temporary executive power?
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by Dolan »

Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 08:55
Whether or not the government will try to legislate their way around this ruling is an interesting question. I think it might be a non-starter.
That's what Biden said once, that he'll put it back in place through federal law.

Image
The court's argument will likely be that the right to abortion is not in the constitution, which makes it hard to get around with legislation that doesn't amend the constitution, right? How would you word said law? You have to enshrine it as a right, which I would think requires a constitutional amendment though IANAL. @Mr_Bramboy
I have heard this idea that he can't really force states to recognise a right that is not specifically enshrined in the constitution. It would go back to the supreme court and get the same ruling.
In Roe v Wade they tried to use the 9th amendment to argue for a constitutional right to privacy, but if that is now struck down, what kind of law could you write that fixes this and doesn't need a supermajority?
IANAL either, but they could try and bind abortion to the general right to healthcare.
So what are these people from your Twitter screenshots going to be protesting for? What are their demands, exactly?
So far they're angry and want to stop what they imagine comes next.
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by fightinfrenchman »

Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:19
What cases are you thinking of when you say "the rest"?
Gay and interracial marriage
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Gendarme
Posts: 5996
Joined: Jun 4, 2019

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by RefluxSemantic »

fightinfrenchman wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:20
Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:19
What cases are you thinking of when you say "the rest"?
Gay and interracial marriage
The USA are a weird place.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by Goodspeed »

Imagine going backwards
Vietnam duckzilla
Jaeger
Posts: 2497
Joined: Jun 26, 2016

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by duckzilla »

fightinfrenchman wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:20
Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:19
What cases are you thinking of when you say "the rest"?
Gay and interracial marriage
What kind of cases are that? Were "interracial" marriages forbidden? Like full-scale Nuremberg Law Blutschande style?
Whatever is written above: this is no financial advice.

Beati pauperes spiritu.
No Flag RefluxSemantic
Gendarme
Posts: 5996
Joined: Jun 4, 2019

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by RefluxSemantic »

Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:30
Imagine going backwards
You don't have to imagine. It's not like NL is moving forwards.
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by fightinfrenchman »

Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:30
Imagine going backwards
With sand in your teeth
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by fightinfrenchman »

duckzilla wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:33
fightinfrenchman wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:20
Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:19
What cases are you thinking of when you say "the rest"?
Gay and interracial marriage
What kind of cases are that? Were "interracial" marriages forbidden? Like full-scale Nuremberg Law Blutschande style?
Obergefell v Hodges and Loving v Virginia respectively
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
Vietnam duckzilla
Jaeger
Posts: 2497
Joined: Jun 26, 2016

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by duckzilla »

fightinfrenchman wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:38
duckzilla wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:33
Show hidden quotes
What kind of cases are that? Were "interracial" marriages forbidden? Like full-scale Nuremberg Law Blutschande style?
Obergefell v Hodges and Loving v Virginia respectively
Shit, really? You guys fought and defeated the Nazis and then went on to sign its main ideology into law? :hmm:
Whatever is written above: this is no financial advice.

Beati pauperes spiritu.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by Goodspeed »

RefluxSemantic wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:35
Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:30
Imagine going backwards
You don't have to imagine. It's not like NL is moving forwards.
I meant social change specifically. This has been an area of somewhat constant progress throughout the world. It's very weird to see a country move the other way on abortion rights.
France iNcog
Ninja
Posts: 13236
Joined: Mar 7, 2015

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by iNcog »

Women are beneath men anyway, so this ruling is fair. Thanks Republicans
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/incog_aoe
Garja wrote: ↑
20 Mar 2020, 21:46
I just hope DE is not going to implement all of the EP changes. Right now it is a big clusterfuck.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by lejend »

Criminalizing murder is generally a sign of progress.

And I'll believe it when I see it. My guess is Kavanaugh or Gorsuch will change their mind and vote to uphold the law. The leak is obviously meant to intimidate them into doing just that.
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by fightinfrenchman »

lejend wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 13:08
The leak is obviously meant to intimidate them into doing just that.
How do you know this
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
Retired Contributor
Posts: 7257
Joined: Feb 15, 2015
Location: California

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by Cometk »

Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:19
Yeah.. Imo, legally you can't make a strong argument either way so while the US continues to be mostly religious and this continues to be a moral issue, courts are going to make judgments that are ultimately moral but obfuscated by weak legal arguments. It follows that a conservative court can (and apparently will) simply overrule the earlier court's decision, and a future liberal court can overrule it again etc.
if it's trump or desantis in 2024 there won't be a future liberal court. it's now or never

fightinfrenchman wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:38
duckzilla wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:33
Show hidden quotes
What kind of cases are that? Were "interracial" marriages forbidden? Like full-scale Nuremberg Law Blutschande style?
Obergefell v Hodges and Loving v Virginia respectively
harcha wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:35
Yeah i'm also interested on what's going to be next on the chopping block.
@Goodspeed @harcha what ear said as well as Griswold (access to birth control), Lawrence (invalidating laws against sodomy), and Romer (preventing discrimination based on sexual orientation)

Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:44
Trump got 3 SCOTUS appointments

bErNie oR bUsT
:geek: shut the fuck up nerd
Image
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by fightinfrenchman »

Cometk wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 13:39

@Goodspeed @harcha what ear said as well as Griswold (access to birth control), Lawrence (invalidating laws against sodomy), and Romer (preventing discrimination based on sexual orientation)

Should also point out for the people who think that social issues are just somehow totally separate from economic ones, the Court will also gut the administrative state and make the government unable to regulate anything effectively
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by Goodspeed »

The reason I made the distinction is that in the past few decades, with neoliberalism being the prevailing doctrine, economic changes have been leaning conservative with deregulation and privatization, whereas social change has been mostly progressive.

So it's strange to see a country regress on social issues specifically.
User avatar
Kiribati princeofcarthage
Retired Contributor
Posts: 8861
Joined: Aug 28, 2015
Location: Milky Way!

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by princeofcarthage »

Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 12:30
Imagine going backwards
It is not going backwards though, is it? Supreme court basically admitted overreach in the case and sent the issue back to congress/states where it should be resolved.
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
User avatar
Netherlands Mr_Bramboy
Retired Contributor
Donator 01
Posts: 8219
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: [VOC] Bram
Location: Amsterdam

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by Mr_Bramboy »

Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 08:55
Dolan wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:54
This abortion decision works in the same direction of pushing issues back to the states. Then Biden's admin will try to regain it with federal law, then they'll fight him in courts again, defying any federal laws.
Whether or not the government will try to legislate their way around this ruling is an interesting question. I think it might be a non-starter. The court's argument will likely be that the right to abortion is not in the constitution, which makes it hard to get around with legislation that doesn't amend the constitution, right? How would you word said law? You have to enshrine it as a right, which I would think requires a constitutional amendment though IANAL. @Mr_Bramboy

In Roe v Wade they tried to use the 14th amendment to argue for a constitutional right to privacy, but if that is now struck down, what kind of law could you write that fixes this and doesn't need a supermajority?

So I wonder what these people from your Twitter screenshots are going to be protesting for. What are their demands, exactly?
It's American and common law, so I wouldn't be sure. Our continental law works differently in many ways. For starters, our judges don't disclose their political preferences :lol:

One feature of common law is that precedents are established because people find a vague situation and step to a court to resolve it. A problem with this approach is that it leads to situations such as Roe v Wade where a complex legal question is based on a foundation that has very little to do with the issue at hand. Common law is reactive in nature. I guess abortion has been such a hot topic for the past decades that no legislative branch has deemed it worth the effort to pass a federal law codifying the Roe v Wade judgment. Leaving policies regarding basic human rights such as gay marriage up to seemingly volatile courts seems like an unreasonable way to run a country, but what do I know.

Then again, I saw this map in the papers today.

Image

I'm not quite sure what this looks like population-wise, but seeing this map the controversy surrounding abortion in the US becomes a lot less surprising.

In The Netherlands (and most of continental Europe), I can't see a similar situation as overseas happening. The claim would have to be based on a legal issue, not on a moral one, and the abortion framework is based on a strong set of formal laws. The court cannot just set aside formal laws (as long as they were created correctly). European courts dodge questions surrounding controversial issues such as abortion because different member states have different views on controversial issues so it is impossible to create one European precedent.
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by fightinfrenchman »

Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 08:55
In Roe v Wade they tried to use the 14th amendment to argue for a constitutional right to privacy, but if that is now struck down, what kind of law could you write that fixes this and doesn't need a supermajority?
There is no way to write a law protecting abortion rights that would get through this court
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
Kiribati princeofcarthage
Retired Contributor
Posts: 8861
Joined: Aug 28, 2015
Location: Milky Way!

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by princeofcarthage »

Mr_Bramboy wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 19:22
Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 08:55
Dolan wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 07:54
This abortion decision works in the same direction of pushing issues back to the states. Then Biden's admin will try to regain it with federal law, then they'll fight him in courts again, defying any federal laws.
Whether or not the government will try to legislate their way around this ruling is an interesting question. I think it might be a non-starter. The court's argument will likely be that the right to abortion is not in the constitution, which makes it hard to get around with legislation that doesn't amend the constitution, right? How would you word said law? You have to enshrine it as a right, which I would think requires a constitutional amendment though IANAL. @Mr_Bramboy

In Roe v Wade they tried to use the 14th amendment to argue for a constitutional right to privacy, but if that is now struck down, what kind of law could you write that fixes this and doesn't need a supermajority?

So I wonder what these people from your Twitter screenshots are going to be protesting for. What are their demands, exactly?
It's American and common law, so I wouldn't be sure. Our continental law works differently in many ways. For starters, our judges don't disclose their political preferences :lol:

One feature of common law is that precedents are established because people find a vague situation and step to a court to resolve it. A problem with this approach is that it leads to situations such as Roe v Wade where a complex legal question is based on a foundation that has very little to do with the issue at hand. Common law is reactive in nature. I guess abortion has been such a hot topic for the past decades that no legislative branch has deemed it worth the effort to pass a federal law codifying the Roe v Wade judgment. Leaving policies regarding basic human rights such as gay marriage up to seemingly volatile courts seems like an unreasonable way to run a country, but what do I know.

Then again, I saw this map in the papers today.

Image

I'm not quite sure what this looks like population-wise, but seeing this map the controversy surrounding abortion in the US becomes a lot less surprising.

In The Netherlands (and most of continental Europe), I can't see a similar situation as overseas happening. The claim would have to be based on a legal issue, not on a moral one, and the abortion framework is based on a strong set of formal laws. The court cannot just set aside formal laws (as long as they were created correctly). European courts dodge questions surrounding controversial issues such as abortion because different member states have different views on controversial issues so it is impossible to create one European precedent.
Laws are based on preferences of majority of people of particular region. If majority of Americans are against or pro some x thing and if there is majority then what is the issue
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: US Politics Megathread

Post by Goodspeed »

fightinfrenchman wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 19:29
Goodspeed wrote: ↑
03 May 2022, 08:55
In Roe v Wade they tried to use the 14th amendment to argue for a constitutional right to privacy, but if that is now struck down, what kind of law could you write that fixes this and doesn't need a supermajority?
There is no way to write a law protecting abortion rights that would get through this court
Source?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV