Go back
Moore V Harper at SCOTUS now.

Moore V Harper at SCOTUS now.

Debates

Vote Up
Vote Down

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/moore-v-harper-explained

This can be the end of democracy in the US.

I wonder how many folks here APPLAUD that case, and hope it wins?

Vote Up
Vote Down

If there are no *federal* laws on the books about redistricting, then the states can do what they want.

that's how I see it. but remember sonhouse, what's good here for the repubs is also good for the dems.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@sonhouse said
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/moore-v-harper-explained

This can be the end of democracy in the US.

I wonder how many folks here APPLAUD that case, and hope it wins?
How can you opine on this if you know way much less than the studious judges, who all disagree.z?

Vote Up
Vote Down

@averagejoe1 said
How can you opine on this if you know way much less than the studious judges, who all disagree.z?
Hahaha you mean the ultra right wing evangelical liars and rapists surely.

Vote Up
1
Vote Down

@earl-of-trumps said
If there are no *federal* laws on the books about redistricting, then the states can do what they want.

that's how I see it. but remember sonhouse, what's good here for the repubs is also good for the dems.
yeh, so a law allowing some bad crap to happen (by removing consequences) being removed is, in your opinion, quite alright, because everybody gets the chance to do that bad crap.

Damn you people are dumb. To me it's baffling not just the stupidity of this argument but mostly that you think you can convince someone with it.

1 edit
Vote Up
1
Vote Down
-1

@averagejoe1 said
How can you opine on this if you know way much less than the studious judges, who all disagree.z?
This used to be a free country.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@averagejoe1 said
How can you opine on this if you know way much less than the studious judges, who all disagree.z?
The link in the OP says that most legal experts have debunked North Carolina's claim on the matter.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

@kevin-eleven said
This used to be a free country.
Lol, how can you opine on anything really unless you're an expert in a position of authority to make decisions?

Vote Up
Vote Down

@averagejoe1 said
How can you opine on this if you know way much less than the studious judges, who all disagree.z?
Joe, you're saying because judges disagree then we shouldn't be able to voice opinions?

Vote Up
Vote Down

@wildgrass said
Joe, you're saying because judges disagree then we shouldn't be able to voice opinions?
No;, I am saying that we not go wild as does Sonhouse. He is not exactly a conversationalist. We should get him one of Billy Graham's old preacher tents!!!!
Case in point, there are reams of 'stuff' that will have to be reviewed, corrected, explained, etc that learned judges will be going over, for months, discussing, certainly we all agree. We further agree that we cannot likely make educated comments when we dont know all those facts and legal reasoning. That will be a lot of posting pretty much going nowhere. There are other fish to fry. Why, we can discuss Trump messing with us!!

Vote Up
Vote Down

@averagejoe1 said
No;, I am saying that we not go wild as does Sonhouse. He is not exactly a conversationalist. We should get him one of Billy Graham's old preacher tents!!!!
Case in point, there are reams of 'stuff' that will have to be reviewed, corrected, explained, etc that learned judges will be going over, for months, discussing, certainly we all agree. We further agree that ...[text shortened]... retty much going nowhere. There are other fish to fry. Why, we can discuss Trump messing with us!!
This IS Trump messing with you and your constitution / democracy

Vote Up
Vote Down

@kevcvs57 said
This IS Trump messing with you and your constitution / democracy
Hey, there's that democracy word again. Can maybe YOU be the one to define it for us? I think it has two definitions , that is the problem. You may differ from Sonhouse, dont turn over the apple cart.