First Year FO reserves
09-09-2018, 05:40 PM
#41
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,503
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
I can’t say with confidence that that is true anymore.
The bar really isn't being set very high these days by either party.
09-10-2018, 04:57 PM
#43
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Posts: 775
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
I can’t say with confidence that that is true anymore.
Not being affiliated with a single party and sharing some beliefs with both, I do a lot of research on each candidate down the card and usually select candidates from both parties and independents. I don’t select candidates based on a strategy of have or not having a single party in power.
I can safely say this November I will be supplementing my normal voting practices with a bit of strategy. Any candidate that aligns with trump in any way is an outmatic No vote. Any opponent cannot be worse than a one that aligns with this joke of a president. If there is not a clear alignment with trump by either candidate I MAY vote for the one that will marginalize him the best.
Congress is supposed to have equal power to the president but some of these congressmen that know he’s terrible and support him anyway because they are afraid of the republican base are tilting the power scale in his favor and disgracing their own offices.
THREAD HIJACK
Not being affiliated with a single party and sharing some beliefs with both, I do a lot of research on each candidate down the card and usually select candidates from both parties and independents. I don’t select candidates based on a strategy of have or not having a single party in power.
I can safely say this November I will be supplementing my normal voting practices with a bit of strategy. Any candidate that aligns with trump in any way is an outmatic No vote. Any opponent cannot be worse than a one that aligns with this joke of a president. If there is not a clear alignment with trump by either candidate I MAY vote for the one that will marginalize him the best.
Congress is supposed to have equal power to the president but some of these congressmen that know he’s terrible and support him anyway because they are afraid of the republican base are tilting the power scale in his favor and disgracing their own offices.
THREAD HIJACK
Equal power? OMG you couldn't be more Wrong! Gov't structure isn't about equal power. Try check and balance, it's not equal. A fundamental principle of American government, guaranteed by the Constitution, whereby each branch of the government (executive, judicial, and legislative) has some measure of influence over the other branches and may choose to block procedures of the other branches.With checks and balances, each one of the three branches of government can limit the powers that the other branches has. This way no one branch becomes too powerful. Each branch checks the power of the other branches to make sure that the power is balanced between them. It's not equal. Go vote Dem and watch your company growth slow down. Good luck knocking Trump out the white house with the economy running at 4 plus GDP. It's about the economy stupid!
09-10-2018, 07:02 PM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,603
Originally Posted by Super EZ E
Snow Flake Check!
Equal power? OMG you couldn't be more Wrong! Gov't structure isn't about equal power. Try check and balance, it's not equal. A fundamental principle of American government, guaranteed by the Constitution, whereby each branch of the government (executive, judicial, and legislative) has some measure of influence over the other branches and may choose to block procedures of the other branches.With checks and balances, each one of the three branches of government can limit the powers that the other branches has. This way no one branch becomes too powerful. Each branch checks the power of the other branches to make sure that the power is balanced between them. It's not equal. Go vote Dem and watch your company growth slow down. Good luck knocking Trump out the white house with the economy running at 4 plus GDP. It's about the economy stupid!
Equal power? OMG you couldn't be more Wrong! Gov't structure isn't about equal power. Try check and balance, it's not equal. A fundamental principle of American government, guaranteed by the Constitution, whereby each branch of the government (executive, judicial, and legislative) has some measure of influence over the other branches and may choose to block procedures of the other branches.With checks and balances, each one of the three branches of government can limit the powers that the other branches has. This way no one branch becomes too powerful. Each branch checks the power of the other branches to make sure that the power is balanced between them. It's not equal. Go vote Dem and watch your company growth slow down. Good luck knocking Trump out the white house with the economy running at 4 plus GDP. It's about the economy stupid!
I just want him to be a lame duck as much as possible and keep him from placing justices that are going to have real implications on judgements for generations. The Janus decision was the first. We all know we are in a union right?
Let congress do the governing and he can sign or veto whatever he wants. Right now it’s just congress following this man child out of fear.
Btw Snowflake from wiki:
Snowflake as a slang term involves the derogatory usage of the word snowflake to refer to a person. Its meaning may include a person perceived by others to have an inflated sense of uniqueness or an unwarranted sense of entitlement, or to be over-emotional, easily offended, and unable to deal with opposing opinions. Common usages include the terms special snowflake, Generation Snowflake, and snowflake as a politicized insult.
Not sure I’d fall into any of these categories. I find that most hard line trump supporters are the ones unable to deal with opposing opinions. Does that make them Snowflakes? Seems right to me
Last edited by Qotsaautopilot; 09-10-2018 at 07:18 PM.
09-10-2018, 07:49 PM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Position: Da Bus, Left
Posts: 1,510
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
I just want him to be a lame duck as much as possible and keep him from placing justices that are going to have real implications on judgements for generations. The Janus decision was the first. We all know we are in a union right?
09-10-2018, 09:12 PM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 3,000
Originally Posted by Tranquility
He has/ will have placed 2 Justices with two others on the bench in their 80’s.... You voted for him not realizing this would be one of his Constitutional duties?? He even made his picks well known! Now, who’s the idiot.... 🤦🏻*♂️
09-10-2018, 10:28 PM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,603
Originally Posted by Tranquility
He has/ will have placed 2 Justices with two others on the bench in their 80’s.... You voted for him not realizing this would be one of his Constitutional duties?? He even made his picks well known! Now, who’s the idiot.... ����*♂️
One can never really predict if one party will take control of both houses of congress and the presidency so I have never voted based on that strategy because I’m not a single party voter. I vote for who I think is best for their job.
All this garbage would work itself out if we did away with the party system all together and everyone running for office was labeled independent. They could actually speak out on their views and issues instead of towing the party line on every topic. How are guns, taxes, healthcare, abortion, and workers rights at all related? Yet to win office you have to pick the party side of all of those topics. I’m pretty sure the majority of the electorate doesn’t bleed all red or blue on each of those topics but for some reason we have to choose candidates that do. We probably have representatives that are much like the electorate in their beliefs but they can’t say so because it’s not the party way and it’s why we don’t have competent non extremist republicans speaking out agains this joke of a president.
My municipal elections don’t have party affiliation next to their name and you actually have to listen to them and research their positions on topics to make an informed decision. Why are we not doing that at the state and national level? I makes zero sense.
09-11-2018, 07:08 AM
#49
Line holder
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: On the bus,seat 0A
Posts: 3,228
Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot
Can’t argue with this other than I did know he would be picking justices. I guess I didn’t realize how extreme the court would become. And again, as an independent, I share views with both sides so some decisions I’m sure I’d agree with. Also, just as Obama had his pick not confirmed I figured the senate wouldn’t confirm ridiculous choices but this puppet show congress just does as told.
One can never really predict if one party will take control of both houses of congress and the presidency so I have never voted based on that strategy because I’m not a single party voter. I vote for who I think is best for their job.
All this garbage would work itself out if we did away with the party system all together and everyone running for office was labeled independent. They could actually speak out on their views and issues instead of towing the party line on every topic. How are guns, taxes, healthcare, abortion, and workers rights at all related? Yet to win office you have to pick the party side of all of those topics. I’m pretty sure the majority of the electorate doesn’t bleed all red or blue on each of those topics but for some reason we have to choose candidates that do. We probably have representatives that are much like the electorate in their beliefs but they can’t say so because it’s not the party way and it’s why we don’t have competent non extremist republicans speaking out agains this joke of a president.
My municipal elections don’t have party affiliation next to their name and you actually have to listen to them and research their positions on topics to make an informed decision. Why are we not doing that at the state and national level? I makes zero sense.
One can never really predict if one party will take control of both houses of congress and the presidency so I have never voted based on that strategy because I’m not a single party voter. I vote for who I think is best for their job.
All this garbage would work itself out if we did away with the party system all together and everyone running for office was labeled independent. They could actually speak out on their views and issues instead of towing the party line on every topic. How are guns, taxes, healthcare, abortion, and workers rights at all related? Yet to win office you have to pick the party side of all of those topics. I’m pretty sure the majority of the electorate doesn’t bleed all red or blue on each of those topics but for some reason we have to choose candidates that do. We probably have representatives that are much like the electorate in their beliefs but they can’t say so because it’s not the party way and it’s why we don’t have competent non extremist republicans speaking out agains this joke of a president.
My municipal elections don’t have party affiliation next to their name and you actually have to listen to them and research their positions on topics to make an informed decision. Why are we not doing that at the state and national level? I makes zero sense.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
