How do you know how fair she'll be? I linked to her upholding unconstitutional lockdowns, and we already know she won't overturn roe v wade, or any other scotus decision, as well as possibly recuse herself from cases.
So, how will she tip the scales in our favor? What will she help us get done?
Other than "owning the libs". Can anybody tell me?
I never said either of those things. There are more than those two options right? I never even said Trump shouldn't put her in. I only wanted to examine the wave of total support for a person we know nothing about...and neither does Trump.
Sorry for the spelling error. My phone isn't great, but it's the only way I could comment during my lunch break.
That remains to be seen. "Conservative" house and senate got us nothing, and the same with "conservative" courts before.
We get this judge that we don't really know anything about, yet everyone is so excited like this is gonna change everything; like we really got em now!
If ACB is a constitutionalist only to extent that she will side with non-consitutional SCOTUS or circuit rulings, then expect very little difference from the status-quo.
EDIT: Seeing replies like "she's better than RBG" is really what I'm trying to point out.
Has it ever occurred to you that choosing the lesser of two evils is still evil, and going to hirt us in the end?
But no, we're just too busy "owning the libs", not caring that rushing this judge might be the wrong move bc "it's a Trump win".
I hope so, folks, I really do, but sometimes I think we're too focused on the wrong things.
Maybe it's not a huge problem, winning so bigly that I have to say don't get too excited, but just keep it in mind. Always fight for liberty, freedom, and justice for all...above all else, even our favorite POTUS.
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3886780/posts
^^^She recently uphelp unconstitutional lockdowns people.
My entire point is we say we want to support conservative judges, but they hardly end up supporting us.
Being a "Constitutionalist" judge is just the nice way of saying "they are not as bad". Either way, the Constitution gets erroded, changed, or perceived as a living document.
For example, she will not help us overturn row v wade. So why do we care so much? Just bc it's a win for Trump, and we want to vicariously win though him?
The Constitution makes our local government more powerful than the supreme court. The Federal gov doesn't have to control us, we have local checks against them. And putting ACB on the bench isn't going to provide any checks within the fed gov, even if we hope it will.
That's not what David Knight says at all.
He calls out when Trump does things that would happen with globalist people in charge...like rushing a vaccine because it's politically convenient; cost and safety be damned.
However, there is no way you can claim he'd rather globalists "run amok" than be on the Trump train.
I'll agree that he might be too uncompromising, but wanting someone BETTER than Trump in 2024 is something we should all agree on.
Trump is a great start, he really showed us how to win, but fighting for liberty doesn't end by electing someone, even Trump, and it won't stop after he gets a 2nd term either.
Knight is the ONLY person I know of who constantly brings up the topic of local elections, and local rights to overturn or disregard federal or state law.
I think we need to keep BOTH perspectives in mind. We need to focus on local elections like we focus on Trump. We need to fix the local level to protect us against the deep state bc it will take a long time to drain the DC swamp. The entire operating system of DC will have to be reformed, and most elected reps would have to be replaced before that would happen.
Can anyone tell me what's so great about ACB? Like, why everyone cares to the point where it seems like they trust the Supreme Court to be our total saviors?
I thought it was closer to 3, after looking at post-stats (but I'm not gonna rewatch to confirm lol). Even if it's 4, the numbers were ~34 mins to ~38 mins. That's really not too big a difference. Especially, as you pointed out, Pence was much more effective with his time. Also, 4 mins / 12 questions is 20 extra secs per question. However, she probably didn't space all that out evenly. My best is that most of the extra time came from her rambling near the end.
Contrary to most people here, I felt that the candidates received roughly equal time. Pence might've gotten slightly more. There were several times when he just kept going until he was finished. Meanwhile, Kamala tried to do the same, but couldn't pull it off.
My favorite part was how they both would just completely ignore the mod's question, and use their time to talk about something else. I knew Kamala would never admit to talking with Joe about his age/dementia, but hearing her go off on a rant about being a little girl, and being the first WOC this or that, was very entertaining. It's like Biden's ramblings rubbed off on her!
Just to clarify, no big pharma jimmies will be rustled. When Trump says he's gonna make it free, somebody is still paying. That someone is the gov, aka: John Q. Taxpayer. What's another 100 billion dollars when we've already blown 6 trillion on this thing? Here's hoping this will finally end it.
I appreciate the response, in fact that's pretty much what I've been saying in this little section on the thread. So, why is everybody on our side so gung-ho about ACB?
I get why leftists are angry: they love a centralized fed gov and actually expect it to be dictatorial...so if it isn't exactly in line with their views, they get upset.
But why should WE be so excited?