Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Breaking News
posted by takyon on Saturday September 19 2020, @12:17AM   Printer-friendly
from the september-surprise dept.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Champion Of Gender Equality, Dies At 87

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the demure firebrand who in her 80s became a legal, cultural and feminist icon, died Friday. The Supreme Court announced her death, saying the cause was complications from metastatic cancer of the pancreas.

The court, in a statement, said Ginsburg died at her home in Washington surrounded by family. She was 87.

"Our nation has lost a justice of historic stature," Chief Justice John Roberts said. "We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her, a tired and resolute champion of justice."

Architect of the legal fight for women's rights in the 1970s, Ginsburg subsequently served 27 years on the nation's highest court, becoming its most prominent member. Her death will inevitably set in motion what promises to be a nasty and tumultuous political battle over who will succeed her, and it thrusts the Supreme Court vacancy into the spotlight of the presidential campaign.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Saturday September 19 2020, @12:48AM (53 children)

    by edIII (791) on Saturday September 19 2020, @12:48AM (#1053143)

    Well........ Mitch McFuckFace made a huge fucking deal about a lame duck president nominating anyone for the Supreme Court. That was with a lot more time left in Obama's term.

    So using their own logic, the right to place the next person on the Supreme Court rests with the voters, and ultimately the next president.

    That's if they're willing to be fair, and let what's good for the goose be good for the gander.

    Considering Republicans Trumpicans have been doing every dirty trick in the book to suppress undesirable voting, gerrymander districts, etc. I doubt anything can be done. Get ready to have Christianity, Authoritarianism, and Facism shoved down your throat. It's going to be an age of anti-abortion pro-corporate decisions, that also do whatever is necessary to give more powers to the office of the president, and suppress protests with whatever brutal methods are available.

    Overall, this is just the corpse of America passing a little gas :) Normal part of the decay process.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Flamebait=1, Insightful=5, Total=6
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:00AM (11 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:00AM (#1053159) Homepage Journal

    So using their own logic,

    Logic? In politics? Never, it's all about power. Obama didn't have the power to force the issue. I think Trump has enough power to force it through. We will know for sure in just a very few days - probably within the week. I expect the new judge to be seated before Trump is sworn in again.

    --
    Don’t confuse the news with the truth.
    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:36AM (8 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:36AM (#1053187)

      The Republican party is smart enough to know that doing so will cost them the Senate. Gardner, Collins, Tillis, McSally, and a couple others are on the fence as it is. Running negative ads so close to the election of their own words against them might just be enough to finish them off.

      They also know that no matter who is nominated, they will be pro-corporate and they also know it is not in their long-term interest to overturn Row v. Wade. The best choice, by far, for the Republican party is to keep the status quo going while making plenty of noise.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:39AM (6 children)

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:39AM (#1053193) Journal

        I don't trust the current GOP to be even selfishly rational any longer though. They're basically the Taliban, except too fat and lazy and low-testosterone to grow facial hair.

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
        • (Score: 4, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:49AM (2 children)

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:49AM (#1053203) Homepage Journal

          The rhetoric is strong in this one . . .

          --
          Don’t confuse the news with the truth.
          • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @02:38AM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @02:38AM (#1053228)

            The ignorance is overwhelming with this one . . .

            • (Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @07:33AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @07:33AM (#1053329)

              No, with Runaway, the ignorance is this one. Runaway is so stupid, that they rejected him in the casting call for Dumb and Dumber! When they tried an IQ test on him, it was a negative number! Once, when the thought they had found the stupidest person in the world, they then found Runaway, and realized their entire metric was insufficient by orders of magnitude! And when the Russian "Happy Bear" hacker farm found him, they could not believe their luck. Who knew Americans could be so stupid! Carry on, Comrade Runaway! Even if you do not understand why we say this, the Motherland thanks you.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @05:50AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @05:50AM (#1053282)

          And the Democrooks are any better?

          Do you vote third party?

        • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @08:19AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @08:19AM (#1053358)

          I also like to read opinions of masculinity from lesbians.

        • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Sunday September 20 2020, @02:53AM

          by Immerman (3985) on Sunday September 20 2020, @02:53AM (#1053798)

          I don't trust the Republican voting base to care about hypocrisy - given the rampant numbers of mistresses, abortions, gay prostitues, etc. constantly coming to light without consequence for "the party of family values", brushing off hypocrisy is practically an entrance exam to run on their ticket.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @03:33PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @03:33PM (#1053523)

        Rushing the nomination will signal that the Republican Party considers Trump not a lame duck but a dead duck president.

    • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Saturday September 19 2020, @03:14AM (1 child)

      by Gaaark (41) Subscriber Badge on Saturday September 19 2020, @03:14AM (#1053244) Journal

      " I expect the new judge to be seated before Trump is sworn in again."

      So.....never?

      --
      --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @08:28AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @08:28AM (#1053360)

        I think your love for clever comebacks trumped logic on this one.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:02AM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:02AM (#1053162)

    The reasoning was that with Obama, the Senate was GOP, so it would just be shitshow with no confirmation. The situation now is that the President and Senate are of the same party.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:33AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:33AM (#1053184)

      It'll be a shit show with Moscow's Bitch.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @03:09AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @03:09AM (#1053242)

      That's moving the goalposts. McConnell's justification for not proceeding on Merrick Garland's nomination was that the 2016 election should essentially be a referendum on the Supreme Court appointment. Should the Senate refuse to confirm any nominees until the President and the Senate majority are of the same party? That seems to be an absurd conclusion.

      • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @09:49AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @09:49AM (#1053383)

        Yeah, if that was the real reason, you think they would have said so at the time instead of coming up with it later once they realized how unprincipled that would make them look. But we all know politics is really just throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks while funnelling taxpayer dollars to your donors.

        Interesting note about their old rule though, people are already casting ballots in the 2020 general election right now. If being too close to the presidential election is the cutoff, having actual votes that have been cast makes a pretty good line. The lame duck session has already begun, in a Schrödinger sort of way.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @06:43PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @06:43PM (#1053612)

        Just like the 2 week lock downs to "flatten the curve" were moving the goalposts? Oops, you lose.

  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:36AM (23 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:36AM (#1053188)

    As a fun test, I like to subjugate folks who advocate for something to their own request. For example, if you think murderers should go to jail, what would you say if you murdered? Would you say it was fair to go to jail?

    Now apply that to folks who advocate for abortion. If you were aborted, would you think that was fair?

    If you're having a hard time answering that, maybe you should have the process applied to yourself and then post back here what you think.

    Until then, SHUT UP, you wretched scum of a human being. How dare you advocate for murder of children.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:43AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @01:43AM (#1053198)

      If I were aborted I wouldn't think at all. You fascists just want more canon fodder.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Saturday September 19 2020, @02:26AM (13 children)

      by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Saturday September 19 2020, @02:26AM (#1053222) Journal

      If I were aborted, I certainly wouldn't be around to care.

      So I have no problem with abortion, even if it were applied to me before I was born, because it would be physically impossible for me to give a shit.

      Neither would anyone else who is pro-choice. Because we can't time travel or crawl back into the womb.

      Of course only a troll hiding behind anonymously would pose such an illogical question. Then again, the right isn't noted for logic.

      --
      SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
      • (Score: 2) by Username on Saturday September 19 2020, @10:25AM (12 children)

        by Username (4557) on Saturday September 19 2020, @10:25AM (#1053392)

        What if you survived the abortion with only half your limbs?

        • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday September 19 2020, @12:58PM (11 children)

          by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Saturday September 19 2020, @12:58PM (#1053433) Journal
          Don't be silly. It doesn't work that way.
          --
          SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
          • (Score: 3, Touché) by Username on Saturday September 19 2020, @07:32PM (10 children)

            by Username (4557) on Saturday September 19 2020, @07:32PM (#1053644)
            • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday September 19 2020, @07:45PM (6 children)

              by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Saturday September 19 2020, @07:45PM (#1053651) Journal
              We're better as abortions than someone stuck in Siberia a quarter century ago. So again , it doesn't work that way.
              --
              SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
              • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday September 20 2020, @12:37AM (5 children)

                by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday September 20 2020, @12:37AM (#1053751) Journal

                Ever notice how the most staunchly anti-abortion types are the best arguments for legal abortion? Kind of makes you think...

                --
                I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday September 20 2020, @01:14AM (1 child)

                  by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Sunday September 20 2020, @01:14AM (#1053767) Journal
                  Yep. And since this site is too misogynistic and LGBTQ-hating, I'm gone. See my journal.
                  --
                  SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
                  • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday September 22 2020, @01:35AM

                    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday September 22 2020, @01:35AM (#1054736) Journal

                    Crap. You're one of the few people I like talking to here and you've taught me a lot about transwomen. Do you have a discord or irc channel you like to hang out on? Can email me if so.

                    --
                    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                • (Score: 1, Troll) by Reziac on Monday September 21 2020, @03:23PM (2 children)

                  by Reziac (2489) on Monday September 21 2020, @03:23PM (#1054455) Homepage

                  Ever notice how the most staunchly pro-abortion types are the best arguments for legal abortion? Kind of makes you think...

                  • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday September 22 2020, @01:34AM (1 child)

                    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday September 22 2020, @01:34AM (#1054735) Journal

                    Except no, we're not. I've spent plenty of time around both pro-choicers and anti-choicers, and can see clear moral differences (hint: "pro-life" ain't).

                    Why do you think that works, what you just tried there? Only someone completely amoral (and dumber than a chocolate teapot...) would seriously think that had any stopping power.

                    --
                    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                    • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday September 22 2020, @02:47AM

                      by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday September 22 2020, @02:47AM (#1054763) Homepage

                      Mirror, mirror....

            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by FatPhil on Sunday September 20 2020, @10:51PM (2 children)

              by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Sunday September 20 2020, @10:51PM (#1054110) Homepage
              You're confusing a failed abortion with an abortion.
              Have you ever seen failed driving? Does that mean you want to ban driving?
              Have you seen failed construction? Does that mean you want to ban construction?
              Have you ever seen failed swimming? Does that mean you want to ban swimming?
              --
              Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
              • (Score: 2) by Username on Tuesday September 22 2020, @12:09AM (1 child)

                by Username (4557) on Tuesday September 22 2020, @12:09AM (#1054708)

                Abortion means the termination of a pregnancy. It doesn't mean the fetus dies in the process.

                • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 22 2020, @09:43AM

                  by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Tuesday September 22 2020, @09:43AM (#1054889) Homepage
                  Giving birth terminates a pregnancy. So by your absurd definition, giving birth is an abortion.

                  Even the pro-life movement would be behind me on this one - as they'd not have a problem with abortion if the termination of life wasn't part of the process.
                  --
                  Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Magic Oddball on Saturday September 19 2020, @04:06AM (5 children)

      by Magic Oddball (3847) on Saturday September 19 2020, @04:06AM (#1053254) Journal

      If I was like the 90% of fetuses that are aborted within the first trimester (or the other 3.5% in the next couple of weeks after it), I wouldn't have developed enough of a brain to even be self-aware, let alone have an opinion on the matter. If I was like the approx 2% that are aborted late in term, I'd prefer it over the prospect of spending hours slowly dying of catastrophic defects outside the womb.

      To turn things around:

      1) If you were raped by a close (first-degree) relative, and knew the result was going to derail your career/education long-term (making it extremely difficult at best to earn enough to care for your existing actual children), would you want to have the option of taking a pill to terminate before the fetus can develop sentience beyond that of an invertebrate, or would you want to be forced to carry it to term?

      2) If you were pregnant and discovered mid-term that the fetus had untreatable terminal defects, would you want to be be forced to carry it to term (being reminded every waking minute that your would-be baby is slowly dying inside you) and watch it suffer outside the womb for hours or days before it passed?

      3) If you discovered 3 months into pregnancy that you'd developed a medical situation where remaining pregnant would guarantee your death before the fetus is beyond "extremely premature" (low-moderate chance of survival), would you prefer to have the option of ending the pregnancy, or be forced to die along with the likely-doomed fetus?

      Remember, you have to answer the actual questions, not a weaselly "but what if" scenario.

      • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @05:32AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @05:32AM (#1053276)

        A friend's wife had something similar to situation #2 happen to her. She's Catholic and while pregnant with her third child discovered her body was not supporting the baby well at all. If the child were to survive the full term and birth, it would basically have been a vegetable for life.
        Even the best case scenario would have been an existence so terrible that instead of attempting to complete the pregnancy, she chose to have a an abortion and hysterectomy. I do not know how far along she was when they discovered the situation, but I cannot imagine what grief and heartache is must have been to go against all her beliefs and decide that was more desirable than bringing such a child into the world.

        These are the kinds of things that the Supreme Court decides. Anything is possible, and while the court often clarifies rulings instead of overturning them, nothing stops them from saying "it was the wrong decision and here's how things are going to work now." I think this appointment is going to turn into a real shitshow, real fast. Trump already has two appointees on the court and I'm betting they're going to ram this next one through as fast as possible, consequences be damned. The Republicans showed their colors when they circled the wagons around the president for the impeachment. They have no shame.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by ChrisMaple on Monday September 21 2020, @03:12AM

          by ChrisMaple (6964) on Monday September 21 2020, @03:12AM (#1054207)

          The impeachment was a sham. Anyone claiming the charges against Trump were valid and worthy of impeachment is dishonest or deluded.

      • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Saturday September 19 2020, @02:16PM (1 child)

        by fustakrakich (6150) on Saturday September 19 2020, @02:16PM (#1053471) Journal

        Well, first, you NEVER let males (other than your practicing physician) decide the matter. You have to exclude them entirely before a rational discussion can be had.

        --
        La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
        • (Score: 2, Troll) by Reziac on Sunday September 20 2020, @02:30AM

          by Reziac (2489) on Sunday September 20 2020, @02:30AM (#1053790) Homepage

          Women love to see other women suffer... so that'll work well....

      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @11:00PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @11:00PM (#1053703)

        We need to allow post natal abortions, right up to the 72nd trimester (I think the math on that is right) or out of the house, fully emancipated

    • (Score: 2) by srobert on Saturday September 19 2020, @04:53PM (1 child)

      by srobert (4803) on Saturday September 19 2020, @04:53PM (#1053559)

      How dare you advocate for murder of children.

      This epitomizes why this issue can't be discussed intelligently. The pro-lifers make these sorts of comments, while the pro-choicers prattle on with nonsense about depriving women of "control over their bodies".

      The issue really ought to be discussed in terms of precisely at what point in time after conception a human organism should be granted a legal right to live.

      • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @06:07PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @06:07PM (#1053596)

        and although i'm personally against abortion in most cases, i don't agree that your child is my/societies responsibility, much less your fetus inside your body. I also don't grant the state authority over parents. The parents are not "guardians" allowed some priveleges as long as they do what the state says. The parent has full authority until the kid is an adult. Not that the law would agree in most cases, but that's what the 2nd amendment is for. Killing seditious judges and cops. If a parent abuses their kids, i'm sorry for the kid, but that's on the parents, not me. That being said, i would support justifiable homicide allowances for people who kill child abusers and that sort of thing.

  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @05:45AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @05:45AM (#1053279)

    And the Democrooks are just great citizens?

    It is so sad that the Democrook vs Republocrook cannot be seen for what it is.

    Do you really want Kamala as President?
    If so prepare for it ...

  • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Azuma Hazuki 2.0 on Saturday September 19 2020, @10:10AM (1 child)

    by Azuma Hazuki 2.0 (12884) on Saturday September 19 2020, @10:10AM (#1053388) Journal

    Analagous to a dog whistle, which produces a humans can't hear, "dogwhistling" in politics is the use of coded or euphemistic phrases that have a clearly-understood meaning to the base...which, like Pavlov's dog, more often than not has an automatic, unthinking reaction to it involving foaming at the mouth or at least drooling.

    Example: as the Civil Rights movement wore on, a lot of the hardcore racists learned that you can't outright call people "nigger" and win votes anymore. So they changed their terminology to things like "urban youth," "thugs," "forced busing," "inner-city culture," and so forth. Looks different on the surface, but the red-meat red-state base hears the double-G loud and clear.

    Several of the...ahem...more doctrinaire Democrat posters on this site do the exact same thing. Once you spot it a few times it becomes obvious, and also infuriating, because they think everyone outside their base is too stupid to know what they're doing.

    Let's stop the dogwhistling. I want to see the word "nigger" used more often on this site. Democrats should own their racism. I'm happy to own my racism.

    • (Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @06:14PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @06:14PM (#1053599)

      My racism is about improving myself and helping my race. I try not to focus on the problems of other races so much. Though i will use derogatory terms for other races when angered, but i try to give individuals the benefit of the doubt when the situation allows it.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Saturday September 19 2020, @02:00PM

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Saturday September 19 2020, @02:00PM (#1053455) Journal

    Considering Republicans Trumpicans have been doing every dirty trick in the book to suppress undesirable voting, gerrymander districts, etc. I doubt anything can be done. Get ready to have Christianity, Authoritarianism, and Facism shoved down your throat.

    Ed, Trump can't gerrymander diddly squat. States draw their own districts. Second, Trump is the last guy to force Christianity down anyone's throat. Third, Trump had carte blanche for two years, and did not shove authoritarianism or fascism down anyone's throat. We have separation of powers in America, which is why Gov. Whitmer is able to enact a draconian lockdown in Michigan while the governor of South Dakota never locked down at all; had they been under Trump's thumb, as you believe, they both would have done the same thing, whatever that might have wound up being.

    I do agree with you that we are arriving at the end of an era. I don't know how it's going to happen, what the transition will be, nor what the end state will be, but I am pretty darn sure it's not going to be much fun for anyone getting there.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @03:13PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 19 2020, @03:13PM (#1053513)

    Well........ Mitch McFuckFace made a huge fucking deal about a lame duck president nominating anyone for the Supreme Court. That was with a lot more time left in Obama's term.

    So using their own logic, the right to place the next person on the Supreme Court rests with the voters, and ultimately the next president.

    Chuck Schumer in 2016: Attn GOP: Senate has confirmed 17 #SCOTUS justices in presidential election years.

    Chuck Schumer yesterday: The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.

    So don't label R's as hypocrites. They all are when it serves their interests. Far-left congressmen want to expand the Supreme Court with 15 Progressives if they win the presidency and the Senate. So maybe you should calm down with the hyperventilating.

  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Sunday September 20 2020, @04:34AM (6 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Sunday September 20 2020, @04:34AM (#1053818)

    Get ready to have Christianity, Authoritarianism, and Facism shoved down your throat. It's going to be an age of anti-abortion pro-corporate decisions, that also do whatever is necessary to give more powers to the office of the president, and suppress protests with whatever brutal methods are available.

    Probably so. But remember, the American people chose this.

    I could be wrong. November 20, we could have a landslide election in favor of Biden, with Americans widely showing their disapproval for Trump and his policies and appointments/selections. But I doubt it; I wouldn't be surprised *at all* for the election to be won by Trump, yet again with a narrow popular vote loss but a win with the Electoral College. Americans really showed their colors in 2016 when they elected Trump, and then over and over again during the next 4 years with their various actions in favor of him. This wasn't just some accidental fluke; if it were, the Republicans in Congress would overwhelmingly be opposing him, but they aren't, they're backing him up every way they can, and the American voters (well, about half of them) love it.

    Overall, this is just the corpse of America passing a little gas

    Yep, basically this is what it's like living inside a nation that's in steep decline. All good things must come to an end, as the saying goes, and America couldn't stay on top forever. Just look at what happened to the UK: it was the most powerful nation on the planet for a long time ("the sun never sets on the British Empire"), and now they're just a sad shell of their former glory. If we're lucky, we'll suffer the UK's fate. If we're not so lucky, it'll be something more like Russia, or worse.

    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday September 20 2020, @10:59PM (5 children)

      by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Sunday September 20 2020, @10:59PM (#1054119) Homepage
      > But remember, the American people chose this.

      The data says otherwise.

      The EC chose this. The people wanted the opposite outcome. Historical gerrymandering ensured that their voice was ignorable.

      Not that what they voted for would necessarily have been better for more than a tiny fraction of the population, of course.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
      • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday September 21 2020, @09:20PM (4 children)

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday September 21 2020, @09:20PM (#1054633)

        The data says otherwise.
        The EC chose this. The people wanted the opposite outcome. Historical gerrymandering ensured that their voice was ignorable.

        No, the data doesn't say otherwise at all. Trump **narrowly** lost the popular vote, and handily won the EC vote, because that's how the system was set up. We've had 233 years now to fix this, and it hasn't been done, so obviously it isn't considered to be enough of a problem to bother fixing via a Constitutional Amendment. Contrast this with alcohol consumption, which apparently *was* considered SO important an issue that alcohol was banned via Constitutional Amendment. If there were enough popular support for fixing the Electoral College system, it would have been fixed by now.

        Anyway, no, the people did *not* want the opposite outcome. Yes, *some* people did, in fact a very small majority of voters, but that's not enough. 46% of American voters chose Trump (compared to 48% who chose Hillary). Neither one of them had a majority, so don't give me that "most Americans wanted..." crap, because 48% is NOT a majority.

        My point stands. The American people chose this, through numerous actions and non-actions. If a large majority of Americans wanted something different, it would be done somehow. We're getting what we have because this is what we either want or tolerate, and it is what we deserve. If we deserved better, we would be fighting for something better, but we're not.

        • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 22 2020, @09:53AM (3 children)

          by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Tuesday September 22 2020, @09:53AM (#1054890) Homepage
          God, you're full of shit.

          When evaluating whether the people *chose* this, an *active verb*, you count the number of people who chose this, which was thirty-something percent of the eligible voters. Sixty-something percent of the voters *did not chose this*.

          That's alas just how facts work; maybe try being in the right next time if you care about winning arguments.
          --
          Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
          • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday September 22 2020, @07:31PM (2 children)

            by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday September 22 2020, @07:31PM (#1055102)

            I *am* in the right, and you're full of shit. According to the official stats, 46% of voters chose Trump, not "thirty-something". Where the hell did you get that number? Are you counting people who didn't vote or something? Sorry, but those people don't count. In a democracy, you have to actually vote to be counted. If you don't vote, that's implicit consent.

            • (Score: 1, Troll) by FatPhil on Wednesday September 23 2020, @03:09PM (1 child)

              by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Wednesday September 23 2020, @03:09PM (#1055562) Homepage
              Nope, you're an idiot with terrible reading comprehension. Reread for comprehension this time, and then apologise when (or should I say "if", as you're not showing much activity in your noggin presently, and I shouldn't get my hopes up) you've worked out your idiotic mistake.
              --
              Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
              • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday September 25 2020, @07:20AM

                by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Friday September 25 2020, @07:20AM (#1056582) Homepage
                Lack of attempt to reread for understanding detected, signalled oh-so-clearly by the downmod.

                Or maybe you did attempt to reread, but just couldn't extract the meaning for the words. In which case I could award you a point for trying, but then deduct two for the depth of your fail.
                --
                Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves