What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Official Donald Trump for President thread (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Put it in context. He's playing Star Trek chess, here are his moves this week:

- No convention schedule (week+ late?)

- VP pick is a reality show. Also late.

- Appears to not know difference between Articles and Amendments in USC.

- No actual state campaign offices in key states, just like the primaries where he lost.

- Insults USSC Justice (really the USSC).

- Files lawsuit against former staffer.
Click to expand...
A Strange game.  The only winning move is not to play.

 
badmojo1006 said:
So Trump is going to kick the Justices he doesn't like off the court? Sotomayor, you're Fired! Breyer, you're Fired! Ginsburg, so sad! Lost your mind! YOU'RE FIRED!

Something like that?
Click to expand...
That's not what the tweet says. He says he is going to swamp the court with "real" judges. He doesn't say he is replacing anyone. If you remember your history, FDR tried to expand the number of Justices to a maximum of 15. The number of Justices varied between 6 and 10 until it settled at 9 around 1870, but there is nothing in the Constitution that requires a set number of Justices. Also, as the President appoints justices to federal court, Trump could swamp the judicial system with "real" justices that way. He cannot remove SCOTUS justices. They must be impeached, resign or die. If you had rudimentary knowledge of the Constitution, you would know this (though I'm not sure Trump has that!)

 
bueno said:
That's not what the tweet says. He says he is going to swamp the court with "real" judges. He doesn't say he is replacing anyone. If you remember your history, FDR tried to expand the number of Justices to a maximum of 15. The number of Justices varied between 6 and 10 until it settled at 9 around 1870, but there is nothing in the Constitution that requires a set number of Justices. Also, as the President appoints justices to federal court, Trump could swamp the judicial system with "real" justices that way. He cannot remove SCOTUS justices. They must be impeached, resign or die. If you had rudimentary knowledge of the Constitution, you would know this (though I'm not sure Trump has that!)
Click to expand...
Why are you still trying to defend this tweet from him? Everybody else who has responded has seen immediately that it is an incoherent Tweet from an incompetent boob named Trump.

 
badmojo1006 said:
Why are you still trying to defend this tweet from him? Everybody else who has responded has seen immediately that it is an incoherent Tweet from an incompetent boob named Trump.
Click to expand...
I'm not defending. I'm trying to make sense of it. It all depends on what your definition of swamp is. Some interpretations posited here are pretty bad or just ignorant of how Justices can be replaced.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
badmojo1006 said:
Why are you still trying to defend this tweet from him? Everybody else who has responded has seen immediately that it is an incoherent Tweet from an incompetent boob named Trump.
Click to expand...
Bueno has always picked strange hills to die on. Larry Craig (senator that solicited a male prostitute) being one of the strange ones that I recall. 

 
bueno said:
I'm not defending. I'm trying to make sense of it. It all depends on what your definition of swamp is. Some interpretations posited here are pretty bad or just ignorant of how Justices can be replaced.
Click to expand...
Or they're treating that tweet about as seriously as it deserves to be treated.

 
bueno said:
That's not what the tweet says. He says he is going to swamp the court with "real" judges. He doesn't say he is replacing anyone. If you remember your history, FDR tried to expand the number of Justices to a maximum of 15. The number of Justices varied between 6 and 10 until it settled at 9 around 1870, but there is nothing in the Constitution that requires a set number of Justices. Also, as the President appoints justices to federal court, Trump could swamp the judicial system with "real" justices that way. He cannot remove SCOTUS justices. They must be impeached, resign or die. If you had rudimentary knowledge of the Constitution, you would know this (though I'm not sure Trump has that!)
Click to expand...
Except he can't do that (add justices), because it's up to Congress to control the number.  And even your stretching doesn't explain how "swamping" the Appeals courts is the same as "swamping" Ginsburg.  

 
bueno said:
I'm not defending. I'm trying to make sense of it. It all depends on what your definition of swamp is. Some interpretations posited here are pretty bad or just ignorant of how Justices can be replaced.
Click to expand...
Well, let me know when you figure it out...Maybe then you can explain what it means to the rest of us

 
apalmer said:
Except he can't do that (add justices), because it's up to Congress to control the number.  And even your stretching doesn't explain how "swamping" the Appeals courts is the same as "swamping" Ginsburg.  
Click to expand...
Ginsburg on one side, his justices on another. He swamps her opinion. I don't think this tweet is as incoherent as most of Trump's are. I think it is fairly obvious what his intent is.

ETA: you are right that Congress has to pass legislation to increase or decrease Court size, I was just putting that out there as one way that the Ginsberg camp could be swamped.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
bueno said:
I'm not defending. I'm trying to make sense of it. It all depends on what your definition of swamp is. Some interpretations posited here are pretty bad or just ignorant of how Justices can be replaced.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure badmojo was kidding when he was talking about Trump firing Supreme Court Justices. Trump might be under the impression that he could do so, however (as you acknowledged).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
bueno said:
That's not what the tweet says. He says he is going to swamp the court with "real" judges. He doesn't say he is replacing anyone. If you remember your history, FDR tried to expand the number of Justices to a maximum of 15. The number of Justices varied between 6 and 10 until it settled at 9 around 1870, but there is nothing in the Constitution that requires a set number of Justices. Also, as the President appoints justices to federal court, Trump could swamp the judicial system with "real" justices that way. He cannot remove SCOTUS justices. They must be impeached, resign or die. If you had rudimentary knowledge of the Constitution, you would know this (though I'm not sure Trump has that!)
Click to expand...
Trump says

 
FDR tried to pack the court because he was pissed off that they threw out his National Recovery Act. His attempt was a political disaster, as conservative and moderate Democrats teamed up with Republicans to defeat him. It was the worst political defeat of his Presidency. 

 
timschochet said:
FDR tried to pack the court because he was pissed off that they threw out his National Recovery Act. His attempt was a political disaster, as conservative and moderate Democrats teamed up with Republicans to defeat him. It was the worst political defeat of his Presidency. 
Click to expand...
That's it. The Court just got 10 Justices bigger. 

 
timschochet said:
FDR tried to pack the court because he was pissed off that they threw out his National Recovery Act. His attempt was a political disaster, as conservative and moderate Democrats teamed up with Republicans to defeat him. It was the worst political defeat of his Presidency. 
Click to expand...
Never playing Trivial Pursuit with you, that's for sure!

 
But honestly I didn't think Trump's tweet was too hard to figure out. All he's saying is that he's going to appoint conservative judges and "swamp" the liberal ones. He's not talking about packing the court or trying to fire anybody. 

 
I think Trump means he will swamp the court with cases against him and Trump owned companies.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
But honestly I didn't think Trump's tweet was too hard to figure out. All he's saying is that he's going to appoint conservative judges and "swamp" the liberal ones. He's not talking about packing the court or trying to fire anybody. 
Click to expand...
In all seriousness, we don't know which way Trump will go if elected. He has changed his positions so many times, he may appoint Liberal Judges if elected

 
timschochet said:
But honestly I didn't think Trump's tweet was too hard to figure out. All he's saying is that he's going to appoint conservative judges and "swamp" the liberal ones. He's not talking about packing the court or trying to fire anybody. 
Click to expand...
How is he going to "swamp" her?  He fills the current vacancy and there's no net "swampage" gain since he's replacing Scalia. Since he's promising to "swamp" Ginsburg, that necessarily presumes she'll stay on the Court (even though she's the oldest).  The next oldest is Kennedy, followed by Breyer and then Thomas. I'd say the prospects for Trump "swamping" Ginsburg are quite low.

 
bigbottom said:
How is he going to "swamp" her?  He fills the current vacancy and there's no net "swampage" gain since he's replacing Scalia. Since he's promising to "swamp" Ginsburg, that necessarily presumes she'll stay on the Court (even though she's the oldest).  The next oldest is Kennedy, followed by Breyer and then Thomas. I'd say the prospects for Trump "swamping" Ginsburg are quite low.
Click to expand...
He's talking to his true believers. Logic isn't a priority here. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
[scooter] said:
Lots of low energy speakers there.

Notice that Pence is not specifically listed as a speaker, but Gingrich and Gen. Flynn are.

Also....Ivanka with the primo spot introducing her dad.
Click to expand...
Cruz can get firey...would love to see him give an ol' "F*** You Trump" speech

 
[scooter] said:
badmojo1006 said:
Speaker List for GOP Convention. Other than Tebow, standard Politician list...Where are the Fireworks Trump?

And Dana White, that will be interesting

Oh and opening night, a Benghazi focus. Throw some red meat to the crowd
Click to expand...
Lots of low energy speakers there.

Notice that Pence is not specifically listed as a speaker, but Gingrich and Gen. Flynn are.

Also....Ivanka with the primo spot introducing her dad.
Click to expand...
Reek Christie is not on the list either

 
I don't think I've ever seen Dana White go more than 5 minutes w/o dropping an F bomb. Wondering if he can do it there?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ChiefD
⚽️⚽️⚽️OFFICIAL - MLS PLAYOFF THREAD - ⚽️⚽️⚽️
2
Replies
79
Views
2K
NewlyRetired
NewlyRetired
gianmarco
***Official Links to Funny Posts***
Replies
1
Views
149
gianmarco
gianmarco
Anarchy99
Top 250 Best Selling Rock Albums (1967 - 1981)
12 13 14
Replies
675
Views
17K
zamboni
zamboni

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Top