Comments by "possumverde" (@possumverde) on "MSNBC" channel.

  1. You're assuming the IDF/Israeli government are telling the truth. Given their history, that's a pretty big assumption.
    1
  2. ​ @joebloe923 My moral compass requires evidence to make any meaningful judgement. I have seen none that even proves Hamas had tunnels connected to the hospital to begin with. The only thing the IDF has shown appears to be bits of the underground system the Israelis themselves built back when they controlled the region. Until they can provide more than just their word for it, I'll err on the side of caution and reserve my judgement of the director.
    1
  3. ​ @CaptainChaooooos The age of really broke is about to begin. Unless Congress blocks a lot of his policies like they did last time.
    1
  4. It comes down to a large majority of the population not living up to their civic responsibility to learn the functions of their government as laid out in the Constitution and educate themselves on the issues at more than a surface level, thus dooming those who have to dealing with a lot of poorly chosen representation...
    1
  5. Stand strong Garland. Don't let those petulant children that some other petulant children elected to represemt them bully you. Tell them politely where they can stick it. This mugging for the camera, with each one of them throwing the "clever" little soundbytes some underpaid aide thought up for them out there instead of doing their actual jobs has to stop at some point. Might as well be now.
    1
  6. It's probably not going to hold up. The 14th amendment doesn't actually say anything about being on the ballot. It merely prevents one from holding office or being the one elected to office (the elector). If someone prohibited from holding/being elected to office were on a ballot and won, it would simply be ignored and the second place candidate would be the winner. Also, it's not even a matter for the state court to handle. While it's true that the Constitution gives most of the power over elections to the states, this is a federal amendment being employeed and thus a matter for the federal courts. The decision either applies to all states or to none. Imagine how insane our election histories would be if states could just arbitrarily decide who to put on their ballots.
    1
  7. It's what the voters know. Which for most is very little on both sides. As a centrist, this election has been very disappointing. Trump making all sorts of half baked promises because he doesn't have to worry the accountability of running for another term, and Harris saying next to nothing when she should be giving interviews and explaining what she plans to do. Neither candidates understands that rallies are pointless. They're for school children and those who treat politics like sports fans. The people can't make good decisions if they have almost no solid information to base them on.
    1
  8. ​@user-fy4lv6mf5n Any "Constitutional lawyer" who would even remotely agree with this decision is doing so based on their political ideals not Constitutional law. Nowhere in the amendment does it say anything about being on the ballot. You can't hold office or be the elector to office (declared the winner of the race.) That's it. On top of that, individual states cannot invoke the 14th amendments prohibition anyway. It's a federal law that must be applied equally everywhere. Thus, the decision is for the federal level not the state.
    1
  9. ​ @ihustleforit There are many metrics to consider beyond the 2% GDP defense spending agreement when it comes to determining who's pulling their weight. For example, if any countries wanted to, they could point out that the US accounts for ~34% of the total population of NATO countries yet only pays ~26% of the general operations funding and use that to portray us as the deadbeats. They don't because we make up for it in other ways just as they do with their shortcomings. Trump is just looking for disingenuous excuses to continue the sabotage of NATO he began while in office. The chaos of which compromised NATOs rapid response capability enough for Putin to see an invasion of Ukraine as feasible. Making such statements about long term allies is foolish, bordering on treasonous, and is definitely not in the best interest of our country.
    1
  10. They aren't panincking. They're just realizing that the majority of voters simply don't agree with the hard line right position on the issue they have to maintain and there's nothing they can really do about it now.
    1
  11. What's his plan/view on combatting price gouging on groceries and housing? That's right, he doesn't have any. Not surprising considering he made his living via real estate scamming.
    1
  12. Democrats make up only ~8% of registered voters in New Hampshire and they were pretty much all needed in their own primary in order for the Biden "write in" campaign to achieve it's goal.
    1
  13. So they're allowing 100,000 to leave so that they'll be available to bury the corpses of the other 900,000+ forced to remain and be massacred... They learned well from the SS.
    1
  14. They also have a civic responsibility to learn how the functions of the government and study the issues for themselves before dooming those that have to living under poor representation...
    1
  15. Interesting. How are you even sure hamas had tunnels connected to the hospital to begin with? There's been no conclusive evidence shown of such. All the IDF has shown appears to be parts of the known underground system the Israelis built beneath the hospital back when they controlled the area. Be careful about taking the IDF/Israeli government's word for anything concerning their actions in this war. They have every incentive to lie when it comes to supporting the claims they're using to justify their actions.
    1
  16. Neither amendment is being bypassed. The VII amendment only applies to federal civil court, this was a New York state matter. Also, given the overall amount involved in the fraud, $454M is not an excessive fine and paying a percentage of a bond rather than the full amount by going through a bail bondsman is a privilege, not a right.
    1
  17. @tjthomas01  You have no idea what you're talking about kid.
    1
  18. Only the morally bankrupt God of the old testament/Torah would bless Israel at this point.
    1
  19. No surprise. All of his policies are rooted in the mid 1800's to early 1900's...
    1
  20. ​ @goodone5590 If even half of his unrealistic policies are attempted, it will destroy the economy by the middle of his term. Quicker if he does a bunch of "day one" nonsense like he promised. Many of his other policies will compound the problem (mass deportation for example). There really isn't anything good to look forward to.
    1
  21. There are many factors beyond which countries have reached the goal of spending at least 2% of their GDP on defense to consider when it comes to who's pulling their weight. Trump is just looking for disingenuous excuses to continue sabotaging NATO to the benefit of his old buddy Putin like he did while he was President if elected again. If other countries wanted to, they could point out that while the US accounts for ~34% of the total population of all NATO countries, we only pay ~26% of the general operations funding and use that to claim that we're the deadbeats. With all of the economic issues that have occurred over the 10 years that the GDP agreement has been in place, 2% simply wasn't realistic for many of the countries. They have however in good faith consistently increased their defense spending over that time. Those who didn't reach the goal still offer other indirect benefits and/or strategic advantages that can be argued to be acceptable alternatives to make up the difference (at least for the time being.) To make the kind of statements that Trump has about long term allies we are definitely going to need moving forward, is simply idiotic, bordering on treasonous, and definitely not in the country's best interests at all.
    1
  22. ​@sarahdawn7075 Yes there will. Remember what Mussolini's own supporters did to him when he failed them. Fascists are a fickle crowd easily dispersed once their leader completely falls flat on their promises like Trump will.
    1
  23. It's not the courts fault. There are plenty of laws that, while well-meaning, are worded a bit too vaguely and thus can be interpreted in many different ways. There's a reason "legal-ese" exists. Interestingly though, this ruling won't hold up. The 14th amendment doesn't say anything about being on the ballot. It merely prevents someone from holding office. It's also not the domain of the state courts. It's federal. The Constitution gives the states most of the power when handling elections but since this issue involves a Constitutional amendment, it will ultimately be up to SCOTUS to decide.
    1
  24. He's racking up $5,000 fines everytime he violates it. With all of hoopla that would come along were he to be jailed, it would be more of a punishment for the COs than for him.
    1
  25. Just remember what Mussolini's own supporters did to him when he failed them like Trump will fail his.
    1
  26. Will Harris please just point out the economic chaos his mass deportation plan will cause. That's the best argument against it, and there's even an example from Georgia from years ago when they passed a poorly thoughtout law that drove off nearly all of their illegal population. So many weak arguments against so many things coming from her camp. Pull out the real ones. I'm a centrist and she has my vote but it's just frustrating to watch. Right ideas, wrong arguments.
    1
  27. It's not something that can be stopped entirely. A better idea would be something like a work for citizenship program. There's plenty of infrastructure and other key areas that could use work. Just set those willing up with a program so that their wages are legit and legitimately taxed and as long as they keep out of trouble and do their jobs for however long, they take the test and upon passing...welcome to the club. That would be economically beneficial and much better than the perpetual drain of trying to keep them all out and kick those already here illegally out...
    1
  28. I've had my fill of lies, empty promises, and poorly thought out policy from his rallies thank you. When he said he'd back down to an aggressor because they have nukes during the debate, he lost my potential vote. Harris was absolutely correct that you have to stand up to nuclear dictatorships not appease them. I never thought I'd see a Republican candidate be so weak or a Democrat be the one to chastise them for it.
    1
  29. Explanations for what exactly? There isn't even conclusive evidence that Hamas had tunnels connected to the hospital to begin with. What little "evidence" the IDF has released appears to simply be parts of the known underground system the Israelis built beneath the hospital back when they controlled the area.
    1
  30. ​ @devinaisaican2133 The only question it would raise would be if they refused treatment to the hostages or wounded hamas soldiers. Hospitals are supposed to provide treatment to anyone who needs it. Regardless of who they are. The fact that they allowed armed soldiers to be there is perfectly normal as well in wartime. What are they supposed to do, risk their patients as well as their own safety by needlessly confronting those who are armed or simply patch up who needs it so they have no reason to stay longer?
    1
  31. Definitely got his money's worth.
    1
  32. ​ @JoeRogan-DaveSmith2028  How is voting for a bitter delusional candidate who couldn't stand the thought of someone else becoming the first female President a good choice? All you did was vote for Trump indirectly.
    1
  33. @KidsandKarma  The IDF has released no video or photo evidence of any newly built tunnels under the hospital. The only evidence they've released is entirely consistent with the underground construction done by the Israelis many years ago, which are included in the hospitals' blueprints and thus easy to cross reference for anyone who bothers...
    1
  34. ​@joecancer6013 Doubtful. Democrats account for ~8% of registered voters in New Hampshire while ~24% of the of the total votes were cast in the Democratic primary. To achieve such a result the full 8% would almost certainly be required.
    1
  35. Trying to make the 14th amendment argument at the state level is a complete waste of time. The US Constitution says an insurrectionist is not eligible to be President. It doesn't however say that they can't run for the office. The Constitution gives the powers to run elections to the states. If a candidate meets the criteria to be included on a state's ballot, they can be on the ballot. Should they actually win, the eligibility question will be dealt with when Congress gathers to tally the electoral college votes and decide the President elect. If a state's vote is challenged and invalidated on the grounds that the candidate isn't legally eligible to hold office under the 14th amendment, then it becomes a matter for the court to decide. Edit: On top of that, since there is a federal statute covering insurrection/rebellion, the court will most likely rule that in order for the 14th amendment to be applied, the candidate will need to have been convicted under said statute.
    1
  36. ​ @cowarddonnie-ji5yz He's right. They have to overturn it as a matter of law. To start with, nothing in the 14th amendment says anything about being on the ballot. You can't hold office or be declared the President/VP elect. On top of that, it's not something that can be invoked by individual states. It's a federal law that applies to all states. If, for some reason SCOTUS were to agree with the CSSC, then Trump would have to be removed from all ballots nationwide. Not happening.
    1
  37. After a book deal and a movie deal combined with a loop or two on the talk show circuit, he'll end up with more than he needs to get by.
    1
  38. ​ @kellykrebs7020 If it wasn't based on personal beliefs, then the CSSC has 4 of the most incompetent justices I've ever seen. The ruling won't even come close to surviving SCOTUS. I wouldn't be surprised if the SCOTUS decision didn't also contain a scathing dressing down of those responsible for the original decision. Also, as much as I dislike Trump, one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, period.
    1
  39. No one cares about this debate. Both candidates are hot garbage. Nothing's going to change that and the only policy relevant to either in their conditions are of the life insurance variety.
    1
  40. ​ @Mr.White10-65 They wanted him to win. His first train wreck administration was a gold mine for the liberal media. He'll be even worse this time. A good administration is boring and bad for the news.
    1
  41. You don't want it to be too easy to pull a seat. Something like that can be very easily abused.
    1
  42. No. They need to stick with us as much as possible and hold the fort until the people here witness the mistake they made over the next four years. Otherwise, Trump's election guarantees WWIII within a decade.
    1
  43. Bah, Polk is the worst with Biden and Trump tied for second worst.
    1
  44. It's pretty atraight forward. If the grounds for removing him from the ballot are based on the 14th amendment, then her decision is unconstitutional and will be overturned by SCOTUS (as will happen with Colorado) If however, her decision can be backed up entirely by Maine's state constitution, then it would most likely stand.
    1
  45. It's actually very simple for SCOTUS. It's a federal law which must be applied equally to all states (it either removes him from all ballots in all states or from none.) As such, it must be invoked at the federal level not by individual states. It's a moot point anyway as nowhere in the amendment does it say anything about being on ballots. One cannot hold office nor be declared the elector to office (declared the winner of the race.) That's it. Being on the ballot is not specifically prohibited (and when it comes to the law, specifics matter.)
    1
  46. Bots mostly.
    1
  47. ​ @CarbonatedLithium The economic hit from any mass deportation will only add to that. Things are going to get real bad.
    1
  48. At least Missouri passed their abortion amendment...
    1
  49. ​@sarov7658 If it's not legal nationwide, then it's not legal.
    1
  50. If nothing else, it's a federal law, not a state law. Even if it could be interpreted to keep a name off the ballot (it can't... you can't hold office or be the winner of the election nothing says you can't be on the ballot) it would have to apply in all states not on an individual basis.
    1