• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

RBG dead

Page 14 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
e7e3c8cc-a3c5-4227-a2c4-995ede770841-jpeg.30226


This brings me to something I found disturbing. I saw a news story on TV last night about Trump supporters' demonstration in my region. I live in Alameda County, which is adjacent San Francisco County, CA. It was essentially apparently scores of trucks in the more rural and suburban portions of the county; as far as I could tell, just trucks with signs, shouting people and traversing the streets, maybe highways, probably blaring horns, hubbub, etc. Reporter(s) interviews a couple people.

This seems to me to kind of sum up Trump support. The stereotype would be rednecks, and redneck stereotype is pickup truck drivers. Am I wrong? I mean, WTF. Run the streets, contribute air pollution, noise pollution and AFAIK nothing in terms of meaningful information, just the fact that they are in Trump's camp, a parade of stereotypical Trump supporters. Word was they plan further such action(s). If they came to my town, Berkeley, and tried driving our streets with that spectacle there would almost certainly be violence, but I doubt they'd dare.
 
Last edited:
Muse said:
e7e3c8cc-a3c5-4227-a2c4-995ede770841-jpeg.30226


This brings me to something I found disturbing. I saw a news story on TV about Trump supporters' demonstration in my region. I live in Alameda County, which is adjacent San Francisco County, CA. It was essentially apparently scores of trucks in the more rural and suburban portions of the county; as far as I could tell, just trucks with signs, shouting people and traversing the streets, maybe highways, probably blaring horns, hubbub, etc. Reporter(s) interviews a couple people.

This seems to me to kind of sum up Trump support. The stereotype would be rednecks, and redneck stereotype is pickup truck drivers. Am I wrong? I mean, WTF. Run the streets, contribute air pollution, noise pollution and AFAIK nothing in terms of meaningful information, just the fact that they are in Trump's camp, a parade of stereotypical Trump supporters. Word was they plan further such action(s). If they came to my town, Berkeley, and tried driving our streets with that spectacle there would almost certainly be violence, but I doubt they'd dare.
Click to expand...

The kind of people that say: "I'd like you to meet my wife and sister..."

And there's only one female standing there.
 
HomerJS said:
I checked a few sources. The constitution does not specify "lifetime appointments"
Click to expand...
Correct. But, the term "shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour." has been interpreted to mean that they cannot be removed other than for bad behaviour (impeachment) or voluntary retirement. There is nothing there that indicates that there could be term limits, so it does appear out of the hands of the legislature.
 
Muse said:
This seems to me to kind of sum up Trump support. The stereotype would be rednecks, and redneck stereotype is pickup truck drivers. Am I wrong? I mean, WTF. Run the streets, contribute air pollution, noise pollution and AFAIK nothing in terms of meaningful information, just the fact that they are in
Click to expand...
Yup they are overcompensating for something. And why they support the bully in chief.
 
Muse said:
This seems to me to kind of sum up Trump support. The stereotype would be rednecks, and redneck stereotype is pickup truck drivers. Am I wrong? I mean, WTF. Run the streets, contribute air pollution, noise pollution and AFAIK nothing in terms of meaningful information, just the fact that they are in Trump's camp, a parade of stereotypical Trump supporters. Word was they plan further such action(s). If they came to my town, Berkeley, and tried driving our streets with that spectacle there would almost certainly be violence, but I doubt they'd dare.
Click to expand...

Try living in the Deep South (Mississippi) and being surrounded by them. Most of them are uneducated morons who don't give a damn about anything except their guns and confederate statues. The GOP has done an excellent job instilling fear in them that a vote for any non-right wing president will to lead all of their guns being taken away.
 
Last edited:
BlueWeasel said:
Try living in the Deep South (Mississippi) and being surrounded by them. Most of them are uneducated morons who don't give a damn about anything except their guns and confederate statues. The GOP has done an excellent job instilling fear in them that a vote for any non-right wing president will lead all of their guns being taken away.
Click to expand...
Yup, here in FL it's ALWAYS a giant truck, usually on huge tires with a confederate flag bolted to the bed. The low-IQ
gang loves Trump, dumb-fucks gotta vote too 'ya know!.
 
Nice compilation vid by the Washington Post of all the excuses from the senators who endorse
crapping on RBG's legacy,
I still say they are on really shaky ground here, RBG had mad respect from woman on both
sides the "fuck you" revenge vote can come into play. Pretty easy to lie to hubby and say you
voted GOP all the way.
 
Greenman said:
That's close to the truth.

And now it's a different situation. Now it's the republican's looking to get another justice nominated. Why is that so hard to understand? They will most likely pull it off, then Joe will expand the court to eleven members and appoint two new justices. When the republican's are back in power they'll add enough body's to flip it the other way.
Click to expand...

If the Democrats win the senate Biden should appoint 5 new justices, end the filibuster, and admit Puerto Rico, South DC, and North DC as new states in the union in time for the 2022 midterms. Or maybe even carve DC into 4 states.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv
SteveGrabowski said:
If the Democrats win the senate Biden should appoint 5 new justices, end the filibuster, and admit Puerto Rico, South DC, and North DC as new states in the union in time for the 2022 midterms. Or maybe even carve DC into 4 states.
Click to expand...

I was thinking splitting California in 2, consolidating Wyoming and Montana into one, and consolidating both Dakotas into 1.
The bisons don't vote, they don't need that many senators
 
alexruiz said:
I was thinking splitting California in 2, consolidating Wyoming and Montana into one, and consolidating both Dakotas into 1.
The bisons don't vote, they don't need that many senators
Click to expand...
I don't think you can just split existing states so easily or consolidating them either.The people have to consent. Then you have to have new political and governing bodies arise not to mention all the administrative tasks get duplicated. It'd be a massive expense for the people involved (in fact its crazy enough that we have 50 states because we could cut down on serious administrative overhead by slimming to like 10 states or something).

Realistically speaking, you'd have an easier time making states by just adding DC and current US territories: guam, puerto rico, island of samoa all vote blue generally speaking. You could also do the virgin islands and the north mariana islands.
That would be the ultimate F-U to the republican party for their years of BS.
 
Sunburn74 said:
In fact its crazy enough that we have 50 states because we could cut down on serious administrative overhead by slimming to like 10 states or something.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I was talking to some people who do software support for the nuclear device detectors in American highways (yes, that's a thing), and the impression I got was that the regulatory differences between all the different many states made for a giant headache.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv
I wonder if Felicity Rose Hadley Jones or Felicity Jones to most of us got a mention in the bio information about RBG in the thread. It's just a movie that Jones was in but parts of it were kind of inspiring. (On The Basis Of Sex is the film btw, about RBG's life.)
 
Sunburn74 said:
I don't think you can just split existing states so easily or consolidating them either.The people have to consent. Then you have to have new political and governing bodies arise not to mention all the administrative tasks get duplicated. It'd be a massive expense for the people involved (in fact its crazy enough that we have 50 states because we could cut down on serious administrative overhead by slimming to like 10 states or something).

Realistically speaking, you'd have an easier time making states by just adding DC and current US territories: guam, puerto rico, island of samoa all vote blue generally speaking. You could also do the virgin islands and the north mariana islands.
That would be the ultimate F-U to the republican party for their years of BS.
Click to expand...

Which assumes the great Jerb Creators! will pick up the slack with more Jerbs instead of more offshoring & more automation, the usual.
 
PlanetJosh said:
I wonder if Scotus justices ever vote against what they really believe in order to get more famous. So they can be more remembered in history. Not so much for a book or movie deal after they retire although that may be a secondary reason.

I'm glad that one or two conservative justices voted against Trump's policies in a couple rulings in the last year or two. I hope that's the way they really thought and that they didn't vote against their beliefs in an attempt to get more publicity. Would be nice if the replacement justice for RBG did that a few times. Sorry if it sounds like a conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

Scalia famously decided against himself on many occasions. I don't think he did it to be "famous," just to be an asshole.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
I mean, sure - I guess we can talk about that... But as far as doing away with term limits just sounds like a recipe for some Putin.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that term-limits for the Presidency are a sensible idea, but I don't see that it's clear that 2 is necessarily the 'right' number. You don't want someone to hang on to the job in perpetuity, for many decades, ala Castro or Gaddaffi, but I don't see that 3 terms would be outrageous.

I'd imagine most would be completely knackered and eager to go play golf after 3 terms, anyway.

Re the Supreme Court the complete absence any finite term seems a bad idea. I don't know that expanding the number wouldn't just kick the can down the road - seems to me it needs more fundamental reform. I don't see why the court has so much power anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top