2024 Presidential Race

#4,001
#4,001
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Suggesting paring down govt size and scope should be done in a "nuanced manner" and IN THE SAME POST suggesting an Executive Order to limit free speech in public forums is about as clueless as it gets.
Click to expand...
It's just the facts. Affecting change can be achieved through legal means. E/Os can be done in a nuanced manner as long the specificity and details are provided for the procedure within policy guidelines
 
#4,003
#4,003
hog88 said:
Explain what you mean by a "nuanced manner"?

How would an E/O cutting political discussion from social media be anywhere close to being legal?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't be. But these POS liberals would try it if it benefits them. They don't believe in the constitution to begin with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#4,004
#4,004
BernardKingGOAT said:
It's just the facts. Affecting change can be achieved through legal means. E/Os can be done in a nuanced manner as long the specificity and details are provided for the procedure within policy guidelines
Click to expand...

So you want the President to place limits on free speech? There is nothing "nuanced" about being desirous of having our rights stripped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsAgainstTheWorld15, norrislakevol, StarRaider and 1 other person
#4,005
#4,005
BernardKingGOAT said:
It's just the facts. Affecting change can be achieved through legal means. E/Os can be done in a nuanced manner as long the specificity and details are provided for the procedure within policy guidelines
Click to expand...
You really don't understand that these policy guidelines and hearings and studies and all that go with enforcing an Executive Order are the exact opposite of how a lean, representative federal govt should behave.

To enforce these E/O you need a committee to interpret it, a committee to decide how to carry it out, a committee to decide how to and how much to fund the execution, an agency assigned to hire/train enforcement officials, and on and on.

From a Presidential Order, a single person's notion of something that becomes a federal guideline.

No thanks. Instilling more power into the Executive Branch to bog down the Legislative Branch with interpretive meetings, logistics meetings, funding meetings, training budgets, etc are the opposite of smaller govt.

Even worse, the President can just hand the project to an UNELECTED Cabinet member to hire staff to sort it all out. Again, this is exactly how we got to the point where the govt is huge, inefficient, and sucking up far too many resources in America.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol, StarRaider, UT_Dutchman and 3 others
#4,006
#4,006
hog88 said:
So you want the President to place limits on free speech? There is nothing "nuanced" about being desirous of having our rights stripped.
Click to expand...
Please differentiate your right to own any firearm you wish to your ability to say what you want on social media. Remember muskets? What do think is more likely? That the founding fathers thought rapid fire weapons would be developed OR a world wide, technologically advanced information system would develop? Maybe both??! More likely neither
 
#4,007
#4,007
BernardKingGOAT said:
Please differentiate your right to own any firearm you wish to your ability to say what you want on social media. Remember muskets? What do think is more likely? That the founding fathers thought rapid fire weapons would be developed OR a world wide, technologically advanced information system would develop? Maybe both??! More likely neither
Click to expand...

WTH? Our FFs were smarter than you give them credit for.

But to reply to your post, I have no idea what technological advances they envisioned and it really doesn't matter, what matters is the words they used in the constitution and if you don't like them or think they are outdated start a movement to amend them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsAgainstTheWorld15, norrislakevol, StarRaider and 2 others
#4,008
#4,008
hog88 said:
WTH? Our FFs were smarter than you give them credit for.

But to reply to your post, I have no idea what technological advances they envisioned and it really doesn't matter, what matters is the words they used in the constitution and if you don't like them or think they are outdated start a movement to amend them.
Click to expand...
Ok. 🤭
 
#4,009
#4,009
hog88 said:
WTH? Our FFs were smarter than you give them credit for.

But to reply to your post, I have no idea what technological advances they envisioned and it really doesn't matter, what matters is the words they used in the constitution and if you don't like them or think they are outdated start a movement to amend them.
Click to expand...
I guess that we can apply the 14th Amendment of the Constitution to the Presidential Race as well. In addition, might as well apply the PRA of 1978 to it. We are all good.
 
#4,010
#4,010
Sudden Impact said:
I guess that we can apply the 14th Amendment of the Constitution to the Presidential Race as well. In addition, might as well apply the PRA of 1978 to it. We are all good.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I can't figure out how your post is relevant to the conversation you are quoting. The 14th amendment was not ratified until the 1860s, is not part of the BORs and wasn't authored by any of our FFs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#4,011
#4,011
hog88 said:
Sorry, I can't figure out how your post is relevant to the conversation you are quoting. The 14th amendment was not ratified until the 1860s, is not part of the BORs and wasn't authored by any of our FFs.
Click to expand...
Common denominator is the Constitution and it does not make any difference when it was introduced or who authored it. If the 2nd amendment is to be amended or better clarified it will have to go through the process no matter who originally authored it or when it was entered into the Constitution. We have a set of laws Constitutionally Mandated. Want to amend it? Put it through the process to do so. Muskets vs AR 15s etc are both considered Firearms and will be until changed.

This has no bearing on this Presidential Race to the degree that the 14th Amendment & PRA have at present. I thought I would just throw 2 more topics for you to discuss in the thread.
 
#4,012
#4,012
If Biden steps down, I could see a ticket of Gavin Newsom and Raphael Warnock (Warnock helping Newsom with the middle). There is absolutely no way Democrats and behind the scene players will allow Kamala Harris close.

I think Trump picks a woman this time to potentially help with suburban women. Lake, Haley, Noem, & Huckabee-Sanders.

If it’s DeSantis, I don’t have a clue. He needs to find someone that will pull moderates and Independents.
 
Last edited:
#4,013
#4,013
Sudden Impact said:
Common denominator is the Constitution and it does not make any difference when it was introduced or who authored it. If the 2nd amendment is to be amended or better clarified it will have to go through the process no matter who originally authored it or when it was entered into the Constitution. We have a set of laws Constitutionally Mandated. Want to amend it? Put it through the process to do so. Muskets vs AR 15s etc are both considered Firearms and will be until changed.

This has no bearing on this Presidential Race to the degree that the 14th Amendment & PRA have at present. I thought I would just throw 2 more topics for you to discuss in the thread.
Click to expand...

In short, you were just throwing **** against the wall hoping something would stick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and StarRaider
#4,014
#4,014
headhunter15 said:
If Biden steps down, I could see a ticket of Gavin Newsom and Raphael Warnock (Warnock helping Newsom with the middle). There is absolutely no way Democrats and behind the scene players will allow Kamala Harris close.

I think Trump picks a woman this time to potentially help with suburban women. Lake, Haley, Norm, & Huckabee-Sanders.

If it’s DeSantis, I don’t have a clue. He needs to find someone that will pull moderates and Independents.
Click to expand...

Biden won’t step down until the primaries are decided.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HammondB3Vol
#4,022
#4,022
headhunter15 said:
If Biden steps down, I could see a ticket of Gavin Newsom and Raphael Warnock (Warnock helping Newsom with the middle). There is absolutely no way Democrats and behind the scene players will allow Kamala Harris close.

I think Trump picks a woman this time to potentially help with suburban women. Lake, Haley, Noem, & Huckabee-Sanders.

If it’s DeSantis, I don’t have a clue. He needs to find someone that will pull moderates and Independents.
Click to expand...
Far out prediction: Gavin Newsom and Chris Christie
 
#4,024
#4,024
  • Like
Reactions: SlipKidVol and whodeycin85
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top