Packing the Court

[Orangecat]

The decision won't be made unless the dems win it all and unless the SC obstructs like it has not in the past.

In other words, Joe would support expanding the court if he wins and they won't do his bidding. Good to know.

 

[lantern2814]

How hard is it to answer this? Let the people decide, why not say that for every issue then?

HE won't answer because it will become the issue.....isn't that was a campaign is for?

Joe Biden is a clown....more like a marionette...who is pulling the strings?

I think the answer was already give by Pelosi. No Packing done. It's not up to the President to determine the number of Justices. That's up to the Congress. And since Pelosi already answered the question, Biden was not going to say yay or nay on it because it's not his place. If the House will not pass a Bill to that effect them it's not going to happen. And no President can change that. It's called the Separation of Powers. Rump believes that HE is king. Biden doesn't believe that he will ever be king nor does he believe that Rump can be the king either.

He got asked if he "supported" it, you dolt.

It's not up to him to support it or not. That's up to Congress. They could have asked him what flavor of Ice Cream he liked just as well and who the hell cares.

So presidents should give no opinion on matters that affect the Nation, when the decision ultimately isnt up to them? LOL
What a stupid justification.
You hacks can be so damn pathetic.

Here's a clue for you, TN. The issue facing the American people isn't whether Democrats will "unpack" the courts. Republicans have already "packed them". McConnell refused to approve any judges under Obama, slowing the approval process to an absolute crawl, and then put judging appointments on a conveyer belt once Trump was elected.

McConnell has refused to pass any legislation, or do anything for the American people except cut taxes. But he has packed the courts with a record number of conservative "judges", many of them highly unqualified and likely to fail. McConnell has made "packing the courts" the only work of the senate for the past 8 years.

All of which ignores the PROBLEMS which Trump has either ignored, mismanaged, or utterly fucked up. The opoid crisis - ignored. Covid19 - total clusterfuck. Racial unrest - cracking down on protestors. And he crashed the economy.

Get your boots on people. The shit is getting deep here.

 

[Dragonlady]

How hard is it to answer this? Let the people decide, why not say that for every issue then?

HE won't answer because it will become the issue.....isn't that was a campaign is for?

Joe Biden is a clown....more like a marionette...who is pulling the strings?

I think the answer was already give by Pelosi. No Packing done. It's not up to the President to determine the number of Justices. That's up to the Congress. And since Pelosi already answered the question, Biden was not going to say yay or nay on it because it's not his place. If the House will not pass a Bill to that effect them it's not going to happen. And no President can change that. It's called the Separation of Powers. Rump believes that HE is king. Biden doesn't believe that he will ever be king nor does he believe that Rump can be the king either.

He got asked if he "supported" it, you dolt.

It's not up to him to support it or not. That's up to Congress. They could have asked him what flavor of Ice Cream he liked just as well and who the hell cares.

So presidents should give no opinion on matters that affect the Nation, when the decision ultimately isnt up to them? LOL
What a stupid justification.
You hacks can be so damn pathetic.

Here's a clue for you, TN. The issue facing the American people isn't whether Democrats will "unpack" the courts. Republicans have already "packed them". McConnell refused to approve any judges under Obama, slowing the approval process to an absolute crawl, and then put judging appointments on a conveyer belt once Trump was elected.

McConnell has refused to pass any legislation, or do anything for the American people except cut taxes. But he has packed the courts with a record number of conservative "judges", many of them highly unqualified and likely to fail. McConnell has made "packing the courts" the only work of the senate for the past 8 years.

All of which ignores the PROBLEMS which Trump has either ignored, mismanaged, or utterly fucked up. The opoid crisis - ignored. Covid19 - total clusterfuck. Racial unrest - cracking down on protestors. And he crashed the economy.

Get your boots on people. The shit is getting deep here.

I love how you dismiss facts:

How McConnell's Bid to Reshape the Federal Judiciary Extends Beyond the Supreme Court | FRONTLINE | PBS | Official Site | Documentary Series

Just as Sen. Mitch McConnell helped cement a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, experts and journalists credit him with helping transform the rest of the federal judiciary.

www.pbs.org

Mitch McConnell Admits There Are 395 House Bills Sitting in the Senate

During an appearance on Fox News, the Senate majority leader said he doesn't plan to pass the bills that are currently in the Senate.

www.newsweek.com

 

[lantern2814]

How hard is it to answer this? Let the people decide, why not say that for every issue then?

HE won't answer because it will become the issue.....isn't that was a campaign is for?

Joe Biden is a clown....more like a marionette...who is pulling the strings?

I think the answer was already give by Pelosi. No Packing done. It's not up to the President to determine the number of Justices. That's up to the Congress. And since Pelosi already answered the question, Biden was not going to say yay or nay on it because it's not his place. If the House will not pass a Bill to that effect them it's not going to happen. And no President can change that. It's called the Separation of Powers. Rump believes that HE is king. Biden doesn't believe that he will ever be king nor does he believe that Rump can be the king either.

He got asked if he "supported" it, you dolt.

It's not up to him to support it or not. That's up to Congress. They could have asked him what flavor of Ice Cream he liked just as well and who the hell cares.

So presidents should give no opinion on matters that affect the Nation, when the decision ultimately isnt up to them? LOL
What a stupid justification.
You hacks can be so damn pathetic.

Here's a clue for you, TN. The issue facing the American people isn't whether Democrats will "unpack" the courts. Republicans have already "packed them". McConnell refused to approve any judges under Obama, slowing the approval process to an absolute crawl, and then put judging appointments on a conveyer belt once Trump was elected.

McConnell has refused to pass any legislation, or do anything for the American people except cut taxes. But he has packed the courts with a record number of conservative "judges", many of them highly unqualified and likely to fail. McConnell has made "packing the courts" the only work of the senate for the past 8 years.

All of which ignores the PROBLEMS which Trump has either ignored, mismanaged, or utterly fucked up. The opoid crisis - ignored. Covid19 - total clusterfuck. Racial unrest - cracking down on protestors. And he crashed the economy.

Get your boots on people. The shit is getting deep here.

I love how you dismiss facts:

How McConnell's Bid to Reshape the Federal Judiciary Extends Beyond the Supreme Court | FRONTLINE | PBS | Official Site | Documentary Series

Just as Sen. Mitch McConnell helped cement a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, experts and journalists credit him with helping transform the rest of the federal judiciary.

www.pbs.org

Mitch McConnell Admits There Are 395 House Bills Sitting in the Senate

During an appearance on Fox News, the Senate majority leader said he doesn't plan to pass the bills that are currently in the Senate.

www.newsweek.com

It seems to be getting deeper!

 

[buckeye45_73]

How hard is it to answer this? Let the people decide, why not say that for every issue then?

HE won't answer because it will become the issue.....isn't that was a campaign is for?

Joe Biden is a clown....more like a marionette...who is pulling the strings?

I think the answer was already give by Pelosi. No Packing done. It's not up to the President to determine the number of Justices. That's up to the Congress. And since Pelosi already answered the question, Biden was not going to say yay or nay on it because it's not his place. If the House will not pass a Bill to that effect them it's not going to happen. And no President can change that. It's called the Separation of Powers. Rump believes that HE is king. Biden doesn't believe that he will ever be king nor does he believe that Rump can be the king either.

He got asked if he "supported" it, you dolt.

It's not up to him to support it or not. That's up to Congress. They could have asked him what flavor of Ice Cream he liked just as well and who the hell cares.

So presidents should give no opinion on matters that affect the Nation, when the decision ultimately isnt up to them? LOL
What a stupid justification.
You hacks can be so damn pathetic.

Here's a clue for you, TN. The issue facing the American people isn't whether Democrats will "unpack" the courts. Republicans have already "packed them". McConnell refused to approve any judges under Obama, slowing the approval process to an absolute crawl, and then put judging appointments on a conveyer belt once Trump was elected.

McConnell has refused to pass any legislation, or do anything for the American people except cut taxes. But he has packed the courts with a record number of conservative "judges", many of them highly unqualified and likely to fail. McConnell has made "packing the courts" the only work of the senate for the past 8 years.

All of which ignores the PROBLEMS which Trump has either ignored, mismanaged, or utterly fucked up. The opoid crisis - ignored. Covid19 - total clusterfuck. Racial unrest - cracking down on protestors. And he crashed the economy.

Get your boots on people. The shit is getting deep here.

I love how you dismiss facts:

How McConnell's Bid to Reshape the Federal Judiciary Extends Beyond the Supreme Court | FRONTLINE | PBS | Official Site | Documentary Series

Just as Sen. Mitch McConnell helped cement a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, experts and journalists credit him with helping transform the rest of the federal judiciary.

www.pbs.org

Mitch McConnell Admits There Are 395 House Bills Sitting in the Senate

During an appearance on Fox News, the Senate majority leader said he doesn't plan to pass the bills that are currently in the Senate.

www.newsweek.com

Ok he used the tools of the senate....so what? Packing the courts are not about who you pick, it's about adding new members.....learn what the term is......picking your own nominees is normal and Constitutional.

 

[Coyote]

After McConnell’s and the Republican‘s past behavior on filling SCOTUS vacancies...is there any reason the Dems should NOT consider packing the courts?

It’s perfectly legal...just like what McConnel did...and you’ve already shredded old standards and invented new ones.

It would be a bad idea of course. But the Republicans don’t have a leg to stand on now.

 

[Norman]

After McConnell’s and the Republican‘s past behavior on filling SCOTUS vacancies...is there any reason the Dems should NOT consider packing the courts?

It’s perfectly legal...just like what McConnel did...and you’ve already shredded old standards and invented new ones.

It would be a bad idea of course. But the Republicans don’t have a leg to stand on now.

Holy retard....

There is no "behavior" to what the republicans are doing. Blame the dems for ending filibuster.

But that said, this is a great way to proceed towards the civil war. And I have no doubt that the leftists are crazy enough to do this in their megalomania, when they get the power.

 

[AZrailwhale]

How hard is it to answer this? Let the people decide, why not say that for every issue then?

HE won't answer because it will become the issue.....isn't that was a campaign is for?

Joe Biden is a clown....more like a marionette...who is pulling the strings?

I think the answer was already give by Pelosi. No Packing done. It's not up to the President to determine the number of Justices. That's up to the Congress. And since Pelosi already answered the question, Biden was not going to say yay or nay on it because it's not his place. If the House will not pass a Bill to that effect them it's not going to happen. And no President can change that. It's called the Separation of Powers. Rump believes that HE is king. Biden doesn't believe that he will ever be king nor does he believe that Rump can be the king either.

He got asked if he "supported" it, you dolt.

It's not up to him to support it or not. That's up to Congress. They could have asked him what flavor of Ice Cream he liked just as well and who the hell cares.

So presidents should give no opinion on matters that affect the Nation, when the decision ultimately isnt up to them? LOL
What a stupid justification.
You hacks can be so damn pathetic.

Here's a clue for you, TN. The issue facing the American people isn't whether Democrats will "unpack" the courts. Republicans have already "packed them". McConnell refused to approve any judges under Obama, slowing the approval process to an absolute crawl, and then put judging appointments on a conveyer belt once Trump was elected.

McConnell has refused to pass any legislation, or do anything for the American people except cut taxes. But he has packed the courts with a record number of conservative "judges", many of them highly unqualified and likely to fail. McConnell has made "packing the courts" the only work of the senate for the past 8 years.

All of which ignores the PROBLEMS which Trump has either ignored, mismanaged, or utterly fucked up. The opoid crisis - ignored. Covid19 - total clusterfuck. Racial unrest - cracking down on protestors. And he crashed the economy.

The Senate didn't refuse "to approve any judges under Obama" in fact between 2012 and 2016 21 Federal judges were approved by the Republican controlled Senate that were nominated by Obama. The Senate refused to confirm ONE JUSTICE as was their right. Obama was free to then nominate any number of other candidates for the open SCOTUS seat until he found a COMPROMISE that was acceptable to the republicans. He simply chose not to as was his right.

 

[ThisIsMe]

What is the process for increasing the size of the court? Is it simply having the current potus just nominate some judges and senate confirms?

Normally, I wouldnt worry about it, but I think the left is very angry about ACB, to the point that if they win this time around, I am starting to think they are going to try to appoint 10 new justices to the court.

Just my hunch.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Biden was right not to comment. The Republicans have already packed the Federal courts with conservative corporate lawyers and conservatives. Biden wanted to — though he didn’t do a very good job of it — keep the issue where it should be, centered on the Republican’s disgraceful hypocrisy, obstruction and prior and present partisan court packing.

Absolute bullshit!
First of all get the nomenclature straight..."packing" the court was a term coined in the thirties when FDR tried to increase the number of Supreme Court justices so he run the court as a socialist rubber stamp for his policies.
Obama left office with nearly 100 vacancies on all levels of federal judicial appointments so if crackpots like you want to ***** and whine like little cranky children about Trump appointing judges you'd better go ask
Barry Obama why he was so remiss and negligent in putting judges in place like he was supposed to....

Trump thanks Obama for leaving so many judicial vacancies

President Trump mockingly thanked his predecessor former President Obama for leaving so many judicial posts vacant despite a Republican-controlled Senate slowing down confirmations during the last …

thehill.com

Elections have consequences. Biden refuses to deny he would pack the court, if he could, so we must assume this is a case of sour grapes from a political loser.

Trump may win and appoint a few more young Supreme Court Conservatives. If they are radical activist and obstructionist corporate conservatives — he will be making a fundamental change in the Supreme Court almost inevitable, if populist Democrats ever reacquire the Senate.

This is something nobody should want, especially in this period when the country is tearing itself apart on partisan lines. If the votes were found for it in Congress, it would be absolutely Constitutional. Of course Trump himself, if he were to win a sweeping Congressional victory, is precisely the kind of person who himself might break from tradition and increase the number of Supremes to better meet his personal goals.

Why would Trump go to the trouble of trying to increase the number of conservative friendly
judges when he already has that advantage, assuming Amy Coney Barrett takes her place on the court.

It appears you think I am an idiot who does not know about FDR court packing proposals. Though rather unpopular they did do quite a bit to chasten and convince the court to back down from opposing his legislative agenda. As for the rest, you don’t seem to have read your own link, important parts of which I quote here:

“President Trump mockingly thanked his predecessor former President Obama for leaving so many judicial posts vacant despite a Republican-controlled Senate slowing down confirmations during the last two years of the Obama administration...

“Republicans took control of the Senate in 2014 during Obama’s last two years in office and did not confirm many of his nominees.

“The Senate’s top Republicans, led by Majority Leader Mitchel McConnell (Ky.), teamed up to block Democratic efforts to push forward Obama’s nominees, slowing down confirmations by the most in six decades.

“Most notably, McConnell refused to hold a confirmation hearing on Obama’s nominee for Supreme Court justice, Merrick Garland. Trump went on to nominate Neil Gorsuch to the high court, a conservative victory.

“Social media users were quick to remind Trump that the vacancies left behind by the Obama administration were not by choice.“

Yes, my two posts focused on the SC. And McConnell was not going to fill RBG's seat if she retired in Obama's second term. So it was not just Garland. And if it was just about filling the sudden vacancy left by Scalia, imo the dems should not get too bent out of shape. Replacing Scalai would either maintain, or FLIP, the 5-4 gop advantage. But McConnell threw away all civility and norms in forcing a 5-4 gop court into the 16 elections, with RBG deathly ill. It was ghoulish, and inhumane. Nixon made 4. Reagan made 3. There's no rule for twos. And now Trump's made 3.

But like you say, McConnell pretty much without precedent stopped confirming just about ALL federal judges in Obama's years. THAT is NOT what the const is about. Advice and consent, not flat out obstruct qualified nominees to not allow a president to nominate judges who share a philosophy of the constitution. The dems eventually will get to play pay back. But not if Biden wins. And they have to take the senate. And if Biden has a gop senate, and they continue McConnell's obstruction …. I don't know what will happen. It will be bad though

When control of the Senate and the presidency is split, justices have to be compromises. Obama was never interested in compromise during his eight years. It was always "elections have consequences" "get to the back of the bus" and "I've got a pen and a phone..." Historically, I think justices appointed by split control were better justices.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What is the process for increasing the size of the court? Is it simply having the current potus just nominate some judges and senate confirms?

Normally, I wouldnt worry about it, but I think the left is very angry about ACB, to the point that if they win this time around, I am starting to think they are going to try to appoint 10 new justices to the court.

Just my hunch.

The court seats can be expanded by the House. The President can then nominate new justices to fill those seats. The problem with that is in the past, it was extremely unpopular with the voters. I believe it would be the same today.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

After McConnell’s and the Republican‘s past behavior on filling SCOTUS vacancies...is there any reason the Dems should NOT consider packing the courts?

It’s perfectly legal...just like what McConnel did...and you’ve already shredded old standards and invented new ones.

It would be a bad idea of course. But the Republicans don’t have a leg to stand on now.

They could if they would be willing to sacrifice leadership in Congress or even the White House for a long time. However Democrats are power hungry control people. I don't think they would chance that.

 

[toobfreak]

Catchphrases like “originalist” mean ... just about anything

Sorry, Tom, but Originalism is not a "catchphrase," it stems from the noun ORIGINAL:

Meaning something serving as a model or base reference; the prototype, thus an Originalist is a person who practices Originalism: of adhering faithfully to the original intent and meaning as written and INTENDED by its authors.

There is nothing vague or arbitrary about it, it doesn't mean just about anything, QUITE THE OPPOSITE, it is when you decide you can change, rewrite or reinterpret a Founder's original intent that you can end up with ANYTHING. Maybe you should try reading up on it here:

Originalism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TheGreatSatan]

The moment Democrats think they can get away with it, they will pack the court.

 

[Dragonlady]

How hard is it to answer this? Let the people decide, why not say that for every issue then?

HE won't answer because it will become the issue.....isn't that was a campaign is for?

Joe Biden is a clown....more like a marionette...who is pulling the strings?

I think the answer was already give by Pelosi. No Packing done. It's not up to the President to determine the number of Justices. That's up to the Congress. And since Pelosi already answered the question, Biden was not going to say yay or nay on it because it's not his place. If the House will not pass a Bill to that effect them it's not going to happen. And no President can change that. It's called the Separation of Powers. Rump believes that HE is king. Biden doesn't believe that he will ever be king nor does he believe that Rump can be the king either.

He got asked if he "supported" it, you dolt.

It's not up to him to support it or not. That's up to Congress. They could have asked him what flavor of Ice Cream he liked just as well and who the hell cares.

So presidents should give no opinion on matters that affect the Nation, when the decision ultimately isnt up to them? LOL
What a stupid justification.
You hacks can be so damn pathetic.

Here's a clue for you, TN. The issue facing the American people isn't whether Democrats will "unpack" the courts. Republicans have already "packed them". McConnell refused to approve any judges under Obama, slowing the approval process to an absolute crawl, and then put judging appointments on a conveyer belt once Trump was elected.

McConnell has refused to pass any legislation, or do anything for the American people except cut taxes. But he has packed the courts with a record number of conservative "judges", many of them highly unqualified and likely to fail. McConnell has made "packing the courts" the only work of the senate for the past 8 years.

All of which ignores the PROBLEMS which Trump has either ignored, mismanaged, or utterly fucked up. The opoid crisis - ignored. Covid19 - total clusterfuck. Racial unrest - cracking down on protestors. And he crashed the economy.

Get your boots on people. The shit is getting deep here.

I love how you dismiss facts:

How McConnell's Bid to Reshape the Federal Judiciary Extends Beyond the Supreme Court | FRONTLINE | PBS | Official Site | Documentary Series

Just as Sen. Mitch McConnell helped cement a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, experts and journalists credit him with helping transform the rest of the federal judiciary.

www.pbs.org

Mitch McConnell Admits There Are 395 House Bills Sitting in the Senate

During an appearance on Fox News, the Senate majority leader said he doesn't plan to pass the bills that are currently in the Senate.

www.newsweek.com

Ok he used the tools of the senate....so what? Packing the courts are not about who you pick, it's about adding new members.....learn what the term is......picking your own nominees is normal and Constitutional.

I love how you dress up this level of partisanship as both "normal and Constitutional". It's the same way you explain away Trump's 7 bankruptcies, and 3000 lawsuits as "ususal practices" for big time developers. Nothing that the Republican Party or Donald Trump has done is "normal".

No Senate has ever blocked all legislation and all judicial appointments of a sitting President. EVER. It was part of McConnell's strategy to ensure that Obama had nothing to run on and would be a one-term President.

No Senate has ever refused to meet with a President's appointee, and no Senate in the history of the nation has pass so little legislation as Mitch McConnell.

In the middle of the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression, Mitch McConnell was more concerned with blocking anything that might help give Obama something to run on, than he was with helping the nation, the economy and the people recovering from the economic shock of the Republican fiscal collapse.

To hold onto power, Republicans have suppressed the vote, gerrymandered, and closed polling stations in poor neighbourhoods. They let the voting rights acts expire, and virtually all of the court cases involving election cheating, voter suppression, and concerns about blocking voters have all been against Republicans and their efforts to thwart the will of the people.

Republicans have only won one popular vote for the Presidential election, and two popular votes for the House in the past 20 years, yet they've held the White House and House for 12 of those 20 years. This is minority rule, and given that the two Presidents who crashed the economy this centure were elected by the electoral college and not the voters, and both are considered among the worst Presidents in American history, it would seem that the people make better choices than the Republican Party.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

To hold onto power, Republicans have suppressed the vote, gerrymandered, and closed polling stations in poor neighbourhoods.

Why do you people make statements in which you know nothing about? Elections are conducted by counties, not the federal government. Republicans could never close polling stations in heavily Democrat areas because they are run by Democrats-not Republicans.

Gerrymandering is done by both parties, not just Republicans. We've been doing it that way for generations. Republicans never suppressed any vote. If you think they did, then by all means, provide credible evidence.

I expect crickets from my response here as always.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I really have to respect Roberts. He's not playing Politics at all. He may have been put in that job by a Republican but he doesn't play the part that the party of the rumpers demand he does. And from the looks of things, he tries to impress that on the other Justices.

Then you have to respect Kavanaugh too. It was estimated that so far, he went 50/50 in his decisions.

Actually, he has surprised the hell out of me. Guess they sent him to Alkie Rehab just before sending him through the Justice mini-boot camp.

Especially given what the Democrats put him through to get the seat. I thought he would retaliate which he should have.

But the point is when Republicans nominate justices, each side gets something. When Democrats nominate justices, only their side benefits.

Your Prejedice slip is showing. Do a rethink and remove the "Hurt Butt" from the process.

 

[Dragonlady]

Catchphrases like “originalist” mean ... just about anything

Sorry, Tom, but Originalism is not a "catchphrase," it stems from the noun ORIGINAL:

View attachment 395340
View attachment 395341
Meaning something serving as a model or base reference; the prototype, thus an Originalist is a person who practices Originalism: of adhering faithfully to the original intent and meaning as written and INTENDED by its authors.

There is nothing vague or arbitrary about it, it doesn't mean just about anything, QUITE THE OPPOSITE, it is when you decide you can change, rewrite or reinterpret a Founder's original intent that you can end up with ANYTHING. Maybe you should try reading up on it here:

Originalism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Originalists" is a catch phrase and a pretty meaningless one at that. Those who call themselves "originalists" are attaching far right meaning to that most liberal of documents, the American Constitution. It assumes that the Founders were deeply conservative and dedicated to preserving rights for the ruling, which is the exact opposit of what the Constitution does. The Founders were revolutionaries who wanted to establish a nation where you rose on your own merits, not on your birth or bloodline.

The American Constituion was the most radically liberal document ever written at the time. And it was designed to be a living breathing document which could be amended as needed as and times changed. The very last thing the Founders would have wanted was to apply 18th Century ideas to 21 Century living conditions.

The "originalists" are bound and bent on interpreting Constitutional questions and laws based on life and mores in 18th Century America, and conservative laws and mores at that. Originalists are entitled elitists and hard right conservative, which is diametrically in opposition to the Founders and the very liberal group which upended class, justice and opportunity.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It's not up to him to support it or not.

Of course it is, you dishonest dip shit. He's running for president.

The person it is up to was on his right.

 

[Dragonlady]

To hold onto power, Republicans have suppressed the vote, gerrymandered, and closed polling stations in poor neighbourhoods.

Why do you people make statements in which you know nothing about? Elections are conducted by counties, not the federal government. Republicans could never close polling stations in heavily Democrat areas because they are run by Democrats-not Republicans.

Gerrymandering is done by both parties, not just Republicans. We've been doing it that way for generations. Republicans never suppressed any vote. If you think they did, then by all means, provide credible evidence.

I expect crickets from my response here as always.

Don't hand me your bullshit and lies Ray. I have always given you responses, with more consideration and good manners than you deserve, and in return you've been rude, nasty and dismissive.

Where did I say that all of this was done by federal Republicans?

Repulicans have infected all levels of government. The reason WHY Republicans were so keen on taking over the state houses was to gerrymander the Districts after the 2010 elections. Democrats do gerrymander, but Republicans raised it to an art form which effectively disenfranchised millions of voters and created dozens of "safe seats". Gerrymandering is now being overturned state by state and the voters will be picking their representatives, instead of the other way around.

As for voter suppression, try google. There were literally hundreds of court cases after during and after 2018 - all of them having Republicans charged for voter shennanigans. In last night's debate, Trump asked his supporters to go into polling places and intimmidate the workers there. That's another law that Republicans let lapse over the past 4 years.

The minority party of hate and racism is about to get it's ass handed to it on a plate.