Like, I don't even know like what "Cisgendered" is, like is it a new fashion, or type of I Phone?  It sounds like something I would like support, but I can't, like, you know, just like know what it means off the top of my head. 

Maybe only people that actually pay taxes should vote. 

Electoral Votes

Trump  304

Clinton  232

That is barely winning?  Next someone will mention Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million votes.  Yet all due to L.A. (California) and NYC.  Do we really want these two clueless Metro areas dictating to the rest of the country? 

The FACT is that the Trump Policies are working.  The Media is winning the disinformation campaign against him.  Yes he helps them with a few tweets, but do we want to take away a characteristic that probably helps him be the strong President he can be?

Roberts voted with the majority in Chicago v. McDonald, D.C. vs. Heller, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado, and dissented in Obergefell vs. Hodges, all of which were the same as the rest of the Court's conservatives. And these are only the first major ones that come to mind outside of the ACA ruling. So Roberts votes in a way that many of us disagree with on the ACA ruling and now he's not to be trusted and it's still a liberal court? He's not Kennedy, though there is some speculation that he will take up the mantle of being the swing vote, but only time will tell if that's accurate or not.

The ACA was certainly a big case, but his voting record is pretty solidly conservative. FiveThirtyEight has a good article on this with some interesting numbers:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/john-roberts-has-cast-a-pivotal-liberal-vote-only-5-times/

I understand that his record other than ACA has been good, and I'd much rather have him than another Sotomayor, Kagan, or Ginsburg.  However, the ACA was a big one, and the rationale he used to justify his vote was scary as it had no basis in the law, but totally in his "feelings".  That's why Roberts is a concern to me.  Maybe not a huge concern, but still a concern. 

THAT just CANNOT happen.  We can't let it.

Say we let them have their liberal judge in return for the wall.
Then say we even allocate funds and move to build the wall.
Then the liberal court decides some part of it is unconstitutional and blocks it.  What have we won?

One of the main reasons I voted for Trump was Supreme Court appointments.  Hillary would have put more Far Left Sotomayors, and Kagans on the court.  That would have been disastrous because like Ginsburg, they hate the Constitution as written, and believe it is an archaic document that needs to be "reinterpreted" to reflect today's American.  They are WRONG.

We should have border security, and not have to bargain away stuff to get it. 

Physically, or mentally?

Ethically, Intellectually, Morally in addition to the above.

I motion that we vote on whether or not we should vote on what is spam.

I vote that anyone with whom I disagree is SPAM.  Anyone who disagrees with me is a BOT.  Also, since I am an exalted Moderator, my vote counts as eleventy billion votes.   

I like you, Joe, especially your low key, dry-humor digs you sometimes get at me. So it's cool.

My suggestion that folks were being stupid was in response to thinking liberals don't come here because none of them can support their views. The implication being that "our" views here are right and true, and theirs are false and unsupportable.

Which is utter bullshit, as any honest man would admit.

Well I see.  So indirectly you are accusing me of being dishonest now.  Doing the EXACT thing you are accusing other, conservative posters of doing.  You, nor other "liberals" can not support your views.  Tell me where you convincingly made a argument for what is a Liberal/Progressie (Democrat) view. 

Your over the top response to me removing ONE spam post said all I need to know about you, and another on this board.