One of our lawyers addressed this early. The Supreme Court ruled that Clinton couldn't strike down a line item, but what Trump is proposing is somewhat different, although of the same spirit.
Yes. But I’m sure there is a very good legal argument about how signing statements and line vetoes are completely different things.
The DNC would run away with this election, and would have won the last election, if they paid attention to their own history. Going all the way back to FDR, Democrats (with the single exception of Lyndon Johnson) win the election if they're younger than the presidential average and have a limited history of public service. JFK, Carter, Bill, Obama all fit this mold. When they throw someone old and well known out there they lose (Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry, Hillary). It's really not that difficult. Biden will lose this fall unless millions die from this situation and it's still going strong.
Our store has (some) pasta and canned food. We don't have frozen vegetables. I guess that says something about the coastal Californian diet. Rice and any paper still disappear before sane people wake up in the morning, however.
It would seem so. But do you trust the four non-Roberts Republican judges to set partisanship aside when making the ruling?
Well my wife works at one of these plague factories - she came down with the flu last week, but yeah I got my own house
There's another way of expressing the trend. Nobody who had severed as Senator of either party has won the Presidency since JFK, except Obama, who had barely been a Senator. Hillary, McCain, Kerry, Gore, Dole, Mondale, McGovern, Humphrey, Goldwater. Well LBJ won as an incumbent after inheriting Kennedy's seat but I don't think that counts. Some of that owes to familiarity breeding contempt, some of that is just one of those things. I don't think being a veteran Senator automatically dooms Biden, but yes the history isn't good. People like to vote for candidates they don't know and then project greatness on them. That's why we got stuck with this fool.
This kinda sums up the current state of leadership in the democratic party. Old, boring and White. I say that as a partisan life long life Democrat. Add a very old Joe Biden to the mix and it just proves a point. Dems really needed fresher, younger more dynamic people and POC to lead it from top to bottom.
I honestly think it has less to do with being a senator and more to do with the fact that more dynamic personalities tend to win Clinton/Bush/Obama/Trump So maybe the issue is more than the candidate pool tends to include too many boring senators
In the U.S votes for POTUS is usually 1)popularity contest and 2) identity. Do I like this person or how much do I dislike the opponent 2) Does this person hold my values, opinions or cares about people like me, are they on my "side". The losers in presidential contests are often seen as too aloof, pointy headed, intellectuals, boring, condescending, old and stale. Clinton Romney McCain Kerry Gore Dole BUSH 92 DUKASIS Mondale Carter Look at their opponents personality wise they usually blew them out the water in a number of ways.. hell people voted for Bush over Gore and Kerry based on wanting to have a beer with him than his opponents and he didn't even drink!
My guess is by the time they finish burying the bodies, boring and willing to listen to experts will start to sound pretty good.
Something like a Buttiegieg, Klobucher, Booker, or Kennedy at the top this year in a state they were going to win anyways with someone like Tammy Duckworth as the VP would have run away with it.
And, oddly, the 2020 election will be between two teetotalers. I wonder if that's ever happened before.
I betcha that with Pentecost half the church will be empty. (hint: look for the missing ones in a place that starts with grave and ends with yard)
Actually, nothing against ASU. I am just a fossil who thinks that the Pacific Conference should consist of universities that are in states that, ahem, are on the Pacific. You're better than Utah and Colorado, you can count on that.