Presidentvalget i USA 2024

[Tussi]

Markiii skrev (18 minutter siden):

Vi snakker om ytringsfrihet og friheten til å ytre seg om det man vil, derunder om man mener en presidentkandidat bør trekke seg for landets beste.

Hvis de saklige uttalelsene fra andre i det demokratiske partiet er "mobbing", hva kaller du da de ekstremistiske drittpakkene fra repugnikanerne mot både Biden og nå Harris?

Null kilder, med andre ord. Bare repugnikansk propaganda.

Jeg har gitt kilde til dette 2 ganger i denne tråden 

Her er det en 3 gang 

https://prospect.org/justice/how-kamala-harris-fought-to-keep-nonviolent-prisoners-locked-up/

For ikke å nevne dette fra saken 

Sitat

Of course, Harris has been criticized on multiple occasions for fighting to keep people, including innocent ones, in prison. In the case of Daniel Larsen, an ex-felon sentenced to 27 years to life under California’s “three strikes” law, Harris argued “that even if Danny was innocent, his conviction should not be reversed because he waited too long to file his petition,” according to the California Innocence Project, which took Larsen’s case. 

 

Endret 24. juli av Tussi

[Markiii]

fwj__ skrev (20 timer siden):

Kamala er super-woke. Det vil bli 4 år med komedieshow, men det får man også med Trump. Men ingen vet hvilken politikk Harris vil føre. Uansett, USA er i dyp trøbbel, de printer penger og dollaren vil etter hvert ikke bli den globale valuta standarden, noe som betyr at de ikke kan printe penger i all evighet for å dekke sine utgifter. Det globale skiftet er i gang og Kina spiller "the long game".

Hvorfor skulle det bli "komedieshow" med Kamala Harris?

USA printer vel ikke så voldsomt mye nå?

I følge fiscaldata.treasury.gov:

"Compared to the national deficit of $1.39 trillion for the same period last year (Oct 2022 - Jun 2023), our national deficit has decreased by $125 billion."

Uansett, USA kan trykke penger fordi de har en helt spesiell posisjon i verden. Selv etter trykkingen har dollaren holdt seg sterk. Og jo, de kan trykke penger i all evighet.

Kina kan ikke spille "the long game" fordi de står foran demografisk kollaps. Folketallet vil stupe. De har også et boligmarked som er en helt ekstrem boble. Hvis du trodde det var ille i USA, så bør du lese deg litt opp på boligboblen i Kina.

[Atib Azzad]

13 minutes ago, jallajall said:

Vet ikke, har ikke satt meg så mye inn i 2025.

Så uten å ha noen større kunnskap, velger du å dele en parodiversjon av prosjektet.. Til hvilket formål?

Mer om project 2025:

 

 

[jallajall]

1 minute ago, Atib Azzad said:

Mer om project 2025:

Ser de allerede har svart på mange av disse påstandene..
 

MYTHS VS. FACTS ABOUT PROJECT 2025

We are not affiliated with former President Trump. We are a coalition of more than 110 conservative groups advocating policy and personnel recommendations.

1. End no fault divorce: FALSE

Divorce is not mentioned in our policy handbook, Mandate for Leadership.

2. Complete ban on abortions without exceptions: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership calls for the government to comply with laws that prevent federal funding of abortion. It also calls for federal support for alternatives to abortion, including adoption.

3. Ban contraceptives: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership says nothing about banning or restricting contraception.

4. Additional tax breaks for corporations and the 1%: MISLEADING

Mandate for Leadership calls for LOWER taxes for ALL Americans, to stimulate economic growth and put more money in Americans’ pockets.

5. Higher taxes for the working class: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership calls for LOWER taxes for ALL Americans. Individuals spend their money in more productive ways than the government does.

6. Elimination of unions and worker protections: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership presents different ideas about a conservative labor policy. It calls for combatting the excesses of the Deep State’s bloated federal employee unions, which have ensured that federal employees keep their jobs even if they engage in illegal behavior or perform their jobs poorly.

7. Raise the retirement age: FALSE

Raising the retirement age is nowhere advocated in Mandate for Leadership.

8. Cut Social Security: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership does not advocate cutting Social Security.

9. End Affordable Care Act: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership offers policy suggestions to curb the abuses of the Affordable Care Act.

10. Raise prescription drug prices: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership offers proposals to lower drug prices through competition and innovation.

11. Eliminate the Department of Education: TRUE

Mandate for Leadership calls for an end to the Department of Education. Since the Department was created, educational outcomes have not improved, and the American school system has increasingly fallen behind other countries. Giving more control back to state and local governments and expanding school choice would improve education outcomes for all Americans, especially underprivileged communities. Some functions of the Department would be moved to other departments including Labor, Justice, and Commerce.

12. Use public, taxpayer money for private religious schools: TRUE

Americans are able to use taxpayer money to choose where they shop for groceries, attain housing, and obtain higher education. Religious schools often outperform public schools, and families should have the choice to send their children to these schools.

13. Teach Christian religious beliefs in public schools: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership advocates for all educational opportunities, and for parental rights in education.

14. End free and discounted school lunch programs: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership advocates that the Food and Nutrition Service be moved from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of Health and Human Services. Mandate condemns the Biden administration’s decision to threaten schools that do not comply with radical transgender policies by taking away their funding for school meals for needy students. Additionally, Mandate supports prioritizing school meal programs for those students who are truly needy, not creating an entitlement for almost all students regardless of family income levels.

15. End civil rights and DEI protections in government: MOSTLY FALSE

Mandate for Leadership calls for respecting the civil rights of all Americans, including those who have been censored by the government or had it weaponized against them. Mandate advocates for the end of divisive, race-based, anti-American propaganda in the federal workforce.

16. Ban African American and gender studies in all levels of education: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership does not mention African American studies or gender studies.

17. Ban books and curriculum about slavery: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership does not advocate for banning books or curriculum about slavery.

18. Ending climate protections: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership advocates policies that will produce economic growth through abundant, affordable energy. Famers, hunters, and fishers know how to protect our environment better than D.C. bureaucrats. The Biden administration’s relentless focus on climate has made America less competitive and wasted crucial taxpayer dollars.

19. Increase Arctic drilling: TRUE

The Arctic is of immense strategic importance to America. Mandate for Leadership advocates a strong pursuit of American interests in the region, through economic freedom, through ensuring free and open shipping lanes, and through the development of the vast energy resources of the Arctic.

20. Deregulate big business and the oil industry: MOSTLY TRUE

America needs energy that is plentiful and affordable. Mandate for Leadership calls for an all-of-the-above energy policy that would promote the development of our domestic energy supply, and for fewer burdensome regulations for ALL businesses.

21. Promote and expedite capital punishment: TRUE

The appropriateness of capital punishment divides Americans, and conservatives, of good will. Mandate for Leadership calls for the enforcement of the federal death penalty where appropriate and applicable, and recommends a future presidential administration pursue the death penalty for the most heinous crimes, including those involving violence and the sexual abuse of children, unless Congress says otherwise through legislation.

22. End marriage equality: FALSE

The legal recognition of same-sex marriage is not discussed in Mandate for Leadership. Mandate calls for the protection of faith-based grant recipients who maintain support for the traditional definition of marriage. Mandate also supports conscience protections for those who do not wish to participate in same-sex marriages.

23. Condemn single mothers while promoting only “traditional families”: FALSE

Mandate suggests that a future HHS Secretary replace the policies of the Biden administration that prioritize LGBTQ+ equality, subsidize single motherhood, disincentivize work, and penalize marriage with policies that instead encourage marriage, work, motherhood, fatherhood, and nuclear families.

24. Defund the FBI and Homeland Security: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership supports de-weaponizing the federal government, including the FBI. Mandate’s chapter on the Department of Homeland Security advocates the legislative creation of a standalone Cabinet-level agency with a focus on the border and immigration, including U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR), and the Office of Immigration Litigation (OIL). It also recommends that legislation be pursued to move other component parts of DHS to other agencies, including the Department of Transportation, the Department of Defense, the Department of the Treasury, and the FBI.

25. Use military to break up domestic protests: FALSE

The “protests” referenced in Mandate for Leadership are protests in Iran against its anti-American leadership; and protests of parents at school board meetings in opposition to critical race theory and COVID mandates. Both protests are referenced positively. Mandate also protests the FBI’s harassment of protesting parents and condemns the arrest by armed FBI agents of a man who had protested at an abortion clinic a year earlier.

26. Mass deportation of immigrants and incarceration in “camps”: MISLEADING

Mandate supports an orderly and lawful immigration system. It advocates that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Office of Removal Operations be primarily responsible for enforcing civil immigration regulations, including the removal of those who have violated our immigration laws. It also calls for additional resources to put an end to President Biden’s border crisis and enforce immigration laws.

27. End birthright citizenship: FALSE

There is no mention of ending birthright citizenship in Mandate for Leadership.

28. Ban Muslims from entering the country: FALSE

There is no mention of banning Muslims from entering the United States in Mandate for Leadership.

29. Eliminate federal agencies like the FDA, EPA, NOAA and more: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership’s plan would not eliminate the FDA or the EPA, and NOAA’s functions would be transferred to other agencies, the private sector, and states and territories.

30. Continue to pack the Supreme Court and lower courts with right-wing judges: FALSE

The only people calling for packing the judiciary are those on the Left, who do it every time the Supreme Court or a lower court makes decisions they don’t like.

[Markiii]

BadCat skrev (17 timer siden):

Starter med skittkasting og går over i tankeløst prat.

Hva mener du?

Hvis det er noen som driver med skittkasting så er det Trump og andre repugnikanere. Hvorfor klager du over at Harris kritiserer Trump på reelt grunnlag men ikke ekstremismen fra repugnikanerne? Merkelig.

Sitat

Alle skal ikke bare få en bit av kaka, men de skal få et stykke til å ta med hjem også (komme seg frempå). Hun glemte noe vesentlig, hvem som skal betale. Det var vel de rike og de fattigste siden de eneste hun nevnte var middelklasse. USA har trang økonomi fra før og dette hørtes lite gjennomtenkt ut. Nei, her trengs Trump så han kan tvinge de andre NATO-landene til å betale sin del, ellers vil det ikke være stort til mannen i gata. Det blir ikke akkurat færre kostnader med tilstanden i verden og det er skammelig at Norge er en av de som har ligget bakpå med å betale sin andel.

USA har ingen problemer med å betale noe som helst. De kan bare trykke penger. Og det gjorde jo Trump til gangs, og det medførte en ekstrem inflasjon som Biden heldigvis fikk kontroll på.

At Trump skulle trenges her høres veldig rart ut, all den tid underskuddet økte i rekordfart under hans presidentperiode, de trykket penger som aldri før, og brukte penger som fulle sjømenn.

Hva NATO har med dette å gjøre, vet jeg ikke. Jeg er enig i at andre NATO-land må bruke mer penger på forsvar, men det har ikke noe med USAs betalingsevne å gjøre.

Sitat

Kamala skal skal være kapitalist men hun høres ut som hvilken som helst norsk sosialdemokrat. En av disse som fikk foten i bakenden for ikke så lenge siden og en annen som trakk seg stille tilbake med halen mellom beina.

Eh, hva? Sosialdemokrat? Foten i bakenden? Hva i all verden er det du snakker om her?

Endret 24. juli av Markiii

[shockorshot]

59 minutes ago, jallajall said:

Så om en kongressrepresentant hevder han er uenig i når sin periode utløpet, så behøver han ikke gå av, men bare blir med over i den nye kongressen?

Om executive branch og legislative branch er uenige om tolkning av loven, så blir det rettsak.

Trump, har som jeg linket tidligere til, luftet ideen om å ikke gå av 20th january og advokatene diskuterte dette i tekstmeldingene.

Quote

Om Trump hevder til retten det er tvil om når valget skal avholdes, så blir ikke valget avholdt?

Hvis Trump hevder til retten at det er tvil om når valget skal avholdes, så avklares det før valget. Det er heller ikke føderale executive branch sin oppgave, men statlig og det er i statene det måtte da avklares. Hvis Trump kommer med et søksmål om det like før valget, kan statene nekte å bry seg om at det ikke er avklart i retten, siden det er deres oppgave å gjennomføre valget i staten. Dette var hvorfor de fleste av søksmålene til Trump mot valgresultatet var rettet mot delstaten og deres gjennomførelse av valget.

Quote

Om Trump hevder til retten at det er tvil om at sorte mennesker har stemmerett, så vil ikke disse kunne stemme?

Se svar over. Presidenten har ingenting med utførelsen av stemmingen. Dette er ikke føderalt.

Endret 24. juli av shockorshot

[Tussi]

jallajall skrev (8 minutter siden):

Ser de allerede har svart på mange av disse påstandene..
 

MYTHS VS. FACTS ABOUT PROJECT 2025

We are not affiliated with former President Trump. We are a coalition of more than 110 conservative groups advocating policy and personnel recommendations.

1. End no fault divorce: FALSE

Divorce is not mentioned in our policy handbook, Mandate for Leadership.

2. Complete ban on abortions without exceptions: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership calls for the government to comply with laws that prevent federal funding of abortion. It also calls for federal support for alternatives to abortion, including adoption.

3. Ban contraceptives: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership says nothing about banning or restricting contraception.

4. Additional tax breaks for corporations and the 1%: MISLEADING

Mandate for Leadership calls for LOWER taxes for ALL Americans, to stimulate economic growth and put more money in Americans’ pockets.

5. Higher taxes for the working class: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership calls for LOWER taxes for ALL Americans. Individuals spend their money in more productive ways than the government does.

6. Elimination of unions and worker protections: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership presents different ideas about a conservative labor policy. It calls for combatting the excesses of the Deep State’s bloated federal employee unions, which have ensured that federal employees keep their jobs even if they engage in illegal behavior or perform their jobs poorly.

7. Raise the retirement age: FALSE

Raising the retirement age is nowhere advocated in Mandate for Leadership.

8. Cut Social Security: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership does not advocate cutting Social Security.

9. End Affordable Care Act: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership offers policy suggestions to curb the abuses of the Affordable Care Act.

10. Raise prescription drug prices: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership offers proposals to lower drug prices through competition and innovation.

11. Eliminate the Department of Education: TRUE

Mandate for Leadership calls for an end to the Department of Education. Since the Department was created, educational outcomes have not improved, and the American school system has increasingly fallen behind other countries. Giving more control back to state and local governments and expanding school choice would improve education outcomes for all Americans, especially underprivileged communities. Some functions of the Department would be moved to other departments including Labor, Justice, and Commerce.

12. Use public, taxpayer money for private religious schools: TRUE

Americans are able to use taxpayer money to choose where they shop for groceries, attain housing, and obtain higher education. Religious schools often outperform public schools, and families should have the choice to send their children to these schools.

13. Teach Christian religious beliefs in public schools: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership advocates for all educational opportunities, and for parental rights in education.

14. End free and discounted school lunch programs: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership advocates that the Food and Nutrition Service be moved from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of Health and Human Services. Mandate condemns the Biden administration’s decision to threaten schools that do not comply with radical transgender policies by taking away their funding for school meals for needy students. Additionally, Mandate supports prioritizing school meal programs for those students who are truly needy, not creating an entitlement for almost all students regardless of family income levels.

15. End civil rights and DEI protections in government: MOSTLY FALSE

Mandate for Leadership calls for respecting the civil rights of all Americans, including those who have been censored by the government or had it weaponized against them. Mandate advocates for the end of divisive, race-based, anti-American propaganda in the federal workforce.

16. Ban African American and gender studies in all levels of education: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership does not mention African American studies or gender studies.

17. Ban books and curriculum about slavery: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership does not advocate for banning books or curriculum about slavery.

18. Ending climate protections: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership advocates policies that will produce economic growth through abundant, affordable energy. Famers, hunters, and fishers know how to protect our environment better than D.C. bureaucrats. The Biden administration’s relentless focus on climate has made America less competitive and wasted crucial taxpayer dollars.

19. Increase Arctic drilling: TRUE

The Arctic is of immense strategic importance to America. Mandate for Leadership advocates a strong pursuit of American interests in the region, through economic freedom, through ensuring free and open shipping lanes, and through the development of the vast energy resources of the Arctic.

20. Deregulate big business and the oil industry: MOSTLY TRUE

America needs energy that is plentiful and affordable. Mandate for Leadership calls for an all-of-the-above energy policy that would promote the development of our domestic energy supply, and for fewer burdensome regulations for ALL businesses.

21. Promote and expedite capital punishment: TRUE

The appropriateness of capital punishment divides Americans, and conservatives, of good will. Mandate for Leadership calls for the enforcement of the federal death penalty where appropriate and applicable, and recommends a future presidential administration pursue the death penalty for the most heinous crimes, including those involving violence and the sexual abuse of children, unless Congress says otherwise through legislation.

22. End marriage equality: FALSE

The legal recognition of same-sex marriage is not discussed in Mandate for Leadership. Mandate calls for the protection of faith-based grant recipients who maintain support for the traditional definition of marriage. Mandate also supports conscience protections for those who do not wish to participate in same-sex marriages.

23. Condemn single mothers while promoting only “traditional families”: FALSE

Mandate suggests that a future HHS Secretary replace the policies of the Biden administration that prioritize LGBTQ+ equality, subsidize single motherhood, disincentivize work, and penalize marriage with policies that instead encourage marriage, work, motherhood, fatherhood, and nuclear families.

24. Defund the FBI and Homeland Security: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership supports de-weaponizing the federal government, including the FBI. Mandate’s chapter on the Department of Homeland Security advocates the legislative creation of a standalone Cabinet-level agency with a focus on the border and immigration, including U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR), and the Office of Immigration Litigation (OIL). It also recommends that legislation be pursued to move other component parts of DHS to other agencies, including the Department of Transportation, the Department of Defense, the Department of the Treasury, and the FBI.

25. Use military to break up domestic protests: FALSE

The “protests” referenced in Mandate for Leadership are protests in Iran against its anti-American leadership; and protests of parents at school board meetings in opposition to critical race theory and COVID mandates. Both protests are referenced positively. Mandate also protests the FBI’s harassment of protesting parents and condemns the arrest by armed FBI agents of a man who had protested at an abortion clinic a year earlier.

26. Mass deportation of immigrants and incarceration in “camps”: MISLEADING

Mandate supports an orderly and lawful immigration system. It advocates that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Office of Removal Operations be primarily responsible for enforcing civil immigration regulations, including the removal of those who have violated our immigration laws. It also calls for additional resources to put an end to President Biden’s border crisis and enforce immigration laws.

27. End birthright citizenship: FALSE

There is no mention of ending birthright citizenship in Mandate for Leadership.

28. Ban Muslims from entering the country: FALSE

There is no mention of banning Muslims from entering the United States in Mandate for Leadership.

29. Eliminate federal agencies like the FDA, EPA, NOAA and more: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership’s plan would not eliminate the FDA or the EPA, and NOAA’s functions would be transferred to other agencies, the private sector, and states and territories.

30. Continue to pack the Supreme Court and lower courts with right-wing judges: FALSE

The only people calling for packing the judiciary are those on the Left, who do it every time the Supreme Court or a lower court makes decisions they don’t like.

Takk for at du poster dette! Forøvrig har Trump tatt avstand fra dette, det eneste jeg så på hans side var at han ønsker å gjøre slutt på birthright citizenship, me  det er vel en del av grunnloven?

[jjkoggan]

jallajall skrev (2 timer siden):

Det kunne jo vært verre..
For å gå gjennomført dette planlagte kuppforsøket var de helt avhengig av at demokratene samarbeidet og gikk god for det.

 

Nei- her var planen som trenger ingen støtte fra demokratene i teori

1. VP Pence, presiding over the joint session (or Senate Pro Tempore Grassley, if Pence recuses himself), begins to open and count the ballots, starting with Alabama (without conceding that the procedure, specified by the Electoral Count Act, of going through the States alphabetically is required).
2. When he gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.
3. At the end, he announces that because of the ongoing disputes in the 7 States, there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed in those States. That means the total number of "electors appointed" – the language of the 12th Amendment – is 454. This reading of the 12th Amendment has also been advanced by Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe. A "majority of the electors appointed" would therefore be 228. There are at this point 232 votes for Trump, 222 votes for Biden. Pence then gavels President Trump as re-elected.
4. Howls, of course, from the Democrats, who now claim, contrary to Tribe's prior position, that 270 is required. So Pence says, fine. Pursuant to the 12th Amendment, no candidate has achieved the necessary majority. That sends the matter to the House, where “the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote ..." Republicans currently control 26 of the state delegations, the bare majority needed to win that vote. President Trump is re-elected there as well.
5. One last piece. Assuming the Electoral Count Act process is followed and, upon getting the objections to the Arizona slates, the two houses break into their separate chambers, we should not allow the Electoral Count Act constraint on debate to control. That would mean that a prior legislature was determining the rules of the present one – a constitutional no-no (as Tribe has forcefully argued). So someone – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, etc. – should demand normal rules (which includes the filibuster). That creates a stalemate that would give the state legislatures more time to weigh in to formally support the alternate slate of electors, if they had not already done so.
6. The main thing here is that Pence should do this without asking for permission – either from a vote of the joint session or from the Court. Let the other side challenge his actions in court, where Tribe (who in 2001 conceded the President of the Senate might be in charge of counting the votes) and others who would press a lawsuit would have their past position – that these are non-justiciable political questions – thrown back at them, to get the lawsuit dismissed. The fact is that the Constitution assigns this power to the Vice President as the ultimate arbiter. We should take all of our actions with that in mind.

 

[jallajall]

7 minutes ago, shockorshot said:

Om executive branch og legislative branch er uenige om tolkning av loven, så blir det rettsak.

Trump, har som jeg linket tidligere til, luftet ideen om å ikke gå av 20th january og advokatene diskuterte dette i tekstmeldingene.

At de har luftet ideen om det er jo greit, men hvordan planla de å utføre det i praksis? Det er jo en ganske mange hindre på veien, de må jo ha lagt en form plan dersom de støtte på hindringer?
 

8 minutes ago, shockorshot said:

Hvis Trump hevder til retten at det er tvil om når valget skal avholdes, så avklares det før valget. Det er heller ikke føderale executive branch sin oppgave, men statlig og det er i statene det måtte da avklares. Hvis Trump kommer med et søksmål om det like før valget, kan statene nekte å bry seg om at det ikke er avklart i retten, siden det er deres oppgave å gjennomføre valget i staten. Dette var hvorfor de fleste av søksmålene til Trump mot valgresultatet var rettet mot delstaten og deres gjennomførelse av valget.

8 minutes ago, shockorshot said:

Se svar over. Presidenten har ingenting med utførelsen av stemmingen. Dette er ikke føderalt.

Det er statene som er ansvarlig for å avholde valget, men tidspunktet når det skal avholdes og hvem som har stemmerett er føderale lover. Hva skjer hvis Trump sender inn en klage på at første tirsdagen etter første mandag eg

Han kan altså klage på to grunnlovstillegg, at perioden kun varer i 4 år og at embetet utløpet 20. januat, og da tilsidesettes grunnloven fordi det er en eller annen form for tvist, og han er i praksis president på livstid så lenge dersom retten drøyer veldig lenge med å behande saken?
..men dersom han dagen før valget avholdes klager inn til retten at han ikke er enig i loven, så blir loven ikke tilsidesatt, men valgdagen går som normalt so beskrevet i loven?

[jallajall]

12 minutes ago, Tussi said:

Takk for at du poster dette! Forøvrig har Trump tatt avstand fra dette, det eneste jeg så på hans side var at han ønsker å gjøre slutt på birthright citizenship, me  det er vel en del av grunnloven?

Ja akkurat det er vanskelig å endre på så lenge det er en del av grunnloven..

[jallajall]

6 minutes ago, jjkoggan said:

Nei- her var planen som trenger ingen støtte fra demokratene i teori

 When he gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.

 

Hva skjer om Pelosi tar med seg sine represantenter og teller og bare går? Da kan ikke sertifiseringen lenger avholdes.. ingen pro tempore til å oppnevne ny teller fra Rep.hus.

Endret 24. juli av jallajall

[Cervinus]

On 23.7.2024 at 2:48 PM, jallajall said:

How These 10 Democrats Would Fare Against Trump, Rated by Our Columnists and Writers
 

Populære og godt likte Gretchen Whitmer på topp, men hun ville ikke bli visepresident en gang.

Er det 100% sikkert at Harris nå blir demokratene sin kandidat? 

 

[VifteKopp]

Cervinus skrev (8 minutter siden):

Populære og godt likte Gretchen Whitmer på topp, men hun ville ikke bli visepresident en gang.

Er det 100% sikkert at Harris nå blir demokratene sin kandidat? 

 

95%

[Atib Azzad]

17 minutes ago, jallajall said:

Ser de allerede har svart på mange av disse påstandene..

2. Complete ban on abortions without exceptions: FALSE

Mandate for Leadership calls for the government to comply with laws that prevent federal funding of abortion. It also calls for federal support for alternatives to abortion, including adoption.

Jeg har svært liten tiltro til the Heritage foundation i det hele tatt, og det har jeg masse grunn til, men la oss se på en av deres siste løgner illustert over.

De hevder det er falskt å påstå de ønsker å forby abort, samtidig som 2025-håndboken ønsker seg at Trump-administrasjonen gjeninnfører 1873 Comstock act, for å forby frakt av abort-midler (Stop promoting or approving mail-order abortions in violation of long-standing federal laws that prohibit the mailing and interstate carriage of abortion drugs. hentet fra håndboken), om det er illegalt å sende de nødvendige midlene man trenger for å gjennomføre en abort, fungerer det som et de-facto forbud.
Dokumentet nekter også for at abort skal gå inn under helse-hjelp (health-care) som effektivt bidrar til å nekte behandling.

Det er like lite troverdig som at Trump hevder han ikke kjenner til prosjektet eller hvem som står bak.

[Markiii]

Kenhten skrev (16 timer siden):

Hun har jo hatt snart 4 år til å bli bedre på dette. Mulig hun blir bedre nå som hun ikke er kvotert inn i det. 

Kvotert inn? Hva er det du snakker om?

  

 

Joeal88 skrev (16 timer siden):

Kamala er så dyktig at hun fikk under 2% av stemmene under nominasjonen i 2020, hun havnet ikke en gang topp 10 blant de som forsøkte å bli demokratenes presidentkandidat for fire år siden. Hun klarte ikke en gang og vinne California (Hjemstaten hennes hvor hun i tillegg var senator).

Men nå er hun langt bedre kjent enn hun var da. Og meningsmålinger tyder på at det har en effekt.

 

  

  

Tussi skrev (41 minutter siden):

Takk for at du poster dette! Forøvrig har Trump tatt avstand fra dette, det eneste jeg så på hans side var at han ønsker å gjøre slutt på birthright citizenship, me  det er vel en del av grunnloven?

Trump lyver og later som han tar avstand fra det, men det er hans egne folk som har utarbeidet dette og han er godt informert og oppdatert på det.

 

 

 

jallajall skrev (6 timer siden):

Før Biden hadde valgt VP, var jo også Kamala ute å sa det var svært viktig at Biden valgte en svart kvinne som VP. Av en eller annen grunn er det vist slik at hudfarge vistnok er mangfold.

Med den ekstreme rasismen blant repugnikanere så er det kanskje ikke så rart at fargede ønsker noen som kan bidra til å motvirke denne ekstreme rasismen.

[jallajall]

4 minutes ago, Cervinus said:

Populære og godt likte Gretchen Whitmer på topp, men hun ville ikke bli visepresident en gang.

Ser ikke vekk fra at hun blir å se igjen om 4 eller 8 år.

Er vel så godt som spikret at hun ikke blir kandidaten, mye som skal gå galt. Fristen for å melde inn kandidater til Ohio, slik de tolker loven, går vel ut om to uker.
Får håpe hun hvertfall velger en VP som ikke har sittet i DC i tiår, og kanskje har en litt annen bakgrunn, ala Mark Kelly.
 

[jallajall]

12 minutes ago, Atib Azzad said:

Jeg har svært liten tiltro til the Heritage foundation i det hele tatt, og det har jeg masse grunn til, men la oss se på en av deres siste løgner illustert over.

De hevder det er falskt å påstå de ønsker å forby abort, samtidig som 2025-håndboken ønsker seg at Trump-administrasjonen gjeninnfører 1873 Comstock act, for å forby frakt av abort-midler (Stop promoting or approving mail-order abortions in violation of long-standing federal laws that prohibit the mailing and interstate carriage of abortion drugs. hentet fra håndboken), om det er illegalt å sende de nødvendige midlene man trenger for å gjennomføre en abort, fungerer det som et de-facto forbud.
Dokumentet nekter også for at abort skal gå inn under helse-hjelp (health-care) som effektivt bidrar til å nekte behandling.

Det er like lite troverdig som at Trump hevder han ikke kjenner til prosjektet eller hvem som står bak.

Men at de ikke vil at føderale USPS skal frakte abort-midler er jo ikke det samme som et forbud? De kan jo bare sendes med Fedex, DHL, eller whoever.. ?

 

Endret 24. juli av jallajall

[Atib Azzad]

1 minute ago, jallajall said:

Men at de ikke vil at føderale USPS skal frakte abort-midler er jo ikke det samme som et forbud? De kan jo bare sendes med Fedex, DHL, eller whoever.. ?

Såvidt jeg kan se medfører teksten slik project 2024 formulerer den: federal laws that prohibit the distribution of abortion drugs by postal mail, at det er illegalt å sende med all post, føderalt eller privat.

[Tussi]

Atib Azzad skrev (13 minutter siden):

Jeg har svært liten tiltro til the Heritage foundation i det hele tatt, og det har jeg masse grunn til, men la oss se på en av deres siste løgner illustert over.

De hevder det er falskt å påstå de ønsker å forby abort, samtidig som 2025-håndboken ønsker seg at Trump-administrasjonen gjeninnfører 1873 Comstock act, for å forby frakt av abort-midler (Stop promoting or approving mail-order abortions in violation of long-standing federal laws that prohibit the mailing and interstate carriage of abortion drugs. hentet fra håndboken), om det er illegalt å sende de nødvendige midlene man trenger for å gjennomføre en abort, fungerer det som et de-facto forbud.
Dokumentet nekter også for at abort skal gå inn under helse-hjelp (health-care) som effektivt bidrar til å nekte behandling.

Det er like lite troverdig som at Trump hevder han ikke kjenner til prosjektet eller hvem som står bak.

Det handler om at man ikke skal kunne selge abortpiller til stater der det er forbudt, ikke et totalforbud i stater der det et lov

Trump. Og vance, har forøvrig sagt at de støtter et nasjonalt forbud ikke før 15 uker, dvs ikke et forbud,  95% av aborter skjer før uke 12 antar jeg 

Endret 24. juli av Tussi

[jallajall]

Just now, Atib Azzad said:

Såvidt jeg kan se medfører teksten slik project 2024 formulerer den: federal laws that prohibit the distribution of abortion drugs by postal mail, at det er illegalt å sende med all post, føderalt eller privat.

Det er bare føderale USPS som har lov å levere postal mail.
Tematikken har vært oppe før ifbm at andre stater allerede har prøvd seg på noe lignende uten at jeg husker alle detaljer i farten, men så lenge det er en FDA approved drug så er det også lov å frakte dette over delstatsgresnser.