• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Election

Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

Beaudreaux said:
Let-It-Go.jpg

let_it_go__by_jan_jane-d73khqj.gif
Click to expand...

I let it go a long time ago.
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

iphonelover said:
So very true. Ted Cruz and Republicans are complete hypocrites on Supreme Court authority when it doesn't go their way. Chris Matthews just owned Ted Cruz and pretty much every Republican with this video.


Chris Matthews faced off with Senator Ted Cruz tonight and confronted him about his complaint about the Supreme Court becoming too politicized. Cruz was so outraged about the Supreme Court’s recent pro-gay marriage ruling that he proposed judicial retention elections every eight years to counter “judicial tyranny.”

As they talked about Supreme Court issues, Matthews asked Cruz why he would want to “put judges out there and make them politicians,” constantly trying to raise money. Cruz said he’s “reluctant” to do this, but is tired of “unelected judges” seizing major policy issues.

Matthews shot back, “They seized the presidency in 2000, you did not complain!” He said if there was ever an example of “partisanship or ideology” in the court, that was it, and “you loved it.”

Cruz pushed back against Matthews’ “talking points” and they ended up sparring a bit on that famously controversial decision.
Click to expand...


WTF are you going on about. Chris Matthews owned nothing!!!

Cruz: "How many times did they recount in Florida? Four"

Cruz: "How many times did Bush win? Four"

He stuffed that Election 2000 **** right back down Matthews' throat. Matthews couldn't own Cruz if Cruz was half dead and couldn't talk anymore. In fact I doubt few in Congress could own Cruz, the guy is a natural and champion debater.

PFFFT, Mathews owned Cruz. :lamo :lamo
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

cpwill said:
....yeah..... I'm not a Cruz Fan.... but Matthews makes an idiot of himself in this video.
Click to expand...

I agree... but that has become his trademark, so I expected nothing less from him.

My favorite part was when Matthews has his ass handed to him by Cruz, when Cruz asked him how many recounts that Florida actually did, and then asked him the results of those recounts.
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

justabubba said:
cruz scares me, too. bright ... and unhinged
but i would not be surprised to find that he prevails as the GOP nominee. he's the kind of candidate that the koch suckers throw money at. i see scott walker as the only republican potentially standing between cruz and the nomination, because he has been effective, in a GOP way, against the unions in wisconsin
Click to expand...

Walker has the reputation and record, and Rubio has the gift of gab. Both of them would beat Cruz, who has been losing support as of late to Trump (a small portion of the party is going to support whomever they think Washington hates the most, and right now that's him).

All in all, though, it's still not a bad line up for Republicans - our problem at this point is that we need to start shoving people out. Democrats are currently choosing between Clinton.Inc and Crazy-Hair-Socialism.
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

cpwill said:
Walker has the reputation and record, and Rubio has the gift of gab. Both of them would beat Cruz, who has been losing support as of late to Trump (a small portion of the party is going to support whomever they think Washington hates the most, and right now that's him).

All in all, though, it's still not a bad line up for Republicans - our problem at this point is that we need to start shoving people out. Democrats are currently choosing between Clinton.Inc and Crazy-Hair-Socialism.
Click to expand...

in less than a month faux news will cull the herd to the round number of ten who can participate in the debates. faux news gets to eliminate the rest from contention
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

justabubba said:
in less than a month faux news will cull the herd to the round number of ten who can participate in the debates. faux news gets to eliminate the rest from contention
Click to expand...

That's interesting to hear. Who is this organization and how does that forcing function work?
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

cpwill said:
That's interesting to hear. Who is this organization and how does that forcing function work?
Click to expand...

the debate host
among other criteria:
Must place in the top 10 of an average of the five most recent national polls, as recognized by FOX News leading up to August 4th at 5 PM/ET. Such polling must be conducted by major, nationally recognized organizations that use standard methodological techniques.
Click to expand...
FOX NEWS AND FACEBOOK PARTNER TO HOST FIRST REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY DEBATE OF 2016 ELECTION – Fox News Channel Press
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

cpwill said:
Ah. So what you really meant was that those who poll well enough on their own will get to compete in the Fox News debate.
Click to expand...

no. i meant what i posted
the top ten in the polls will be able to participate in the debate
the rest will be ignored
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

justabubba said:
no. i meant what i posted
the top ten in the polls will be able to participate in the debate
the rest will be ignored
Click to expand...

Then you have a problem because what you stated does not support what you claimed. Fox will not be doing the culling - the Republican Electorate will be doing the culling, and FOX will be following their will in who it invites to the debate.
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

cpwill said:
Then you have a problem because what you stated does not support what you claimed. Fox will not be doing the culling - the Republican Electorate will be doing the culling, and FOX will be following their will in who it invites to the debate.
Click to expand...

fox set the arbitrary number of participants
culling the rest
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

justabubba said:
fox set the arbitrary number of participants
culling the rest
Click to expand...

:shrug: sure, if you want, but they are not the ones choosing who will be up on the stage - they are not the ones doing the culling. They are the ones responding to those actions by others.
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

cpwill said:
Then you have a problem because what you stated does not support what you claimed. Fox will not be doing the culling - the Republican Electorate will be doing the culling, and FOX will be following their will in who it invites to the debate.
Click to expand...

The Fox debate is next month so basically the candidates who have the highest name recognition will get into the debate and those who aren't recognized as much will be SOOL. Fox News has the option to expose their favorites to the public more than others. BTW Rupert Murdoch wants Jeb Bush to win the nomination.
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

pbrauer said:
People seem to forget that Bush ran to the SCOTUS after the Florida Supreme Court decided the whole state should be hand recounted. Counts by a newspaper consortium showed Gore would have won.
Click to expand...

Your parting comment about the findings of the newspaper consortium is false. The consortium looked at a number of different possibilities for the results of its count, and for the remedy the Florida Supremes sought to impose Bush remained the (likely) winner.

"According to a massive months-long study commissioned by eight news organizations in 2001, George W. Bush probably still would have won even if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a limited statewide recount to go forward as ordered by Florida’s highest court."

The Florida Recount of 2000
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

iphonelover said:
So very true. Ted Cruz and Republicans are complete hypocrites on Supreme Court authority when it doesn't go their way. Chris Matthews just owned Ted Cruz and pretty much every Republican with this video.


Chris Matthews faced off with Senator Ted Cruz tonight and confronted him about his complaint about the Supreme Court becoming too politicized. Cruz was so outraged about the Supreme Court’s recent pro-gay marriage ruling that he proposed judicial retention elections every eight years to counter “judicial tyranny.”

As they talked about Supreme Court issues, Matthews asked Cruz why he would want to “put judges out there and make them politicians,” constantly trying to raise money. Cruz said he’s “reluctant” to do this, but is tired of “unelected judges” seizing major policy issues.

Matthews shot back, “They seized the presidency in 2000, you did not complain!” He said if there was ever an example of “partisanship or ideology” in the court, that was it, and “you loved it.”

Cruz pushed back against Matthews’ “talking points” and they ended up sparring a bit on that famously controversial decision.
Click to expand...


"Activist judge" is Republispeak for "judge who rules in a way Republicans don't like."
 
Re: Matthews Confronts Cruz: You ‘Loved’ Partisan SCOTUS When They ‘Seized’ 2000 Elec

Kobie said:
"Activist judge" is Republispeak for "judge who rules in a way Republicans don't like."
Click to expand...

We should probably overlook the fact that Matthews' example was poorly chosen. It was a 7-2 vote that found the FL Supremes' decision unsatisfactory.

If we don't overlook that aspect of Bush v. Gore then Democrats' may have to face the fact that the SCOTUS decision vacated an activist decision by the FL Supremes that Democrats liked. We can't have that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom