Suppose Hillary become President..specifically what are the implications?

Orly? said:

Clinton would the be the continuation of Orwellian citizen slavery..

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

With a Trump candidacy, what makes you think she will get a Republican Congress?

Click to expand...

Helix said:

you think congress will flip? i'm not convinced.

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

I think that the Senate is likely, and the House is not impossible. Cook Report is already showing movement in that direction, and he's not even the nominee yet.

Click to expand...

Jesse Booth said:

...Where exactly did you get that ten trillion dollars from? That seems arbitrarily and impossibly high.

Click to expand...

Helix said:

i don't see it. if forced to guess at this point, i'd say Clinton wins president / continued GOP controlled obstructionist congress.

Click to expand...

it will be interesting to see how the two sides will handle the empty SCOTUS seat. what if neither side budges? how long can we have a 4 / 4 split court? basically, that makes the regional courts the effective SCOTUS, so your constitutional rights will depend on where you live. as if that's not already the case, but this makes it even more so.

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

Well I would hope so, if it comes down to Hillary/Trump, but I think we lose the Senate, as Trump depresses GOP turnout, but super motivates Democrats. Down ticket will be brutal.

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

Technically forever, there is no set number in the Constitution.

I think, however, that having run on the "the people deserve to pick" argument, that it would be pretty hard to justify.

It would be an interesting way to reintroduce Federalism, however. I hadn't thought of that.

Click to expand...

NoLeftNoRight said:

At this junction there is a remote possibility that Hillary Clinton could get elected President.

What would we see under her Presidency?

As a short list, I would expect the following...

1). An exponential empowerment of Wall Street and the Uber wealthy
2). Strangulation of small business
3). Significant growth in the size of Federal government
4). Significant increases in taxation
5). Expansion of Gay & Lesbian rights (to far exceed the majority)
6). The Supreme court to become completely far left liberal
7). War with China & Russia (since they could exploit her inability/unwillingness to make proper international and domestic decisions)
8). An explosion in government corruption
9). Expansion of welfare from the current astronomical levels to nation crippling levels
10). The National debt to rise 10 trillion above current levels
11). Trillions of taxpayer funds to disappear in corrupt expenditures secretly destined as paybacks to supporters
12). Her personal wealth to reach 1 billion dollars US
13). An unprecedented lack of government transparency
14). An unusual rise in the mysterious deaths of political and corporate foes.
15). An unprecedented attack on the 2nd Amendment and the nations first widespread confiscations of personal arms and or laws forcing forfeitures
16). Massive gains in foreign interests in infrastructure, corporate ownership and rights to natural resources
17). Expansion of Sanctuary cities
18). The nations first government protected Sharia Law towns and districts
19). Religious persecution - limited to Christians
20). Expanded immigration - to reach 15 million new immigrants from the Middle East and South America within 4 years

Of course, it's unlikely, but the slim chance exists that I could be biased so please say why we can expect otherwise or what you would expect to occur should Hillary become our next President.
Please give explicit examples if you disagree with the above with links to credible sources that clearly disprove any of the above points. If you are not able to intelligently disprove any of the above, I understand and thank you for your participation just the same.

Those who normally are pro-left and vocal and do not participate, will be assumed to have visited this thread, and upon having no intelligent means to disqualify any of the above points, left the thread stymied.

Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:

lol wut....

You mind explaining the logic behind these? When has any American politician anywhere suggested any of these things happen and when has Hillary implied she'd do any of these?

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

The fact that you changed your lean to "Progessive" as of the time I am reading this hilariously biased post you removed half-baked from your colon really adds to the credibility of this hypothetically-rooted attack.Yup.

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

There isn't any logic.

His posts are uniformly written to attack "the left", and his OP merely recycles the same tired doom & gloom statements by the right about politicians on the left that right-leaning media has recycled for the last ten years. (Notice the complete lack of citation to anything Hillary has done or said)

Click to expand...

Helix said:

could be. my gut feeling is no. we can revisit this after the fact.

Click to expand...

well, you have to take into account that the ninth circuit might throw out the individual right to own a firearm, which could totally happen. other decisions could be overturned by right wing courts. i think it's better to have a fully staffed SCOTUS.

Click to expand...

Helix said:

could be. my gut feeling is no. we can revisit this after the fact.



well, you have to take into account that the ninth circuit might throw out the individual right to own a firearm, which could totally happen. other decisions could be overturned by right wing courts. i think it's better to have a fully staffed SCOTUS.

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

I think the data is starting to move that way. Hopefully we won't find out.



Eh. This is an argument for an odd number of Judges, not nine in particular. And that's if you want to cooncentrate the power of the judiciary in the hand of the swing vote.

Click to expand...

Helix said:

i mostly want congress and the executive branch to do their ****ing jobs. i would like to help them by banning political parties outright, and letting a computer redraw all the districts using only census data in order to eliminate gerrymandering. teams are ****ing everything up. i want to vote for a candidate, not a team.

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

Americans have a first Amendment right to Parties, but I could see the efficacy of leaving party affiliation off of ballots and redrawing districts. One of the problems you will have with that, however, is a loss of minority-majority carve outs.

Click to expand...

Helix said:

could be. my gut feeling is no. we can revisit this after the fact.



well, you have to take into account that the ninth circuit might throw out the individual right to own a firearm, which could totally happen. other decisions could be overturned by right wing courts. i think it's better to have a fully staffed SCOTUS.

Click to expand...

NoLeftNoRight said:

What Mr. Person is feebly trying desperately to say about his response is.......

"I got's nothing"

Click to expand...

BTW...the FBI seems close to some important announcements about Hillary.
I would expect a Democrat controlled government to hush all of this out of existence.
If they can't, it would show just how depraved she had to be to get this far.
If they do, it proves just how corrupt the left is.

Click to expand...

Helix said:

i mostly want congress and the executive branch to do their ****ing jobs. i would like to help them by banning political parties outright, and letting a computer redraw all the districts using only census data in order to eliminate gerrymandering. teams are ****ing everything up. i want to vote for a candidate, not a team.

Click to expand...

NoLeftNoRight said:

5). Expansion of Gay & Lesbian rights (to far exceed the majority)
18). The nations first government protected Sharia Law towns and districts
19). Religious persecution - limited to Christians

Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:

lol wut....

You mind explaining the logic behind these? When has any American politician anywhere suggested any of these things happen and when has Hillary implied she'd do any of these?

I'd never vote for a scumbag like Clinton, but this is paranoid nonsense.

Click to expand...

Frank Apisa said:

I would LOVE to see a computer draw all election districts with only census data as the criteria.

I don't expect it to happen...but it would be nice if at least ONE candidate at least mentioned the idea.

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

The fact that you changed your lean to "Progessive" as of the time I am reading this hilariously biased post you removed half-baked from your colon really adds to the credibility of this hypothetically-rooted attack.

Yup.

Click to expand...

NoLeftNoRight said:

Too bad you always see truth as "half-baked".
Instead of this ultra weak reply, address each concern bravely as other did with contrary evidence.
You can't. That's what's really hilarious.

Click to expand...

Hawkeye10 said:

A continuation of the norm.... there will be no reform of Washington, there will be no empowerment of the little people, which means that the rebellion will continue to grow in strength.

Click to expand...