Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Metacomet who wrote (255042)	7/5/2014 2:47:04 PM
From: loantech	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542090

I believe that the Dems are in cahoots with the pugs.

To: Metacomet who wrote (255042)	7/5/2014 3:04:22 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542090

It goes back even further Had Bush's father not put the ideologue Scalia and Thomas, his echo, on the Court, Gore might have been able to claim the election he had won A bit wrong and a bit implausible. Scalia was a Reagan appointee in 1986; not a Bush appointee. As for Thomas, the 88 presidential election was never seriously in doubt. Certainly not the way the 2000 election was. Bush got the Reagan continuation vote. So there's no serious alternative history here. But, if the theme of your argument is that one of the most important items to address in presidential elections is the supreme court, then we are in total agreement.