Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


JamesHackerMP last won the day on May 7 2018

JamesHackerMP had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

74 Excellent

About JamesHackerMP

  • Rank
    Full Member
  • Birthday 07/17/1978

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Province of Maryland

Recent Profile Visitors

3,561 profile views
  1. another book I've failed to finish. Started losing interest, but up to that point it wasn't bad. But now I have seen the movie.
  2. My favorite is "Eorache" (a literary conflation of Eowyn and Eomer). PS, did I REALLY toss out a "spoiler"? It's in the second chapter of the book (or the first half hour of the first movie.)
  3. Why? Was it really in our interests to see the Muslim Brotherhood grab most of Parliament and the Presidency of Egypt? Try telling that to CIA.
  4. Thank you for not making a topic about Apollo 11 about Trump or Nazis or "Down with America", etc, like one of the above posters has.
  5. You're in a similar pickle as me, Olijam (though perhaps in the opposite direction, but no matter). While I cannot directly compare your politics to ours, I left the Republican party years ago but still cannot bring myself to join the democrats, as they aren't the answer either. Sux to be so free-thinking, doesn't it? Good for you, though!
  6. Make sure you do research before you buy one. Do you want an old fashioned one (that you have to aim yourself) or a "go-to" that does it for you? Take into account that there is some legerdemain involved in the latter.
  7. For those of you who do not remember, Morsi was the democratically-elected President of Egypt, who came to power on the surge of what the western media inaccurately calls "The Arab Spring". Then, a year into his term of office, army officers who feared his constitutional shenanigens amounted to a coup, had him arrested and removed from office. He's been on trial several times. BTW, I'm not showing sympathy or antipathy for Morsi. I believe the situation is interesting, however. One does wonder, however, if Pres. Sisi will end up like Mubarak, or even Morsi. Thoughts?
  8. Mohammed Morsi, aged 67, dies during his trial. Here is a podcast link. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00066wj
  9. Got to agree with you on that. Why proselytize when they already have a religion of their own? There's nothing wrong with trying to spread your own views, until you start thinking that yours are so superior that you have to go around correcting other peoples'.
  10. Well, that's the danger of being a "predictable" voter, or someone who is loyal to one party: your vote is "expected" and the party or candidate in question doesn't have to work for your vote, since you've just given it away readily. Notice that battleground states are the ones that can go either way. Ohio for example, which is the mother of all battleground states, has a large percentage of moderate unaffiliated voters. Maybe if people stopped treating federal politics like baseball (rooting for the "home team" and only caring that they win) they would have more power over politicians, however many parties there were/are.
  11. Yeah, but we still aren't talking about double jeopardy, we're talking about the SC overturning judgments it previously made.
  12. DRC? Democratic Republic of Congo? I don't completely understand your statement above. What would cause Republicans and white nationalists to win elections? Bernie Sanders could run and probably would poll a minority of popular votes, if we ditched the EC in favor of a direct, national, popular vote. I've come to the conclusion that, despite our frustration with two-party politics, most Americans are more comfortable with two parties than, say, four or five. In a sense, we make it a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts by always voting for the GOP or the dems. Now there's technically nothing to stop anyone from voting for third parties, or for those parties to win. The only thing needed is people to vote for them. But they don't, no matter how much they may say the present system sucks. However, we have had third parties win a bunch of seats in Congress, before. And don't forget the presidential election of 1860, where Abraham Lincoln was one of four candidates, and therefore managed to win with a fraction of the popular vote because he won the more populous northeastern part of the country. But I'm not just talking about the presidential elections, I'm talking about Congress, mostly. THere are places where a Democrat almost never wins, or a Republican almost never wins. It would be in these areas in which a third party--if the residents therein wanted to do so--could replace the normal token opposition party (GOP or Democrats) with one of the third parties. It's mathematically possible. We just don't do it. But the fact that we did many years ago could one day make it a serious consideration. There are presidential systems, Brazil notably, where there are a bunch of parties in Congress. A run-off system would probably allow for this in the States; but under first-past-the-post it's far less likely, I admit.
  13. Double jeopardy is a prohibition against an individual being tried twice for the same crime (twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, I think is the specific wording.) What I asked them, was about a SC overturning a previous SC's judgment/precedent/whatever; not a criminal trial.
  14. That's it! stare decisis...I couldn't think of that. yeah, but the two decisions you mentioned were 58 years apart. That's what I was talking about, some amount of time passing before a SC reverses a previous SC judgment---does the Supreme Court regularly overrule itself more quickly than that? (i.e., with less time having passed) Or does it usually take a while? (as in the two cases you mentioned being separated by 58 years)
  • Create New...