evilgenius wrote:vtsnowedin wrote:evilgenius wrote:vtsnowedin wrote:The idea that a conservative six to three court would install a candidate that had obviously lost the electoral college is ludicrous.
They might bring an end to the debate as they did with Gore Vs. Bush but they would always come down on the side of the candidate that had carried the most electoral college votes.
They are conservative. They do not change the rules. They go by them.
Sure they do. You have too much faith that the definition of conservatism is also the definition of the American Way. If push comes to shove, they will pick conservative over American. They'll do it because they can't see that the thing they detest is the thing they should love. All they need is the letter of the law, they don't need the spirit.
Well let us agree to disagree on that one as it is just my opinion against your opinion. In just a couple of weeks or so we can see what they actually do in real time and then we can have more then idle speculation to discuss.
Yes. I don't want to push this. I only bring it up because I feel badly about the situation. That's enough to mention it, but not to stress it.
Plenty of room to feel badly about the situation. On Democracy Now, they highlighted how ideological (as in Republicans win-win, not necessarily in conservatism of itself is good) is Kavahnaught and Amy and how a recent decision had an opinion by Kava(I can't spell it, but it ends in a naught!) that was sophomoric and inaccurate and that three of the justices were all on the Florida board that stopped the recount and gave the 2000 election to Bush. Anyway, the Supreme Court is now interwined with the around the corner counting of the election results.
My own prediction is that the election will not be close and the Supreme Court will stay out of it, but these all make good betting opportunities.