Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–568 of 568 posts

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#561

Post by Slava_Propanei »

MBCook wrote: post #80
whoisthemachine wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A plurality of Americans voted for this government, for better or worse. The courts are one of the primary avenues for the minority to express their will, but they move slowly, although slightly faster than congress.

That assumes a fair vote, which is arguable. Between Gerrymandering, purging voter roles, suits over who is allowed on the ballot, ID checks and associated issues I’m not sure it’s so clear cut. He won under the conditions the election was performed under. That’s clear. I’m not sure I could call those fair after years of attacks on people’s voting rights.

[dead]

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#562

Post by Slava_Propanei »

tristan957 wrote: post #449
rayiner wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no “attacks on people’s voting rights.” It’s a canard Democrats trot out to energize their base, just like Republicans trot out lies about election fraud. For example, studies show voter ID doesn’t reduce turnout (but also doesn’t reduce fraud). https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/21/18230009/v... . Gerrymandering doesn’t affect the presidential election. But the GOP won the House popular vote by…

Gerrymandering can have an effect, but I'm not sure how to measure it. Gerrymandering contributes to voter disenfranchisement. If you have been disenfranchised for the 3 years before the presidential election, why would you then choose to participate in the elections in the 4th year? To me, that number has to be non-zero, but it isn't obvious if it's anything significant. For instance, how many Democrat supporters ju…

[dead]

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#563

Post by Slava_Propanei »

thrance wrote: post #499
MBCook wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump already appealed. It goes to the next court up. Fun continues until the Supreme Court takes it + decides or chooses not to (effectively leaving the appellate decision in force).

And then? Trump doesn't follow SCOTUS rulings anymore.

[dead]

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#564

Post by Slava_Propanei »

selimthegrim wrote: post #226
stevenwoo wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three of the post senior citizen Democratic representatives died in office so far so the margin is actually getting bigger as time goes on, the GOP had room to make multiple mistakes on the budget bill where one GOP rep fell asleep and didn't vote and one rep was present but just missed the deadline to vote. The Democratic senators have not shown the spine to put a hold on any appointments or pull a Tuberman and not…

Schumer letting a Muslim appellate judge nominee be swiftboated also has to be up there

[dead]

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#566

Post by Slava_Propanei »

Spooky23 wrote: post #38

It will be interesting to hear what Justice Thomas’s supine justification will be for attacking the ruling. The catalyst for the American Revolution was the imposition of taxation (tariffs) without representation. The irony that the party of performative patriotism, with a conservative court, control of the presidency is so spineless that they are afraid to stand and vote for their policy is too afraid to attach thei…

[dead]

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#567

Post by thomastjeffery »

deathanatos wrote: post #221
thomastjeffery wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are so dead wrong I don't even know where to start. Gerrymandering doesn't affect the presidential election? Surveys show how everyone would have voted? Do you even hear yourself?

He's wrong, yes, but no, gerrymandering does not affect the presidential election, since the gerrymandered borders are congressional district borders. (Unless you've got an argument that the state borders are gerrymandered, in which case, let's hear it!)

The presidential election is not directly gerrymandered. It's also not the president who chooses where ballot locations are, who gets registered and how, or who gets sent a mail in ballot. The more local the politician, the more power they have over the voting system that is used for all elections.

Gerrymandering is not just used on its own. The legislators that use their authority to disenfranchise voters use gerrymandering to dodge accountability. When Republican state legislators, congressmen, and senators do this, they do it to disenfranchise the same voters that would vote for a non-Republican president.

So yes, it's technically indirect, but gerrymandering obviously affects presidential elections. It couldn't not.

Post reply on HN