Packed comments
-
His position is clear to anyone with a brain.
Strategic ambiguity.
He should maintain it post election, too.
“Nice little 9-member court you’re got there, be a shame if something happened to it”
-
It’s ultimately a bluff though, it’s unlikely you’d get unanimous support for it on the Democratic side, unless there were some really egregious decisions at some point.
-
I think that tweet is directed to how, all of a sudden, appointing ACB is "court packing."
And how, after Joe said it, 5000 "journalists" picked it up - independently, of course.
Even Tapper (!) called out Coons on the supposed "unconstitutionality" of the appointment.
-
Oh.
-
I would hope he thinks that maintaining strategic ambiguity is the right thing do.
I don’t know why it’s so hard for people to see that as an actual preference rather than the avoidance of one.
DON’T let them eat cake.
- RFK Jr -
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
Link to video
"Talk less. Smile more.."
"What?"
"Don't let them know what you're against, or what you're for."
"You can't be serious..."
"You wanna get ahead?"
"Yes..."
"Fools who run their mouths off wind up dead." -
@George-K said in Packed comments:
@jon-nyc said in Packed comments:
strategic ambiguity is the right thing do.
"Mr. President, will you denounce right wing groups?"
The media is all over his supposed "strategic ambiguity" on this issue.
Why excuse Joe and not Trump?
As long as you can put “acquiescing racism” and “court packing” on different moral planes, yeah, you can excuse one but not the other.
Try this version:
“Mr. President, will you denounce the Nazis?”
“Schutzstaffel, stand back and stand by.”
