Matt Walsh is the typical White Republican / Conservative POS but he some times makes great points and statements.

“Some Times”

@krishna_bound

Is he trolling with this? lol

bruh the 24 election gonna be a s***show of ai created misinformation like we aint never seen before

lol

There were people saying women shouldn’t be allowed to vote last night. Shambles were so high

Thank god, Vallas is a f***ing moron lol

Johnson's kinda a cruddy candidate too but at least he has potential

Curious if this is likely

nbcnews.com/politics/wisconsin-gop-try-oust-new-liberal-state-supreme-court-justice-rcna78318

So Tennessee just expelled black congressmen from their state but voted to keep the one white woman democrat

Even worse, there were 3 of them that were voted to be expelled; 2 of them black men, 1 white woman. The white woman is the only one who wasn't expelled.

Justin Jones and Justin Pearson

Yep

The whole concept of expelling elected officials is wild. Recall is one thing, but not even allowing voters decide is just wtf

@LLCtheDEAD

if they expelled all 3 you could at least point to partisanship but nah thats insane. theres no other way to coat it, thats just straight up being racist. that's insane

and the votes to expel the two men weren't even close either. GOP just lost Wisconsin Supreme Court vote by 10 points and then they do this in Tennessee, don't they want to win?

Of course the guy that made the ruling is named Matthew Kac

probably won't stand

@krishna_bound what do you think of this?

the ruling is stupid for sure, one of the worst in recent memory, but i haven't read the decision so i'm not sure what they're actually citing within it as precedent/rule of law. that said, encouraging straight up ignoring the ruling is a stupid idea that will ultimately backfire. states are the ones which should be ignoring rulings - if the federal govt itself ignores rulings as an administration, it's basically over (has happened before, but usually it's for foreign policy which is a bit harder to enforce). there are many ways to approach this strategically w/o just straight up f***ing up the entire political landscape, something that will backfire on them supremely just as every other type of dem aggression tactic has for like 30 years. even if they feel texas is a lost cause, state-level regulation OR state-level ignorance of regulation/precedent (i mean, it worked for marijuana among other things) is not only beneficial as a workaround but also would theoretically show their target demographic that, to them, parties in power align to their values. alternatively, they could actually put it in law, something that half the SC has been basically telling dems to do for years now rather than rely on court precedent for cultural victories. this is all asking too much tho as usual ofc

I'm just not sure why she said it publicly, obviously Biden isn't going to be doing that.

her reasoning involves when Trump ignored the DACA ruling.

difference is tho as i mentioned, even if it's immigration-related, it's still foreign policy in a way as its understood - federal govt issues immigration, not states, so it's a lot easier to manipulate rulings of within perceptive reason. with stuff like this which is direct policymaking its way more volatile. remember how quickly trump distanced himself from sessions after sessions wanted to go after federal marijuana charges for states?