Government Diigo

Even if his approval rating drops at all, I don't believe people are going to stop saying he's a "great" president.

I think it's interesting that the article claims Americans are bracing for a recession. We have a record high DOW Jones stock, unemployment is decreasing (more than 20 million new jobs since 2010), and Americans, in general, have more money in their pockets than we did 3 years ago. https://ig.ft.com/sites/numbers/economies/us/ It also piques my interest that the article claims the Trump approval rating as a whole is falling. After the democratic debates, Donald Trump has only increased in followership, rally attendance, etc. This is the reason people keep saying he's a "great" president. You might not like him as a person, I might not like him as a person, but if he continues to put a dent in the public debt, and continues to uphold basic constitutionalist ideals, he will continue to see success in America. I think it's interesting and I predict that the 2020 election will play out very similarly to the 2016 election. The democratic party did everything in their power to stop Trump from becoming president. Both Republicans and Democrats alike turned to personal attacks and scandals. Even if all the candidates are bad, we have to pick the best one. Trump was able to win against the Democrats because they didn't have any solid plans with evidence for the policies they wanted to implement. Trump has an upper-hand because he's never changed too. Democrats have flipped like no other when it comes to policies because they are desperate to be approved of by the younger masses. Trump has always supported a smaller government, focused on the economy, and wanted stricter foreign relations. The same cannot be said about Democrats, their talking points are that of enabling a welfare state, stripping citizens of their 2nd amendment rights, and their false sense of acceptance. tl;dr: orange man bad, but doing his job well.

"The Google-owned company also removed 100,000 videos, a spike in takedowns since its new hate speech policy went into effect in June."

it seems kind of stupid to me that they would do that usually they will give people a warning to take down the video that violates there rules but I guess they decided to just give up on them.

I think that the arguments arising around Youtube, Facebook, etc. are interesting. Because, while they are private corporations with the ability to regulate their material how they please, they are also communication platforms. And being communication platforms, they have to conform to certain laws. They have to guarantee everyone a right to be seen and heard.

"These laws may be unenforceable because of the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in all 50 states. But abortion opponents are hoping that the legal challenges will serve as a vehicle for the Supreme Court to eventually overturn the Roe ruling."

banning abortions is against the constitution because the 14th amendment gives a women the right to have a abortion or not

While I personally agree that abortions should be legal, the 14th amendment doesn't give any particular rights to anyone. The 14th amendment basically just says the government can't take away the inalienable rights away from legal citizens (such as freedom of speech, press, religion, right to a trial, etc.) Nowhere in the constitution does it guarantee an abortion for any reason. That's the exact reason this debate is so large and divided. There are no legal standards because we've never had the technology for these procedures before. The only standard is the Roe v. Wade decision which essentially says that first trimester, there can be no regulations. Second trimester, the government can impose regulations that are reasonably related to maternal health. Third, states are allowed to entirely prohibit third-trimester abortions. But even Roe v. Wade is just a supreme court decision that can be overturned.

Ending gun violence sounds like a great idea, but when it talked about video game violence, trying to put an end to violence in video games won't work because it's really not the problem. People make people violent, not video games.

I agree To Jaxon. It would be a good idea.....but it is not video games that is casing gun violence

Stopping gun violence, is a good idea in some ways. It talked about the many video games have that influence the gun violence. People choose their own actions, and people make them choices. No one can stop yourself besides yourself. Video Games do not influence any kind of crimes.

I agree with this law and feel like it should be the same in every state. There are millions of families out there who have wanted a baby and either couldn't have one or the pregnancy didn't go through as planned. Some people would counter-argument that certain women who get pregnant or have been raped don't think they are fit to be a parent. This is where the women who struggle to have kids can get involved. There are many different options babies can go to if their mother cant take care of them. Abortion is taking a life away and in my eyes is seen as a form of murder.

"Trump's path to a second term would most likely come in the same fashion that his first term did -- an Electoral College victory and a popular vote loss. Recent analysis suggests that Trump could lose the popular vote by as many as 5 million votes, but still win the Electoral College."

Maybe I don't understand it well enough, but to me, it doesn't make sense that a presidential candidate can lose the popular vote (you know, the one everyone gets a say in) by such a large margin, but *still* win because of the Electoral College. It doesn't seem legit like someone could simply go for the states with the most votes, and then they have a bigger chance of winning even if the majority don't necessarily like them.

There's a reason that the Electoral College exists. The United States was founded as a democratic-republic. Meaning that we elect representation that decides on the issues. We do not have a direct democracy, and we never have. All the good presidents back to Abraham Lincoln were elected this way. The reason we have an electoral college is to establish a democracy while still protecting the rights of minorities. A purely popular vote system could encourage certain states to modify voter requirements, as it would directly affect the national vote. Statistically, having to win multiple sub-elections is a more effective measure than one large one. It's why we count who won and who lost in sports instead of total points that season.

"The Supreme Court on Tuesday left in place a lower court ruling in favor of a Pennsylvania school district policy that allows some transgender students to use bathrooms that match their gender identity."

I agree with what the author is saying because people should be able to use which every restroom they feel most comfortable using based on their gender

This agree with this article because they talk about how transgender's should be able to feel comfortable and use whatever restroom or facility they want. Instead of being forced into a situation where they should feel uncomfortable.

"Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot ripped Texas Sen. Ted Cruz over his opposition to gun legislation reform after he claimed such laws don't work, pointing to gun violence in Chicago. Lightfoot, a Democrat, claimed in a tweet that 60% of illegal firearms recovered in Chicago come from outside of Illinois, "mostly from states dominated by coward Republicans like you who refuse to enact commonsense gun legislation.""

"Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday if a Supreme Court vacancy occurs during next year's presidential election, he would work to confirm a nominee appointed by President Donald Trump. That's a move that is in sharp contrast to his decision to block President Barack Obama's nominee to the high court following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016."

"President Donald Trump on Wednesday acknowledged taking massive tax write offs for real estate losses topping $1 billion from the mid-1980s to mid-1990s, calling it "sport" among developers like himself during that period."

"A federal appeals court ruled Friday the Trump administration acted in an "arbitrary and capricious" manner when it sought to end an Obama-era program that shields young immigrants from deportation."