Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Will a President Trump use his negotiation skills to introduce an amendment to overturn Citizens United?
First, it is presumptuous that Trump has particularly good negotiating skills. His negotiations with banks left him with high interest debt that even the money generated by casinos couldn't cover the interest costs and drove Trump's casinos into bankruptcy. While he himself claims to be 'the best negotiator' that's hardly factual based on his record. He has often made bad deals.
Second, what would be negotiated? Negotiations are a give and take process. Overturning C.U. through a constitutional amendment not only requires 2/3 of Congress but 3/4 of the states. There is nothing to be "negotiated." Moreover, those in Congress and who are in the state legislatures benefit from C.U. and aren't voting for an amendment.
Third, tactically, the best scenario is another court challenge. I think the SCOTUS knows that it made a mistake and unless there is another GOP appointed justice, will overturn the earlier decision.
Forth, the question is moot. Clinton has 262 reliable electoral votes and needs only 8 more to win. Any one of these states will push her over the top: Georgia (16), Florida (29), Ohio (18), North Carolina (15), Nevada (6), Minnesota (10), Iowa (6) or Arizona (11). Clinton leads marginally in most of those states.
No. Private citizens can not do that, only a President.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14
What is a President Trump?
So you guys are now getting paid to post this crap over and over again in threads? Do you think it helps you guys when you cannot even debate a single issue and just do this crap over and over again?
By they way I would like to know how to get these jobs, I spend too much time on the internet and may as well get paid for crap like this.
Are you saying that you think trump would ask Congress to consider an amendment to the Constitution to ban PACs from engaging in the political arena? Yeah, ok... good luck with that.
Are you suggesting that a Supreme Court decision can be 'repealed'? ummm... they don't 'repeal' SC decisions. The decision itself, that basically opened the door to all the PACs getting down and dirty with politics? Since it is not a "law", it cannot be "repealed". A new case would have to be brought. Now, if trump were to ask Congress to pass a new law, and Congress actually got up off its dead butt and did so... then a case could be brought, based on the constitutionality issue based on the new law.
if it is the organization, Citizens United... they are basically one of many lobbying organizations that are based in DC. Good luck trying to 'repeal' an organization. Who We Are
Citizens United is an organization dedicated to restoring our government to citizens' control. Through a combination of education, advocacy, and grass roots organization, Citizens United seeks to reassert the traditional American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security. Citizens United's goal is to restore the founding fathers' vision of a free nation, guided by the honesty, common sense, and good will of its citizens.
First, it is presumptuous that Trump has particularly good negotiating skills. His negotiations with banks left him with high interest debt that even the money generated by casinos couldn't cover the interest costs and drove Trump's casinos into bankruptcy. While he himself claims to be 'the best negotiator' that's hardly factual based on his record. He has often made bad deals.
Second, what would be negotiated? Negotiations are a give and take process. Overturning C.U. through a constitutional amendment not only requires 2/3 of Congress but 3/4 of the states. There is nothing to be "negotiated." Moreover, those in Congress and who are in the state legislatures benefit from C.U. and aren't voting for an amendment.
Third, tactically, the best scenario is another court challenge. I think the SCOTUS knows that it made a mistake and unless there is another GOP appointed justice, will overturn the earlier decision.
Last night I was watching "The Essential Donald Trump" on CNN, which I thought gave a pretty balanced viewpoint of Mr. Trump's past triumphs (which he has certainly had) and failures (ditto). While Mr. Trump refused to be interviewed, his three eldest children did so.
Anyway, one portion dealt with the 'spending spree' Mr. Trump went on, purchasing a yacht and other high-ticket items, all while going into debt due to his three casinos in Atlantic City. At one point he owned money to some 80 banks.
The issue was whether to force Mr. Trump into personal bankruptcy, and foreclose on his expensive stuff. CNN had the attorney on that represented the 80 or so banks (the banks figured better to have one person negotiate, rather than 80).
Said attorney used the rather odd words, to me, that they decided that "Donald Trump was worth more alive than dead", which he repeated several times. He explained that, 'alive' (which I believe meant, 'non-bankrupt'), Mr. Trump could use his undoubted fame to sell the yacht and such at a premium price, rather than have these items go through the bankruptcy/bidding process.
It was an interesting show, and clearly pointed out Mr. Trump's vision for New York City, and the undoubted energy and foresight he had in some of his buildings. Of course, on the negative side, it showed that when he left his wheelhouse (casinos, etc), he lacked expertise, or the willingness to listen to the experts, and so developed financial problems.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.