Thursday, October 20, 2016

last nights debate, third party responses, and fact checking, Part 1

So last night was the final debate before the election. For those that are interested, I am posting segments of it here, along with responses from third party candidates as the debate occurred.(Included are Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, Evan Mcmullin, and Darrell Castle, as they had concurrent responses on twitter as the debate occurred) I will try to keep most of my commentary to a minimum in this post, but will do some relevant fact checking so you don't have to.

Part 1: SCOTUS and the constitution, Second Amendment, Abortion







SCOTUS and Constitutional interpretation, 3rd party responses:








SCOTUS and the Constitution, some commentary and fact checks:

Trump is using fear tactics regarding the 2nd amendment here, yet has made several anti 2A statements in the past, including recent and continued support of "no fly no buy", a violation of the 2nd and 5th amendments. He talks a decent game on constitutional issues, but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. See my previous discussion Donald Trump vs the Constitution. 

Second Amendment and Gun Rights, 3rd party responses

 






Commentary and Fact Checks:

Hillary loves to throw around that 33,000 a year statistic. But it's a misrepresentation, and it's a deceptive use of statistics.

Comprehensive background checks...so, kinda a system like this?
But those loopholes! I can go online and just buy a gun and avoid all that! No...no you can't. And the gun show loophole? Again, it's not quite what Clinton and others would have you think it is.

Would have also liked to see the moderator ask Trump about his change of mind regarding an assault weapons ban, which before running for office he supported.

As to Trump's comment regarding judges and the second amendment, if you appoint strict constitutionalist judges, does that point need to be clarified? Isn't it included?

Abortion issues, 3rd party responses:










  Fact checks and commentary:

Evan McMullin actually made one of my points for me above, that Donald Trump is not consistently pro life and is not dependable on the issue.

My main takeaway from this portion was how little discussion there was of the implications of the 10th amendment here, and of state laws on the matter. Trump did mention that if Roe vs Wade were overturned it would go to the states, but that was the extent of the conversation. However, coming at it from a constitutional perspective, it is in fact a state issue.

Also, as Johnson pointed out above, Roe vs Wade is not the law of the land regarding abortion, but Casey vs Planned Parenthood. Under Casey vs Planned Parenthood, Hillary's justifications for late term abortions are invalid.

Final note, on the issue of abortion rights, Clinton is rabidly all about individual rights and how the government shouldn't be involved, an argument I can to a degree understand, if she consistently applied it on other positions. But she doesn't, and in this instance, it still doesn't apply, because under the 10th amendment, states can still regulate it, the federal government cannot.

Final comment from me, I have a breakdown of each candidates positions and backgrounds on my blog already if you'd like to check it out


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)