Public Land Transfer and 2016 Election

mkmatheson · Sep 25, 2016

For your consideration. I'm interested to hear your thoughts.

Mr. Trump wins the presidency. The Republican Party retains the Senate (likely if Mr. Trump wins) and House (virtually a certainty). Mr. Trump will appoint the new supreme court justice. That leaves a court of Justices Alito and Thomas (clearly right), Justices Kennedy and Roberts (mostly right), and the new justice (absolutely right). This creates a 5-4, right leaning Supreme Court. With the same party who has made public land transfer a part of its platform controlling both houses of Congress, the presidency, and the Supreme Court, where does that leave public land hunters like you and me?

Oneye · Sep 25, 2016

It leaves us in a very bad place, and anyone can make excuses and talk politics but that is the truth. It leaves us in a bad and scary place. I would rather one party he's congress and the other gets the presidency. Clinton is without a doubt not a commendable person by any means, but Trump sucks just as bad and you can see it if you actually read his plans and what they are going to cost. It comes down to who you feel safer with if you're voting on this issue, and for me that is Clinton. Doesn't mean I am voting for her, but I can't vote corn Trump at this point, so I'm at a loss. When you put Mike Lee as a possible Supreme Court justice, I can't vote for you.

grizzly_ · Sep 25, 2016

I'm voting Democratic in all State elections (my first vote for the DNC ever) and writing in John Huntsman Jr for President.

I can't think of anybody alive today that I would rather have as President than John Huntsman Jr.

Hunting Wife · Sep 25, 2016

grizzly_ said:
I'm voting Democratic in all State elections (my first vote for the DNC ever) and writing in John Huntsman Jr for President.

I can't think of anybody alive today that I would rather have as President than John Huntsman Jr.

I was impressed with Huntsman last time as well. No idea where he stands on public lands, but he seemed very pragmatic on most issues. A sad state of affairs when reasonable candidates can't get votes, while people fall all over themselves to vote for the ones trying to out-crazy each other.

Saw this week that one name being floated as a potential Secretary of Interior under Trump is Forrest Lucas, founder of Lucas Oil. If true, that does not strike me as a positive for our public lands.

pointingdogsrule · Sep 25, 2016

I didn't realize that any one "party"...... controlled the Supreme Court ????

good luck to all
the dog

bobbydean · Sep 25, 2016

In the past our expectations of what a Supreme Court judge will be have often been erroneous. May be nominated by a Democrat and the judge uses his own judgement. The same for a Republican nomination. The judges at this level follow their interpretation of the law.

I prefer a Republican appointee, but it is not a guarantee of what you expect.

Tkaldahl2000 · Sep 25, 2016

A republican appointee MAY back land transfer, and a democrat appointee MAY reinterpret the second amendment. The court has become way too politically oriented. I just wish they would stick to the words in the Constitution, and not their ideology. I predict that if Clinton wins, Obama's nomination will get a hearing and confirmation. That will not be good for the 2nd amendment supporters. On the other hand, with no public land to hunt on I don't really need firearms. I can defend my home with a baseball bat. If you are a believer, pray for some sanity on the court.

Public Land Transfer and 2016 Election

mkmatheson

New member

Oneye

Active member

grizzly_

Well-known member

Hunting Wife

Well-known member

pointingdogsrule

Well-known member

bobbydean

Well-known member

Tkaldahl2000

New member

Similar threads

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Share this page