Vaudeville Vanillin

@lovovmelife

24 year old law student in NYC (he/him) Enjoy yapping Jewishly and gayly

387 Siguiendo1867 Seguidores4621 Publicaciones

YouTube Bluesky

gay

¿Es tu perfil?Reclámalo y lovovmelife.dirty.social es tuyo.Reclamar perfil

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· 1d

Look at his platform. He doesn’t thinks indigenous people are subhuman and he’s not some data center fanatic Indigenous people are underpolled, and also unfortunately face many vote-suppression barriers Where are you getting that Bodnar is anti-indigenous from? www.sethformontana.com/Platform

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· 1d

The Public Opinion Strategies poll cited in that infographic is run by a pro-GOP firm. GrayHouse is also pro-GOP The NRSC is literally the National Republican Senatorial Committee! And the July 23-26 GQR poll? It also ran head-to-head matchups showing Bankhead down by 8% and Bodnar BEATING Alme!

Screenshot from Wikipedia disclosing that the June 8-11, 2026 poll by Public Opinion Strategies was, “commissioned by The Political Company, a consulting firm that supports Republicans”

Screenshot of an article identifying GrayHouse as, “a Republican polling firm”

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· 11d

For years US media has been fixated on pro-Palestinian activism, opinion/speech heterodoxy & elitism on college campuses—in an extremely unfavorable manner To the extent this article displays the rightwing equivalent…it’s all treated as a problem for the GOP, not as an existential crisis for the US

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· 11d

Sen. Moreno’s father was Bernardo Sr. Assuming they used the same naming convention for Sen. Moreno’s eldest son, he would also be named Bernardo (III) Sen. Moreno married in 1989; in 2008, his son would be a teenager (maybe even a minor) In 2016 Sen. Moreno acknowledged that his son was gay

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· 15d

Interesting choice to crop out the affiliation of that pollster (R) and the two prior polls that looked much better for Achilles The Bullfinch poll from May 29-June 1 has Achilles down only 4 points when he’s head-to-head against Risch. And that was nearly 2 months ago So maybe changes something

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· 15d

Yes, unbridled capitalism is famously the best way to supply fresh, healthy, untainted meat.

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· 19d

You’re right, this seems to be the closest analogue. I still think Beshear should try it, not because he will succeed but because even in failing the GOP will look terrible. And it wouldn’t empower the GOP anyway But I understand better why Beshear isn’t doing it You don’t have to make it personal

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· 21d

Mamdani isn’t just a mayor, he’s also a US citizen. Netanyahu isn’t just a war criminal, he’s also not a US citizen. Pennsylvania is constitutionally required to allow entrance to Mamdani. New York owes no such duty to Netanyahu, and if anything is legally obliged to arrest/exclude him.

The US Constitution, Article IV Section 2:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Freedom of movement under United States law is governed primarily by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States
Constitution which states, "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."
Since the circuit court ruling in Corfield v.
Coryell, 6 Fed. Cas. 546 (1823), freedom of movement has been judicially recognized as a fundamental Constitutional right. In Paul v.
Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), the court defined freedom of movement as "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them." However, the Supreme Court did not invest the federal government with the authority to protect freedom of movement. Under the "privileges and immunities" clause, this authority was given to the states, a position the court held consistently through the years in cases such as Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. 418
(1871), the Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36
(1873) and United States v. Harris, 106 U.S.
629 (1883). 2131

The U.S. Supreme Court also dealt with the right to travel in the case of Saenz v. Roe, 526
U.S. 489 (1999). In that case, Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, held that the United States Constitution protected three separate aspects of the right to travel among the states:
(1) the right to enter one state and leave another (an inherent right with historical support from the Articles of Confederation),
(2) the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than a hostile stranger (protected by the
"Privileges and Immunities" clause in Article IV,
§ 2), and
(3) (for those who become permanent residents of a state) the right to be treated equally to native-born citizens (this is protected by the 14th Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause; citing the majority opinion in the Slaughter-House Cases, Justice Stevens said, "the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ... has always been common ground that this Clause protects the third component of the right to travel.").

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· 26d

www.nytimes.com/2025/08/27/u...

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Jul 12

Enlightening that centrist pundits like Yglesias are actually responding to shifting politics. This is really a cession from his position only a year and half ago. It’s the backtrack of someone interested committed to an agenda rather than truth or political success. But a backtrack nonetheless

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Jul 9

I think you know, I think you’re doing it on purpose, and I think you can feel the spark here

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Jul 8

The Reddit history informs how we view his character. The Graham who wrote those posts was online and edgy enough to learn what a totenkopf was at some point. This is corroborated by a statement from his ex-gf. “He covered it after learning what it was” isn’t a fact, it’s an embrace of his narrative

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Jun 24

@taniel.bsky.social Donald-Duck race in Maryland House of Delegates district 4 is super tight

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Jun 22

I think she’s just apprehensive of continuing to dissent to cases that have already come and gone. She’s too committed to stare decisis and the Court’s “legitimacy” to comment on bad precedent (the Court’s election jurisprudence being one notable exception)

Instead of acting in a way that harms the Court's legitimacy, Justice Kagan strives to defend it. Her motivations square with the strategic reasoning since her dissents are limited to "recently decided, hotly contested cases that have not yet reached protected status."175 Justice Kagan does not show the same intransigence towards stare decisis as Justice Scalia. All of the analyzed dissents emphasize stare decisis, and Justice Kagan progressively becomes more emphatic about preserving it.
In Bennett, Justice Kagan argued that the majority misapplied the Court's standing precedent. She goes further in Rucho, arguing that the majority disregarded accepted constitutional breadth. And finally, she argued in Brnovich that the conservatives snubbed precedent, ignoring clear statutory directives and conveniently flouting their preferred interpretive methods. Accordingly, her dissents increasingly rely on and stress stare decisis.
Justice Kagan's original strategy of narrowing the question acted as a restraining force to dull the magnitude of large partisan shifts, and stare decisis can be used similarly. Generally, "stare decisis acts as a bastion of legitimacy by moderating potential ideological swings and assuring the public that the Court is an apolitical legal institution."176 Weakening stare decisis "undermines the legitimacy of the Court and calls into question its apolitical status."177 Justice Kagan's recent public comments reflect this understanding and raise similar concerns. She has stated that the Court must "act like a Court" to "build up some reservoir of public confidence and goodwill."l78 She noted that the "first thing" in "acting like a Court" is to "abidel] by precedent."l?9 This explains part of the increased frustration in her dissents and focus on former Court holdings.

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Jun 11

I mean

Screenshot of the June 4, 2026 Times piece on Platner: “Some of the women also raised questions about his trustworthiness. Mr. Platner's insistence that he did not know that his tattoo was a Nazi symbol until it became a campaign issue last fall was simply not true, Ms. Fifield said. After all, she said, he had taught her the word for it years earlier, referring to it as ‘my Totenkopf.’”

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· May 17

“The president has never pretended to be an ordinary American” except literally yes he has!?!

Trump cosplaying as a McDonalds fry cook during his 2024 presidential campaign

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· May 11

Proof Trump is being fed a diet of AI slop by his handlers and doesn’t have the mental capacity to distinguish them from reality

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· May 10

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Apr 30

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Apr 29

It’s because they’re either projecting their right wing psychosis onto others or approaching this in bad faith

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Apr 19

Maybe if he thought of incarcerated individuals as “justice involved people,” he’d be more hesitant about the death penalty? He’s not the worst. But claiming, “it’s about form, not substance” in 2026 is crazy. Especially for someone trying to stake out the “normal, peaceful politics” lane for 2028

From KY gubernatorial debate in 2023: “Beshear noted there are ‘some crimes so terrible and some people so dangerous that I do believe this [death penalty] law needs to continue to be on the books.’
Asked again if he would support expanding the death penalty, Beshear said ‘it would depend on the crime.’
‘But right now,’he added, ‘a court order is preventing any of those executions.’”

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Apr 9

@penacolada2293.bsky.social I didn’t realize you were Alaska

A map of the US featuring each state’s most viewed gay porn categories

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Apr 9

Now that Bove, Bovino, and Bongino are all no longer (technically) in the Administration, reposting this:

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Apr 1

I wonder if the taste of crow is beginning to register…but it’s Roberts, so who knows

Excerpt from Justice Roberts’ opinion in United States v. Trump: “The dissents' positions in the end boil down to ignoring the Constitution's separation of powers and the Court's precedent and instead fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals about a future where the President ‘feels empowered to violate federal criminal law.’”

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Mar 30

Nothing. And I mean nothing. Will be as unsettling as Pete Buttigieg eating a cinnamon roll.

Pete Buttigieg, biting into a cinnamon roll like a Viking clamping his maw down on a hunk of meat

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Mar 18

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Mar 4

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Mar 2

Notice how they cut out Mace’s original post, instigating toward Omar and Tlaib by implying their allegiance to Khameini. And construe her response as a spontaneous “lash out” against Mace and Trump for committing all of this this during Ramadan.

Rep. Ilhan Omar’s response to Nancy Mace’s tweet, “My heart goes out to Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib tonight. Sending them thoughts and prayers.” with an attached picture of Ayatollah Khameini

Vaudeville Vanillin@lovovmelife· Mar 1

I mean that non-rhetorically btw