Jump to content
270soft Forum


Steering Council Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About jvikings1

  • Rank
    Political Guru
  • Birthday June 22

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Nicholasville, KY, USA
  • Interests
    politics (especially American and European), history, sports, trivia, Brexit, Euroscepticism, Nigel Farage, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Matt Bevin, UKIP, Republican Party

Recent Profile Visitors

2,616 profile views
  1. Subject to the jurisdiction thereof is the key phrase which could be challenged. Depending on the makeup of the Supreme Court, this could be argued to not include children of 2 illegals. However, I will admit that it is a long shot.
  2. DACA applies to children who were brought here by their parents when they were young. Technically children born here to illegals are American citizens (however, this could potentially be challenged in court).
  3. jvikings1

    Forum Political Compass

  4. jvikings1


    1. The WPA is an excuse used by some in favor of the attack. However, it doesn't apply to this situation. I am specifically referring to Congress's exclusive ability to authorize force in instances such as this. Also, just because something is ignored doesn't mean it's right to ignore it. 2. What would the purpose in testing Trump be? 3. I don't need a point to go along with the question of what the airstrikes actually do.
  5. jvikings1


    I have a few questions regarding the strikes. 1. Were they constitutional? I'd argue that they were not. Congress has not authorized force, and the US wasn't in any immediate danger. 2. Did Assad actually use chemical weapons during this latest alleged attack? I'm skeptical because of the fact that it wouldn't make any sense. Why would he do that even after Trump stated that the US was going to withdraw? Unless he's just some idiot that knows nothing of geopolitics, he wouldn't have done something like that. 3. What are these strikes actually going to do?
  6. jvikings1

    General Historical Scenarios Update

    Sounds good
  7. jvikings1

    General Historical Scenarios Update

  8. jvikings1

    General Historical Scenarios Update

    I would be fine with you making the changes (or at least starting on them). I'll probably use most (if not all) of your suggestions, so the changes you would probably make would be right in line with what I would be editing.
  9. jvikings1

    General Historical Scenarios Update

    I'm going to add them when I get the time. However, I'm currently in the middle of taking 18 hours worth of college classes, so my free time is limited. This combined with extracurricular activities and time spent hanging out with friends doesn't leave me much to work on the scenario. Although, I hope to put in work over the summer with the suggestions that Vcczar made.
  10. jvikings1

    Building a Good Presidential Cabinet

    Love seeing 2 great politicians from Kentucky on the list.
  11. I used a map that I got from @Conservative Elector 2. Although, you can use my KY governor 2015 scenario as a base so you don't have to go put all 120 counties in again.
  12. jvikings1

    Presidential Ranker Excel

    @vcczar I'll do this once I get around to it. Midterms are finishing up (I have 1 more on Thursday), so I'm going to have a little more free time for a little bit leading into spring break.
  13. jvikings1

    Eurosceptic UK

    2001 Election: Labor: 49.1% 454 Tories: 28.2% 135 Lib Dems: 14.3% 26 DUP (post merger with UUP): 1.2% 17 UKIP: 1.5% 14 SNP 2.2% 6 PC: 0.5% 4 Independent: 1.5% 2 SF: 0.3% 1 SDLP: 0.4% 0 Green: 0.2% 0 BNP: 0.1% 0 (total collapse from internal fighting and Tyndall's actions) Alliance: 0.2% 0 Slight loses by Labor won't matter much in the ling run. This was a relatively boring result. However, the drastic rise in seats held by the DUP and UKIP is something to note.
  14. He was just re-elected in 2016, so he's in the Senate until 2022. I doubt he primaries Trump unless he continues on this rocky stretch that he's has the past week. My hope is that he'd run for governor in 2023 (or 2024 if they switch the election year).
  15. I agree that the majority of people in DC are detached and unsympathetic to common Americans. But, Rand isn't one that compromises his principles. He won't be running for re-election after his current term is up because of his position on term limits. He hasn't voted for a budget that has passed because of his belief in a balanced budget. A big reason Ron Paul was never doing things, such as filibusters, that Rand does is because the House has different rules than the Senate.