What's your prediction on this?

[LafayetteBear]

The discharge petition having passed, Mike Johnson announced that he has scheduled a House vote on the full release of the Epstein files for next Wednesday, November 19. There are rumors that, with the various e-mails being leaked to the press naming Trump, a number of Republican House members are going to defect and vote for the full release of the Epstein files. But the situation is, to say the least, fluid.

How many Republicans end up voting in favor of the full release of the files? It could go in pretty much any direction, I think, but it seems like it will either be that GOP leadership somehow manages to hold the line and corral would be defectors, or that there could be quite a number of defectors. What is your prediction?

 

[Rastafarian]

The discharge petition having passed, Mike Johnson announced that he has scheduled a House vote on the full release of the Epstein files for next Wednesday, November 19. There are rumors that, with the various e-mails being leaked to the press naming Trump, a number of Republican House members are going to defect and vote for the full release of the Epstein files. But the situation is, to say the least, fluid.

How many Republicans end up voting in favor of the full release of the files? It could go in pretty much any direction, I think, but it seems like it will either be that GOP leadership somehow manages to hold the line and corral would be defectors, or that there could be quite a number of defectors. What is your prediction?

I hope I’m not dispappointed but I think we see a ton defect. When your vote is recorded, you risk history recording you being on the side of protecting a pedophile. .

 

[yoshi121374]

I hope I’m not dispappointed but I think we see a ton defect. When your vote is recorded, you risk history recording you being on the side of protecting a pedophile. .

Particularly if they already know it's going to pass.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

I think the vote to pass in the house will clear, and then Trump will veto, and then I don't think the Senate will get the 67 votes needed to overrule him. And pedophile's will once again be protected. Just my prediction.

 

[Clemblack]

The discharge petition having passed, Mike Johnson announced that he has scheduled a House vote on the full release of the Epstein files for next Wednesday, November 19. There are rumors that, with the various e-mails being leaked to the press naming Trump, a number of Republican House members are going to defect and vote for the full release of the Epstein files. But the situation is, to say the least, fluid.

How many Republicans end up voting in favor of the full release of the files? It could go in pretty much any direction, I think, but it seems like it will either be that GOP leadership somehow manages to hold the line and corral would be defectors, or that there could be quite a number of defectors. What is your prediction?

hyphenate "would-be," you illiterate chode

 

[LafayetteBear]

hyphenate "would-be," you illiterate chode

"Would-be" meaning "potential": must it be hyphenated?​

Asked 10 years, 8 months ago
Modified 10 years, 8 months ago
Viewed 5k times


1
Suppose I write, "Giving exams in class thwarts would-be cheaters." Must "would-be" have a hyphen? Or would it be preferable to write it without a hyphen? (It seems easier to read with the hyphen.)

• idioms
• hyphenation

Share
Improve this question
Follow

asked Feb 26, 2015 at 22:19

Mars
16333 silver badges1010 bronze badges

• 2
  No. Different people and different editors will give you their opinions, but there's no definitive source for punctuation or spacing of compound phrases. If you use it a lot, figure out what suits you, and then stick to it. It's your language, if you're speaking it. Or if you're writing it.
  – John Lawler
  CommentedFeb 26, 2015 at 22:22

 

[scotchtiger]

I think the vote to pass in the house will clear, and then Trump will veto, and then I don't think the Senate will get the 67 votes needed to overrule him. And pedophile's will once again be protected. Just my prediction.

The optics of vetoing that will be so bad

 

[UrHuckleberry]

The optics of vetoing that will be so bad

Calling a rep into the situation room to try to get them to remove their signature is horrible optics too. I can only assume that what is in the files is that embarrassing.

 

[LafayetteBear]

The optics of vetoing that will be so bad

Imagine the optics of a second vote in the House on whether to override Trump's veto. I imagine you would see a number of additional Republican defections. Ouch.

 

[Chumpsky]

My prediction is that Trump will attack Venezuela this weekend and that LITERALLY every republican will cave because they're all a bunch of pu$$ies who would rather see their own daughters get raped by Trump than stand up to him.

 

[baltimorened]

The discharge petition having passed, Mike Johnson announced that he has scheduled a House vote on the full release of the Epstein files for next Wednesday, November 19. There are rumors that, with the various e-mails being leaked to the press naming Trump, a number of Republican House members are going to defect and vote for the full release of the Epstein files. But the situation is, to say the least, fluid.

How many Republicans end up voting in favor of the full release of the files? It could go in pretty much any direction, I think, but it seems like it will either be that GOP leadership somehow manages to hold the line and corral would be defectors, or that there could be quite a number of defectors. What is your prediction?

I read up to 100 republicans could vote for it

 

[Chumpsky]

I hope I’m not dispappointed but I think we see a ton defect. When your vote is recorded, you risk history recording you being on the side of protecting a pedophile. .

They all gon have a LOT to think about this weekend.

 

[LafayetteBear]

I read up to 100 republicans could vote for it

This slow drip of leaked (and lurid) e-mails is not helping Trump, that's for sure.

 

[baltimorened]

They all gon have a LOT to think about this weekend.

well, I admit to knowing nothing about what's in the Epstein file. But some on here seem pretty sure that there is damning evidence implication both Trump and Clinton among many others.

I do recall one of the victims claiming that dercowitz was guilty of having sex with her. Only, after being sued, she determined that she might have been mistaken.

Epstin might have been an enabler, I don't know, In fact, the only person that might know the inside story is maxwell and she's in prison.

I agree that the files should be released just so we can put the entire thing behind us and work on the issues affecting us all. It also wouldn't surprise me that if some are charged based on the Epstein files they gat off because the files can't be introduced into evidence because without validation the files are just hearsay. But @LayfetteBear might know more legal basis than I.

 

[LafayetteBear]

well, I admit to knowing nothing about what's in the Epstein file. But some on here seem pretty sure that there is damning evidence implication both Trump and Clinton among many others.

I do recall one of the victims claiming that dercowitz was guilty of having sex with her. Only, after being sued, she determined that she might have been mistaken.

Epstin might have been an enabler, I don't know, In fact, the only person that might know the inside story is maxwell and she's in prison.

I agree that the files should be released just so we can put the entire thing behind us and work on the issues affecting us all. It also wouldn't surprise me that if some are charged based on the Epstein files they gat off because the files can't be introduced into evidence because without validation the files are just hearsay. But @LayfetteBear might know more legal basis than I.

There are a host of exceptions to the Hearsay Rule, but courts and attorneys practicing in those courts have a ton of experience deciding when they apply. Even dudes who are total pervs deserve a fair trial, a presumption of innocence, and the benefit of the beyond a reasonable doubt standard. If we depart from that, we depart from the rule of law.

I just do not want to see the release of these files (whether they are photos, grand jury transcripts, e-mails, letters, or depositions) held up any longer. The victims of this creepy and wildly illegal rape cabal deserve better than that.

 

[baltimorened]

There are a host of exceptions to the Hearsay Rule, but courts and attorneys practicing in those courts have a ton of experience deciding when they apply. Even dudes who are total pervs deserve a fair trial, a presumption of innocence, and the benefit of the beyond a reasonable doubt standard. If we depart from that, we depart from the rule of law.

I just do not want to see the release of these files (whether they are photos, grand jury transcripts, e-mails, letters, or depositions) held up any longer. The victims of this creepy and wildly illegal rape cabal deserve better than that.

understand, but in and of itself, given that there is no opportunity for a defendant to cross examine, do you think a judge would allow evidence like an email from Epstein to someone wherein Epstein gives an opinion like "Clinton is handsy" or "trump is a maniac"? (just examples I made up)

 

[LafayetteBear]

understand, but in and of itself, given that there is no opportunity for a defendant to cross examine, do you think a judge would allow evidence like an email from Epstein to someone wherein Epstein gives an opinion like "Clinton is handsy" or "trump is a maniac"? (just examples I made up)

The examples you provided are both an expression of someone's opinion. That's not evidence. If they said "I saw Clinton getting busy with Victim X" or "Trump told me he had sex with several underage girls," that would be a different story. Those are factual allegations. The second example I provided is also hearsay, but it would be admissible into evidence as an "admission against interest" on the part of Trump.

 

[baltimorened]

The examples you provided are both an expression of someone's opinion. That's not evidence. If they said "I saw Clinton getting busy with Victim X" or "Trump told me he had sex with several underage girls," that would be a different story. Those are factual allegations. The second example I provided is also hearsay, but it would be admissible into evidence as an "admission against interest" on the part of Trump.

thanks

 

[TigerGrowls]

Calling a rep into the situation room to try to get them to remove their signature is horrible optics too. I can only assume that what is in the files is that embarrassing.

Don't celebrate yet.

 

[TigerGrowls]

This slow drip of leaked (and lurid) e-mails is not helping Trump, that's for sure.

Is that making you sad???

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Don't celebrate yet.

That post would be the worst celebration ever. I was just saying his base seems to stay behind him so optics haven’t seemed to drive him.

 

[TigerGrowls]

That post would be the worst celebration ever. I was just saying his base seems to stay behind him so optics haven’t seemed to drive him.

Promises kept and track record. Trump has built a lot of trust and the MAGA base is with him.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Promises kept and track record. Trump has built a lot of trust and the MAGA base is with him.

I definitely agree they are with him