I make these age jokes a lot, but seriously, who are the five highest profile Democrats nationally that are under 70?
I might be forgetting someone obvious, but the point is that the young GOP bench is so much bigger than the young Democrat bench. The old, largely eDem fucks just won’t get out of the way. It’s truly absurd.
AOC.
An alternative view is that young GOPers are better at making a name for themselves at the expense of the party establishment than young Democrats.
Obama.
That one is kind of cheating, though. He’s arguably the highest profile, but it’s silly to count him for obvious reasons.
If we do get rid of the senate filibuster and make packing the court the norm, it is going to get pretty crazy since there will be massive changes to the country every time the parties flip since it is a two party system and the biggest indicator for political losses is the state of the economy and our economy is entirely driven by interest rates and Wall Street. Just moving to whatever country has the system you want seems more viable long term.
Does Hunter Biden count? lol
That’s Level 1.
Level 2 is that by actually using power, and then passing a law striking down gerrymandering and protecting voting rights, you’d shift the playing field back closer to neutral. The House would be nearly neutral, the White House would be slightly less neutral, and the Senate would still favor the GOP but not as badly.
In this climate, based on the issues, the partisan lean of our electoral outcomes would shift well to the left and it would be hard for the GOP to take the House. The end of gerrymandering would also remove one of the biggest structural incentives for extremism, which would move the GOP back towards sanity over the next decade or so.
Level 3 is that once you nuked the filibuster and reformed and packed the court (let’s say to 15 justices), you might then be able to use your newfound power to force the other side into an acceptable detente with rotating justices with staggered 15 year terms so that each presidential term got four judicial replacements.
So if you added, say, four liberal justices and two moderate justices (maybe make it so that Bernie, Manchin, Romney, and McConnell all agreed on those two), you’d be setting up a court that was essentially 7 liberals, two moderates, and six conservatives. With staggered terms, the court could swing back and forth in every presidential term and there wouldn’t be a need for any president to pack the court. Perhaps you could figure out a way to make the packing difficult enough that it wouldn’t be worth the trouble versus just taking the slots you’d be given anyway.
Plus, by making the politicians on both sides more accountable to the voters, an unpopular court packing could blow up in their faces - as long as you managed to set everything up thus that voting rights couldn’t be curtailed in under two years.
Of course all of this is pointless because they’re not nuking the filibuster.
We’re too far down the rabbit hole. If the chance for electoral victory is taken away, the extremists will just seek non-electoral paths to victory. Wishing for a saner GOP is the same as wanting a strong Republican Party. They need to be utterly and completely defeated and reconstructed.
Striking down gerrymandering and enacting voting/democracy reform to protect rights would lead to their repeated utter and complete electoral defeat.
Well, in a world where Dems understood the stakes and the proper strategy politically, they’d also understand that that’s what the FBI/DOJ is for, and they’d shut their non-electoral paths to victory down hard and go for the maximum penalties through the judicial system.
Like, on 1/6 there should have been shots fired as soon as they were scaling the walls and trying to break windows. Everyone should have been charged with the most severe crimes possible and the maximum penalties should have been sought. We should have sent the message loud and clear, “If you try to overthrow the government and the bullets miss you, you’re going to jail for 20 to life.”
Imagine if Al Qaeda was a movement native to the United States. Do you think that would work to eradicate the movement? A normal political and judicial response isn’t enough.
There are some ways in which that comparison is valid but in terms of how to defeat each movement the responses are very different. But I understand you get off on the idea of civil war so enjoy your mental masturbation.
I don’t get off on the idea of civil war. I just don’t have much hope that there’s an alternative. I felt that way pre-Trump and nothing over the past few years has made me feel better.
If their goal was winning they would be trying to replicate this. The fact they’re trying to sink him tells you all you need to know.
https://twitter.com/ajentleson/status/1524565279199612928?s=21&t=M5GzPOWf1k3hrgYkqIwB7A
I WANT TO TALK
ABOUT INFLATION GODDAMMIT
WHEN IS MY NAP
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1524480428681355266?s=21&t=M5GzPOWf1k3hrgYkqIwB7A
Not sure what level this is on.
Averaging under 75 is shockingly not bad for dems
https://twitter.com/RepKatiePorter/status/1524471357098004481?s=20&t=jhvzKhtTMtqh8vo9j2x22w
More Katie Porters less Nancy Pelosis
