I wore a t-shirt with the following logo in a room full of racist white people in Sterling, AK in 1994:
I’d do it again.
8 Likes
I think that almost every woman who was politically engaged enough to know who RBG is, what Roe v Wade is, and to care about either was already voting Biden (or was pro life and will be pushed further towards Trump).
2 Likes
I do think that the Harlem Globetrotters metaphor is partially accurate. I.e. the GOP are the Globetrotters and the Dems are the Washington Generals – paid to lose but make a show of it. There is a portion of the Dem constituency (donor class) that likes the filibuster and the Dems ‘playing by the rules’ because it means that nothing too major ever happens.
I guess I’d be rather shocked if the Dems can find 50 votes to eliminate the filibuster or pack the court. Adding PR and DC seems feasible though. Regarding the court, I assume that the Chris Coons of the world probably think it’s enough to just not seat a justice the next time the Dems have the Senate and the GOP the presidency (whenever that might be).
1 Like
Americans are uniquely ignorant, but this particular issue is probably global. I think the percentage of Canadians that could name a Canadian SC judge is less than 1%. They’re just not considered major public figures here.
Yeah I mean I’m not saying it as a disparaging thing, just that I don’t think this will change voting behavior much one way or the other. The people who are aware of this stuff and care are the same people who are aware of kids in cages and crumbling Democratic norms (and a lot of them approve of both).
One thing I hadn’t considered is maybe Biden leans on a few senators to pack the court once the new court nukes the ACA. That’s like the one decent thing in his life he can say he was apart of.
I know I know lol Biden but let me dream. He was there when Mitch blocked Garland for a full year.
But I could see him wanting to get it done once the ACA is gone.
Assuming most dems support it of course.
Wonder what they’re telling him to say at the debates. Probably that he wont pack the court right? Because he might lose some of the trumpers who left over covid? Or lose votes in the few states that matter.
Just to calibrate myself against the group, it’s totally appropriate that a president would nominate someone and the Senate would vote to confirm that person reagrdless of the fact that there’s an impending election, right? Like, Romney isn’t being a scumbag or immoral to say that he’d participate in the nomination process prior to the election or during a lame duck session.
The anger that everyone (including me) is feeling stems from how Dems got rolled with Garland, and how the Senate seems permanently set up to defy future Dem actions. Not because anyone actually believes there should be some blackout window where nominations can’t be made or confirmed.
Right? Or am I crazy?
14 Likes
This. I follow Czech politics closely and have barely heard about the court, let alone the judges referred to here. Hell the Wikipedia article on it doesn’t have any judges’ names on it.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but for me, of course you’re right. We wouldn’t be talking about fighting this hard if Garland hadn’t happened.
2 Likes
That is correct. If the Senate had (good faith) hearings for Garland in 2016 that led to him being confirmed, there would be no outrage right now. The fact that they held that seat open for 8+ months then but are making the exact opposite argument to fill a seat in under 2 months now is what’s causing the bulk of the rightfully placed anger.
4 Likes
It’s not normal for the highest court to be either so politicised or to have such a fundamental role in the practical content of laws. A politically controversial ruling happened recently in the UK, but that was more or less a first.
Here in France the last constitutional court ruling I remember essentially said ‘afraid we have to get rid of this law, but you should probably just change the Constitution’, and the Constitution is changed fairly regularly.
(Edit - addressing why not knowing court justices is rife around the world.)
1 Like
Honestly, Don Jr. is who we deserve as a country.
1 Like
Yeah, I think it was on 5-4 that they made the point that the Republicans have just outsourced legislating all their terrible policy positions to the Supreme Court.
Right. The President can nominate someone and the Senate can hold hearings and vote to confirm. But the Republicans fucked that all up four years ago and are now all flipping the public opinions they expressed back then, purely for political power.
The problem as I see it is that from now on, a Democratic president will never be able to install a new Justice if the Republicans control the Senate. Ever. Even if it’s not an election year. The Republicans simply won’t let it happen.
2 Likes
I don’t think they can really get away with this. If a justice retires or dies on day one of the Biden administration they’ll have to hold hearings that at least seem good faith and hold a vote. I think it’s likely Republicans vote down anyone too left or young but would confirm someone old and centrist like Garland.
Counterpoint: no
7 Likes
You don’t think they would even hold hearings or have a vote?
After the Garland gambit worked, I’m not sure what would ever compel a GOP Senate to hold hearings or have a vote under a democratic president.
5 Likes