Ruth Bader Ginsberg is still alive. Good night and have a pleasant tomorrow.
2 Likes
I mean my preferred position is to end the war on drugs and greatly expand immigration with express lanes and shit. Thus we donât need any of that.
But Iâm acknowledging that we live in USA#1 and my preferred position is a pipe dream, thus I put out an idea that might have a snowballâs chance in hell of being accomplished in the next 5 years.
I know we have a lot of purists here, but most progress is won inch by inch. Thatâs often true even when it doesnât look like it.
Iâm suggesting we try a little West Coast Offense here. Picking up 12 yards and a first down doesnât mean we punt on the next play. We can keep looking downfield. Iâm just saying our offense shouldnât be three Hail Marys and a punt every time we get the ball.
Even more broadly speaking, a big part of the reason weâre on the side that makes up like 60% of the country and is getting its ass kicked is that Republicans put a really strong ground game in play like 10-15 years ago. They took state houses and gubernatorial races, and used them to gerrymander and suppress the vote. They used that to take Congress, which they used to block almost everything Obama wanted to do. They use their power to basically own the judiciary. A lot of conservatives think itâs their birthright to have a country with conservative judges.
They have a strong defense against liberal policy in the courts, a strong ground game at the state level, and thus theyâre in a position to control the game. Even still, when they try to go too far downfield (Repeal ACA) they get shut down.
Thereâs value in shifting the Overton Window, but we still should be trying to pick up 3-10 yards when we can, and protecting our position in between. Weâre way more likely to pick up 70 yards in 7-10 plays over 20 years than we are to do it all at once at any one point in time.
Most huge, fast shifts come from SCOTUS striking something down (Shelby v Holder and Citizens United come to mind).
There are a few areas where big breakthroughs are getting close. Prohibition was protected by a constitutional amendment in 1930 and was totally over in 1933 after taking several serious body blows around the definition of alcohol.
The War on Drugs is really long in the tooth. It was obvious it needed to end by 2000.
I hope sheâs not wrong.
Perhaps. But they are likely the result of decades of three yards and a cloud of dust. Like, say, healthcare. Are we getting close to single payer? Maybe. I could see it within a decade if we maintain a free and fair democracy. But thatâs the end result of 3-4 decades of work, a failed attempt to pass healthcare reform under Clinton, a half-measure under Obama, and a continued push since then.
Yup ditto for the war on drugs of course.
Lol, I literally drove through this town on my way to a winery a few weekends ago and was fucking shocked to see that sign. Itâs like a tiny shitty downtown area surrounded by mcmansions around the outskirts, seemed like prime real estate for pieces of shit.
Sheâs in the fucking hospital.
Ugh. I want to use my one time, but I think Iâve already used 5 just on RBG aloneâŚ
Also, for folks who joked about pulling a Weekend at Bernies with RBG, note how quickly this info came out (especially compared with the Robertsâ incident)
I have a very bad feeling about this. Very.
She dies, they put a 40 year old rapist, alcoholic to the right of Thomas on the court and by a 5-4 margin yup turns out Trump can end mail-in voting and require ID to vote in person by EO.
1 Like
This is not an exaggeration: if she dies, it is game over for this country as a functioning democracy.
1 Like
For sure, full stop. Trump 2020, 2024, 2028, etc.
1 Like
So I should know this but, can Trump nominate a SCOTUS judge after Nov if he loses?
Recent precedent dictates that no justice nominee will be confirmed during an election year.
What are you all so worried about?
6 Likes
Is microbet a Riverman gimmick?
I hope RBG hangs on 
2 Likes
Iâm pretty sure McConnellâs refined argument was that no judicial nominees will be confirmed during an election year where you know there is going to be presidential turnover. (I have a vague recollection of an interview where he specified that, at least.) The argument is that âLame duckâ presidents canât nominate justices.
Obviously that doesnât apply in this case because Trump could win the 2020 election.
Edited to make it clear that McConnellâs argument is that lame ducks canât nominate. Obviously thatâs not the law. And obviously itâs complete bullshit. But this is the immediate distinction that he will make as he confirms Amy Coney Barrett to the SC.
Fyp
1 Like